Round 10: Ward v Kovalev

[GPTM1403]

I have the exact same card as Glen Trowbridge apart from round 10 that I gave to Kovalev and - which was one of the tightest rounds in the fight. And we differed on round 12 which I have a draw- he gave Ward. So easy to see how a 2 round Kovalev win can easily become a 1 round loss.

This is why i made the thread really, imo the story of the fight boils down to the scoring of round 10.

I've not rewatched it but I remember thinking that rund 10 was a very clear Kovalev round. Had it been scored by Kovalev by any if the judges... they turn in a Kovalev card.

Basically had they all scored round 10 the way pretty much everyone else, including those who chose Ward as winner, did then the judges would have ended up with a draw, which wouldn't have been unfair, so the most contentious of the scoring did favour Ward however you look at it. Which does at least justify the rematch.

[crow]

In terms of the overall scoring from the UK Sky Sports team:

* Paulie Malignaggi = 116-112 to Ward
* Matthew Macklin = 115-113 to Ward
* Spencer Fearon = 115-113 to Ward
* Paul Smith by three points to Ward
* Tony Bellew & Johnny Nelson 114-114 a draw
* Adam Smith = 114-113 to Ward
* Eddie Hearn = 114-113 to Ward

This unanimous agreement by 8 out of 8 that Kovalev didn't win is suspicious as hell, since 73% of boxing experts gave Kovalev the win.

On the other hand, if Kovalev was English, these hacks would be screaming bloody murder for 6 months.

[Tanzio]

In terms of the overall scoring from the UK Sky Sports team:

* Paulie Malignaggi = 116-112 to Ward
* Matthew Macklin = 115-113 to Ward
* Spencer Fearon = 115-113 to Ward
* Paul Smith by three points to Ward
* Tony Bellew & Johnny Nelson 114-114 a draw
* Adam Smith = 114-113 to Ward
* Eddie Hearn = 114-113 to Ward

This unanimous agreement by 8 out of 8 that Kovalev didn't win is suspicious as hell, since 73% of boxing experts gave Kovalev the win.

On the other hand, if Kovalev was English, these hacks would be screaming bloody murder for 6 months.

no doubt indoubtable evidence that the Sky crew was turned by the Illuminati or Bilderburg Group or (cue the dun dun duuuuun! music) the Rothschilds' managing lizard herself!!

[Ricky_]

I have the exact same card as Glen Trowbridge apart from round 10 that I gave to Kovalev and - which was one of the tightest rounds in the fight. And we differed on round 12 which I have a draw- he gave Ward. So easy to see how a 2 round Kovalev win can easily become a 1 round loss.

This is why i made the thread really, imo the story of the fight boils down to the scoring of round 10.

I've not rewatched it but I remember thinking that rund 10 was a very clear Kovalev round. Had it been scored by Kovalev by any if the judges... they turn in a Kovalev card.

Basically had they all scored round 10 the way pretty much everyone else, including those who chose Ward as winner, did then the judges would have ended up with a draw, which wouldn't have been unfair, so the most contentious of the scoring did favour Ward however you look at it. Which does at least justify the rematch.

No... if 10 goes to Kovalev then Kovalev wins. 114-113.

[Tanzio]

This is why i made the thread really, imo the story of the fight boils down to the scoring of round 10.

I've not rewatched it but I remember thinking that rund 10 was a very clear Kovalev round. Had it been scored by Kovalev by any if the judges... they turn in a Kovalev card.

Basically had they all scored round 10 the way pretty much everyone else, including those who chose Ward as winner, did then the judges would have ended up with a draw, which wouldn't have been unfair, so the most contentious of the scoring did favour Ward however you look at it. Which does at least justify the rematch.

No... if 10 goes to Kovalev then Kovalev wins. 114-113.

Clear, incontrovertible evidence that this was a _ _.

Fill in the blanks.

[Ricky_]

Basically had they all scored round 10 the way pretty much everyone else, including those who chose Ward as winner, did then the judges would have ended up with a draw, which wouldn't have been unfair, so the most contentious of the scoring did favour Ward however you look at it. Which does at least justify the rematch.

No... if 10 goes to Kovalev then Kovalev wins. 114-113.

Clear, incontrovertible evidence that this was a stitch up.

Fill in the blanks.

[Tanzio]

No... if 10 goes to Kovalev then Kovalev wins. 114-113.

Clear, incontrovertible evidence that this was a stitch up.

Fill in the blanks.

Let's try again.

If the judges would have given Krusher round 10 the Russian would have won the fight 114-113. Would that have constituted a close fight?

[Ricky_]

Clear, incontrovertible evidence that this was a stitch up.

Fill in the blanks.

Let's try again.

If the judges would have given Krusher round 10 the Russian would have won the fight 114-113. Would that have constituted a close fight?

Yes. But you're peddling the fallacy that close fight, ergo it cannot be a robbery.

When they didn't give him the tenth, they knowingly jobbed him. I believe their scoring to be sincere until round 10. When the bell rang to close round 10, the stitch-up occurred.

[Tomasino]

My best pal, an ex pro boxer, rang me in the morning shouting that he hates boxing now because it's all robberies. "How the fornicate could they give that to Ward" he said. So I watched it with commentary off myself and scored it a draw. I thought Kovalev was hurt yo the body a few times and that Ward blocked a large number of punches and countered crisply. I enjoyed the fight. I scored round 10 to Kovalev.

[Tanzio]

Let's try again.

If the judges would have given Krusher round 10 the Russian would have won the fight 114-113. Would that have constituted a close fight?

Yes. But you're peddling the fallacy that close fight, ergo it cannot be a robbery.

When they didn't give him the tenth, they knowingly jobbed him. I believe their scoring to be sincere until round 10. When the bell rang to close round 10, the stitch-up occurred.

What evidence do you have that "they knowingly jobbed" Krusher?

All evidence (every shred) points to this fight being close enough to have gone either way. Please, provide the evidence that would prove that this fight could not have been legitimately scored close for Ward.

Go ahead, we've been wasting our time on this for six days, I will wait for your incontrovertible evidence that this fight was fixed.

[Ricky_]

What evidence do you have that "they knowingly jobbed" Krusher?

All evidence (every shred) points to this fight being close enough to have gone either way. Please, provide the evidence that would prove that this fight could not have been legitimately scored close for Ward.

Go ahead, we've been wasting our time on this for six days, I will wait for your incontrovertible evidence that this fight was fixed.

Evidence?



The above is a court of law, this is where "evidence" is presented.



^ This however, is an internet forum, this is where opinions are presented. Learn the difference.



The overwhelming majority of commentators and pundits believe Kovalev won round 10 - a position also seemingly backed up by statistics. It's my opinion the judges knew Kovalev won round 10 - therefore, knowingly giving it to the other guy is malicious.

[Tanzio]

What evidence do you have that "they knowingly jobbed" Krusher?

All evidence (every shred) points to this fight being close enough to have gone either way. Please, provide the evidence that would prove that this fight could not have been legitimately scored close for Ward.

Go ahead, we've been wasting our time on this for six days, I will wait for your incontrovertible evidence that this fight was fixed.

Evidence?



The above is a court of law, this is where "evidence" is presented.



^ This however, is an internet forum, this is where opinions are presented. Learn the difference.



The overwhelming majority of commentators and pundits believe Kovalev won round 10 - a position also seemingly backed up by statistics. It's my opinion the judges knew Kovalev won round 10 - therefore, knowingly giving it to the other guy is malicious.

True, this is not a court of law. If it was, you would have been laughed out of it.

Let's be crystal clear about this; your guy did not win, therefore the judges were corrupt, no matter how close the actual fight was. In other words, it does not matter to you that this fight could have been scored either way, you have concocted a biased theory that supports your biased opinion.

Ok, got it.

[Ricky_]

True, this is not a court of law. If it was, you would have been laughed out of it.

Let's be crystal clear about this; your guy did not win, therefore the judges were corrupt, no matter how close the actual fight was. In other words, it does not matter to you that this fight could have been scored either way, you have concocted a biased theory that supports your biased opinion.

Ok, got it.

Laughed out for lack of evidence? Remind the forum again how many times you repeated the claim that Donald Trump was solely running in order to get Clinton elected? That he was nothing more than a sneaky pro-Democrat saboteur


You dumbass.


Go run a poll on it, ask the question; what is more likely, that the judges deliberately shafted Kovalev by scoring round 10 to Ward even though they know he lost, or, Donald Trump being agent saboteur for Hillary Clinton?

We'll see who gets "laughed out"

[crow]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWKs8-UaFcg

[Tanzio]

True, this is not a court of law. If it was, you would have been laughed out of it.

Let's be crystal clear about this; your guy did not win, therefore the judges were corrupt, no matter how close the actual fight was. In other words, it does not matter to you that this fight could have been scored either way, you have concocted a biased theory that supports your biased opinion.

Ok, got it.

Laughed out for lack of evidence? Remind the forum again how many times you repeated the claim that Donald Trump was solely running in order to get Clinton elected? That he was nothing more than a sneaky pro-Democrat saboteur


You dumbass.


Go run a poll on it, ask the question; what is more likely, that the judges deliberately shafted Kovalev by scoring round 10 to Ward even though they know he lost, or, Donald Trump being agent saboteur for Hillary Clinton?

We'll see who gets "laughed out"

Like a true Breitbart.comedien, you take a snapshot of what I said and attempt to discredit me. I still believe what I said, including the part where I pointed out that Hilarity was such a weak candidate that she might lose to the only opponent she had a chance to defeat.

Stay tuned for that prosecution of Hilarity, building of a wall, trashing of the Affordable Care Act, etc.

You would be laughed out of a court of law Ricky. You know that this fight was close and you have to find ways to discredit the judges' decisions.

It is possible that the judges were corrupt, but there is no proof and the fight could have gone either way. I happen to agree with the decision, but I would have been fine with it going to Krusher close.

You and the rest of the squealing piglet brigade can squeal until the end of days. It will change nothing. This was a close fight that could have gone either way.

Resume squealing.

[GPTM1403]

This is why i made the thread really, imo the story of the fight boils down to the scoring of round 10.

I've not rewatched it but I remember thinking that rund 10 was a very clear Kovalev round. Had it been scored by Kovalev by any if the judges... they turn in a Kovalev card.

Basically had they all scored round 10 the way pretty much everyone else, including those who chose Ward as winner, did then the judges would have ended up with a draw, which wouldn't have been unfair, so the most contentious of the scoring did favour Ward however you look at it. Which does at least justify the rematch.

No... if 10 goes to Kovalev then Kovalev wins. 114-113.

sorry yes my mistake but even more makes the point that a rematch is needed

[Impractical Poster]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWKs8-UaFcg

Yeah... I thought this round, and breakdown was pretty indicative of the fight as a whole. It was a close round, but definitely edged towards Kovalev. Kovalev threw more, landed more, and was the aggressor. You really have to stretch hard, and disregard some of Kov's work to give that round to Ward. And that is about how I feel about the fight in general.

What's interesting is that everyone I have seen score it for Ward says they would have no issue with a close win for Krusher. However, people who scored it for Kov do not sing the same tune. For me, that is an indication that Kov did more in this fight.

I've noticed people saying to turn the noise down on the TV to effectively score rounds. Maybe the judges should where noise cancelling headphones then. Because whenever Ward did anything at all, the crowd went crazy. Maybe that affected the 10th round scoring?

[Ricky_]

Like a true Breitbart.comedien, you take a snapshot of what I said and attempt to discredit me. I still believe what I said, including the part where I pointed out that Hilarity was such a weak candidate that she might lose to the only opponent she had a chance to defeat.

Stay tuned for that prosecution of Hilarity, building of a wall, trashing of the Affordable Care Act, etc.

C'mon now Tanzio, you posted this ridiculous conspiracy theory numerous times, and with no evidence.

Call my claim that the judges pulled one over on Kovalev with the 10th round scoring "a conspiracy theory" too if you want, but the readers of this thread can decide on this; What's more bat-shit crazy, hometown judges stiffing a guy in a round he clearly won, or, an entire presidential campaign being a criminal fraud, conning the united states of it's democracy in order to guarantee the election of the establishment candidate?

Crackpot.

You would be laughed out of a court of law Ricky. You know that this fight was close and you have to find ways to discredit the judges' decisions.

On one hand you argue it was close, but on the other you are on board with a complete judges whitewash of rounds 7,8,9,10,11 & 12.

That's why it was a stitch up, because Ward could only have won by getting rounds 7-12, and they gave him all of those rounds. The fact there final cards read out with a 1 point difference doesn't really matter, no way Ward won all 6/6 rounds in the 2nd half, that's why in many fans opinions, they jobbed Sergei.

[GPTM1403]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWKs8-UaFcg

aside from a couple of the comments this is a pretty good summary of how to dissect and show that what the judges gave is at best incorrect or at worst influenced by the wrong things, e.g. crowd response not their own vision. What I mean by their own vision is sometimes this is going to be action they only part see, is it that easy to not be consciously or subconsciously influenced into believing a scoring punch landed if you see most of it and hear a big response? Is there a case now for putting judges in soundproof booth or headphones and also in a position where they can see the action from a more objective perspective?

[Tanzio]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWKs8-UaFcg

Yeah... I thought this round, and breakdown was pretty indicative of the fight as a whole. It was a close round, but definitely edged towards Kovalev. Kovalev threw more, landed more, and was the aggressor. You really have to stretch hard, and disregard some of Kov's work to give that round to Ward. And that is about how I feel about the fight in general.

What's interesting is that everyone I have seen score it for Ward says they would have no issue with a close win for Krusher. However, people who scored it for Kov do not sing the same tune. For me, that is an indication that Kov did more in this fight.

I've noticed people saying to turn the noise down on the TV to effectively score rounds. Maybe the judges should where noise cancelling headphones then. Because whenever Ward did anything at all, the crowd went crazy. Maybe that affected the 10th round scoring?

First of all, I scored the 10th for Krusher.

The vid posted starts from the flawed view that close rounds are supposed to be scored for the champion. That is not the case, and it discredits him from the outset.

Close rounds are to be scored for the boxer who won the round closely, in the view of the judge.

[crow]

[

The vid posted starts from the flawed view that close rounds are supposed to be scored for the champion. That is not the case, and it discredits him from the outset.

Close rounds are to be scored for the boxer who won the round closely, in the view of the judge.

He said close rds don't get scored consistently to a single party.
Rds 7 to 12 were all close; that's 18 rds (6x3); they scored it 17 to 1.

Impossible unless the fix was in.

Not too hard to comprehend.

Unless you're Tanzidiot.

[Tanzio]

Like a true Breitbart.comedien, you take a snapshot of what I said and attempt to discredit me. I still believe what I said, including the part where I pointed out that Hilarity was such a weak candidate that she might lose to the only opponent she had a chance to defeat.

Stay tuned for that prosecution of Hilarity, building of a wall, trashing of the Affordable Care Act, etc.

C'mon now Tanzio, you posted this ridiculous conspiracy theory numerous times, and with no evidence.

Call my claim that the judges pulled one over on Kovalev with the 10th round scoring "a conspiracy theory" too if you want, but the readers of this thread can decide on this; What's more bat-shit crazy, hometown judges stiffing a guy in a round he clearly won, or, an entire presidential campaign being a criminal fraud, conning the united states of it's democracy in order to guarantee the election of the establishment candidate?

Crackpot.

You would be laughed out of a court of law Ricky. You know that this fight was close and you have to find ways to discredit the judges' decisions.

On one hand you argue it was close, but on the other you are on board with a complete judges whitewash of rounds 7,8,9,10,11 & 12.

That's why it was a stitch up, because Ward could only have won by getting rounds 7-12, and they gave him all of those rounds. The fact there final cards read out with a 1 point difference doesn't really matter, no way Ward won all 6/6 rounds in the 2nd half, that's why in many fans opinions, they jobbed Sergei.

The American POTUS election has been jobbed for a very long time. The two party system assures that only a very exclusive handful of people have the opportunity to win. That is not news, Ricky.

[Tanzio]

[

The vid posted starts from the flawed view that close rounds are supposed to be scored for the champion. That is not the case, and it discredits him from the outset.

Close rounds are to be scored for the boxer who won the round closely, in the view of the judge.

He said close rds don't get scored consistently to a single party.
Rds 7 to 12 were all close; that's 18 rds (6x3); they scored it 17 to 1.

Impossible unless the fix was in.

Not too hard to comprehend.

Unless you're Tanzidiot.

No, in the beginning of the vid he states (paraphrasing) that champions should get the benefit of the doubt in close rounds. That is incorrect.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a judge scoring all close rounds for the same person if in that judge's view that person won each round.

I scored 5 out of 6 of rounds 7-12 for Ward, because I saw it that way. Round 10 was not any clearer than any of the other rounds in the entire fight,imo. It was less clear than a number of them though.

[GPTM1403]

First of all, I scored the 10th for Krusher.

The vid posted starts from the flawed view that close rounds are supposed to be scored for the champion. That is not the case, and it discredits him from the outset.

Close rounds are to be scored for the boxer who won the round closely, in the view of the judge.

As I said about it, there's some comments you have to disregard and I'd say that was one of them but I don't agree it discredits him, listen to what he says about the round itself as it happens and it is a good summary and he's being even handed there, in fact I'm sure early on there is a Kovalev uppercut that he ignores completely. What he says about the punches landing on the back shouldn't count is spot on but you have to question were the judges counting them, if you count them then you can see how they might favour Ward, likewise if they're seeing something in an instant and hearing a big cheer they might think they've watched an effective scoring punch and give it more emphasis. What he says about all that is spot on, just the bit about should favour the champion and later bits about establishment are off putting.

Ultimately you do have to question how 3 judges, acting independent of each other, with 3 slightly different viewing positions, manage to score every close round consistently to one fighter if they're not being influenced by something like the crowd or their own pre-fight expectations. That is some fluke considering you could take 3 people from this site and find they've got different views on most rounds and a lot of the people on here are not muppets who know less than a judge about how they're supposed to score a fight.

[Tanzio]

First of all, I scored the 10th for Krusher.

The vid posted starts from the flawed view that close rounds are supposed to be scored for the champion. That is not the case, and it discredits him from the outset.

Close rounds are to be scored for the boxer who won the round closely, in the view of the judge.

As I said about it, there's some comments you have to disregard and I'd say that was one of them but I don't agree it discredits him, listen to what he says about the round itself as it happens and it is a good summary and he's being even handed there, in fact I'm sure early on there is a Kovalev uppercut that he ignores completely. What he says about the punches landing on the back shouldn't count is spot on but you have to question were the judges counting them, if you count them then you can see how they might favour Ward, likewise if they're seeing something in an instant and hearing a big cheer they might think they've watched an effective scoring punch and give it more emphasis. What he says about all that is spot on, just the bit about should favour the champion and later bits about establishment are off putting.

Ultimately you do have to question how 3 judges, acting independent of each other, with 3 slightly different viewing positions, manage to score every close round consistently to one fighter if they're not being influenced by something like the crowd or their own pre-fight expectations. That is some fluke considering you could take 3 people from this site and find they've got different views on most rounds and a lot of the people on here are not muppets who know less than a judge about how they're supposed to score a fight.

You are correct, the word discredits was too strong.

The judges did not score all close rounds for Ward. 1,3,4,5, and 6 could also be considered close under the parameters that you seem to be setting forth. Also, we can go back and analyze every round in slomo but that is not going to discredit what individuals saw realtime.