Charlo vs Martirosyan
Charlo vs Martirosyan
I thought Martirosyan won the fight. If throwing jabs and punches that don't land are scoring punches then I can see why Charlo got the decision.
I thought the judges were wrong, but that is hardly a first.
Anybody else disagree with the verdict?
I thought the judges were wrong, but that is hardly a first.
Anybody else disagree with the verdict?
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
I thought the verdict was fair but I would've had no problems with a draw or a close decision the other way.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
I actually had it four rounds to Martirosyan but I could see it being scored closer, most of the rounds were close.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
That was a close fight.
Martirosyan started well but Charlo got himself back into the fight, some of the rounds could have gone either way.
I thought a turning point was the clash of heads/punch that caused Martirosyan's eye problems, he seemed to drop off mentality and only rallied late in the 10th.
Martirosyan started well but Charlo got himself back into the fight, some of the rounds could have gone either way.
I thought a turning point was the clash of heads/punch that caused Martirosyan's eye problems, he seemed to drop off mentality and only rallied late in the 10th.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
To me, Martirosyan won at least 6-7 rounds. He threw better quality punches and was better in ring generalship. Charlo's head punches didn't even move Martirosyan's head, and he barely threw any body punches.
It was a pretty close fight, but a clear robbery.
It was a pretty close fight, but a clear robbery.
-
kidbazooka1
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 959
- Joined: 14 Dec 2007, 13:56
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
Not a fan of either guy but I thought Vanes edged it but here in America the brutha will always get the nod when back peddaling and jabbing.
It's like the judges automatically give African american fighters 3 points before the bell even rings.
Oh and let's not forget Charlo is with good ole Al haymon.
It's like the judges automatically give African american fighters 3 points before the bell even rings.
Oh and let's not forget Charlo is with good ole Al haymon.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
I don't know about the 'brother' part, but I think many people often look at that type of back-foot boxing approach and assume that it's more effective than it is, especially when it's a quick and sometimes flashy guy like Charlo utilizing it. In many rounds he was hardly doing more than flicking out jabs occasionally and moving, and I don't see what he did to be a clear winner.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
Charlo LANDED very little for me. I thought he clearly lost the fight.
-
Datsue
- Heavyweight

Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
Uh...kidbazooka1 wrote:but here in America the brutha will always get the nod when back peddaling and jabbing.
It's like the judges automatically give African american fighters 3 points before the bell even rings.
I just...
Uh...
Um...
Right. Right. Of course.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
ikorolev wrote:To me, Martirosyan won at least 6-7 rounds. He threw better quality punches and was better in ring generalship. Charlo's head punches didn't even move Martirosyan's head, and he barely threw any body punches.
It was a pretty close fight, but a clear robbery.
-
ScottDetonator
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 1079
- Joined: 15 Mar 2011, 04:33
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
I had it 97-94 for Martirosyan. Charlo was poor apart from 1 or 2 rounds and then he only worked for half the round. A lazy fighter for me that will be exposed in the not too distant future. A sweet bit of home cooking.Ian1973 wrote:I thought Martirosyan won the fight. If throwing jabs and punches that don't land are scoring punches then I can see why Charlo got the decision.
I thought the judges were wrong, but that is hardly a first.
Anybody else disagree with the verdict?
-
Impractical Poster
- Middleweight
- Posts: 7636
- Joined: 18 Jun 2014, 07:28
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
I enjoyed the fight. Fought at a very high level throughout.
In no way was this fight a robbery. Byrd's card was a little wide for my liking, but the fight could have gone either way. Vanes was the aggressor for the majority of the bout, but Charlo was landing the flashier punches and did a good job of accentuating Vanes missed punches.
In no way was this fight a robbery. Byrd's card was a little wide for my liking, but the fight could have gone either way. Vanes was the aggressor for the majority of the bout, but Charlo was landing the flashier punches and did a good job of accentuating Vanes missed punches.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
Only an idiot can't understand it. It was close but a winner (by 3-4 rounds) was clear, and it was Vanes.dberry wrote:ikorolev wrote:To me, Martirosyan won at least 6-7 rounds. He threw better quality punches and was better in ring generalship. Charlo's head punches didn't even move Martirosyan's head, and he barely threw any body punches.
It was a pretty close fight, but a clear robbery.How can a close fight be a robbery, you fuckwit
I'm hurting here, thanks for your idiotic comment, it gave me a good laugh, nay, a hernia.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
I guess that's the way it was in Mayweather vs Canelo, huh?? Some serious racist stuff there. I've never seen an African American just inherit points either before he starts nor during the fight, if that was the case then Trout would've easily beaten Canelo by your bigoted statement.kidbazooka1 wrote:Not a fan of either guy but I thought Vanes edged it but here in America the brutha will always get the nod when back peddaling and jabbing.
It's like the judges automatically give African american fighters 3 points before the bell even rings.
Oh and let's not forget Charlo is with good ole Al haymon.
I thought Vanes won the fight.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
I have to admit I fell asleep during the fight after the first few rounds....was not an exciting fight imo. From what I did see it looked close, but Vanes was being the aggressor and the more effective puncher. Maybe they should do a rematch.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
Canelo always has judges gifting him rounds. Vanes looked better than Canelo, and Lara looked better than Charlo, but Canelo won while Vanes lost.KBB wrote:I guess that's the way it was in Mayweather vs Canelo, huh?? Some serious racist stuff there. I've never seen an African American just inherit points either before he starts nor during the fight, if that was the case then Trout would've easily beaten Canelo by your bigoted statement.kidbazooka1 wrote:Not a fan of either guy but I thought Vanes edged it but here in America the brutha will always get the nod when back peddaling and jabbing.
It's like the judges automatically give African american fighters 3 points before the bell even rings.
Oh and let's not forget Charlo is with good ole Al haymon.
I thought Vanes won the fight.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
ikorolev wrote:Canelo always has judges gifting him rounds. Vanes looked better than Canelo, and Lara looked better than Charlo, but Canelo won while Vanes lost.KBB wrote:I guess that's the way it was in Mayweather vs Canelo, huh?? Some serious racist stuff there. I've never seen an African American just inherit points either before he starts nor during the fight, if that was the case then Trout would've easily beaten Canelo by your bigoted statement.kidbazooka1 wrote:Not a fan of either guy but I thought Vanes edged it but here in America the brutha will always get the nod when back peddaling and jabbing.
It's like the judges automatically give African american fighters 3 points before the bell even rings.
Oh and let's not forget Charlo is with good ole Al haymon.
I thought Vanes won the fight.
So you're basically saying you agree with him?? The fact of the matter is that you pointed out that Canelo won, is he African American? Did Mosley get 3 point vs Pacquiao? Did Floyd get 3 point facing Oscar?? Did Hopkins get 3 points vs Calzaghe??
That was some racist stuff to say and anyone who agrees with that is as much a bigot as kidbazooka is.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
I certainly disagree that fighters get points based on their race. We all know though that home fighters get those undeserved points.KBB wrote:ikorolev wrote:
Canelo always has judges gifting him rounds. Vanes looked better than Canelo, and Lara looked better than Charlo, but Canelo won while Vanes lost.
So you're basically saying you agree with him?? The fact of the matter is that you pointed out that Canelo won, is he African American? Did Mosley get 3 point vs Pacquiao? Did Floyd get 3 point facing Oscar?? Did Hopkins get 3 points vs Calzaghe??
That was some racist stuff to say and anyone who agrees with that is as much a bigot as kidbazooka is.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
Do they now? Did Hopkins get points over Calzaghe? How about Trout (who is from Texas) did he get points over Canelo (who is from Mexico)??ikorolev wrote:I certainly disagree that fighters get points based on their race. We all know though that home fighters get those undeserved points.
-
ReggieDiggs
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 3126
- Joined: 05 Jun 2010, 10:37
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
I think anyone who clearly thought much beyond it was a close fight that coulda went either way is clearly wrong. I can definitely understand someone feeling like Vanes won, but there were a TON of close rounds that I could understand people having varying opinions on that coulda made for varying outcomes.Ian1973 wrote:I thought he clearly lost the fight.
For full disclosure I scored it 7-3 Jermell, but this was definitely one of the closest 7-3 scored fights I've seen in awhile.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
When humans are involved, there are exceptions to almost any rules, but don't pretend that there isn't well known home advantage.KBB wrote:Do they now? Did Hopkins get points over Calzaghe? How about Trout (who is from Texas) did he get points over Canelo (who is from Mexico)??ikorolev wrote:I certainly disagree that fighters get points based on their race. We all know though that home fighters get those undeserved points.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
Who said I was pretending anything, the bottom line is that you have no proof of that and I've provided 2 great examples of two hometown fighters who did not get any hometown advantage.ikorolev wrote:When humans are involved, there are exceptions to almost any rules, but don't pretend that there isn't well known home advantage.KBB wrote:Do they now? Did Hopkins get points over Calzaghe? How about Trout (who is from Texas) did he get points over Canelo (who is from Mexico)??ikorolev wrote:I certainly disagree that fighters get points based on their race. We all know though that home fighters get those undeserved points.
All you have is innuendo.
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
No, fuckhead, only an idiot would make that statement.ikorolev wrote:Only an idiot can't understand it. It was close but a winner (by 3-4 rounds) was clear, and it was Vanes.dberry wrote:ikorolev wrote:To me, Martirosyan won at least 6-7 rounds. He threw better quality punches and was better in ring generalship. Charlo's head punches didn't even move Martirosyan's head, and he barely threw any body punches.
It was a pretty close fight, but a clear robbery.How can a close fight be a robbery, you fuckwit
I'm hurting here, thanks for your idiotic comment, it gave me a good laugh, nay, a hernia.
-
black panther
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 4091
- Joined: 11 Dec 2003, 07:06
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
To be fair to him mate, you can have a close but clear fight in that in terms of rounds won was close (say 7 rounds to 5) but it was clear who won said rounds.
-
ReggieDiggs
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 3126
- Joined: 05 Jun 2010, 10:37
Re: Charlo vs Martirosyan
Obviously. I don't think that was the case here though. There were a bunch of rounds that depending on how you felt about Vanes' aggression or Jermell's effectiveness could have you coming up with either guy winning the round. There was much to dispute here imho, even on a round by round basis. I think I was more impressed with Vanes' aggression at the beginning (gave him the first two rounds or 2 outta the first 3 idr exactly), but then was more taken with Jermell & thought Vanes was far less effective.black panther wrote:To be fair to him mate, you can have a close but clear fight in that in terms of rounds won was close (say 7 rounds to 5) but it was clear who won said rounds.