Joseph Parker was robbed

[Stuarty]

lol im confused, grailers saying parker was robbed but is now defending the judges? um okay

He's a fuckin moon man!

[gilgamesh]

lol im confused, grailers saying parker was robbed but is now defending the judges? um okay

He's a fuckin moon man!

[Stuarty]

My mum always told me when I was a boy, 'you'll never win an arguement with an idiot'.....

[gilgamesh]

My mum always told me when I was a boy, 'you'll never win an arguement with an idiot'.....

You especially won't win one with a troll. Because they only care about arguing not winning the argument.

[Stuarty]

My mum always told me when I was a boy, 'you'll never win an arguement with an idiot'.....

You especially won't win one with a troll. Because they only care about arguing not winning the argument.

Sometimes I find it hard to tell a part a troll and a fuckin moron on here! It's a thin line bruv

[gilgamesh]

My mum always told me when I was a boy, 'you'll never win an arguement with an idiot'.....

You especially won't win one with a troll. Because they only care about arguing not winning the argument.

Sometimes I find it hard to tell a part a troll and a fuckin moron on here! It's a thin line bruv

It becomes obvious to me whenever every single point that can be made on a topic has been made, and somebody just keeps on going back to square one in an attempt to keep the argument going on and on endlessly.

[Badhusker]

Posts are essentially opinions. Factual accuracy isn't necessarily a prerequisite for posting on a forum, but generally you get eviscerated by the people who DO know what they're talking about when you post stupid sh*t.

Yeah you can challenge me, even if you're a forum moderator.

Why don't you review the last ten posts I've submitted in the context of the claims being made by other forum members when they claim they're articulating facts rather than opinions.

I generally challenge other forum members claims that they believe to be fact rather than opinion.

If you think I'm wrong, then issue me with a permanent ban. If you carefully review these posts and then appreciate the fact that my claims are accurate, then be honest and say so.

Either issue me with a permanent ban or admit that my behaviour isn't so unreasonable.

You're one of the few people I respect that frequent this forum, but if you cannot perform an objective analysis and appreciate what has actually occurred, then you may as well issue me with a permanent ban.

Last night, I received a tonne of abuse from a fellow forum member that I've admired for quite a long time, simply because they issued me with a challenge to illustrate the fact that Deontay Wilder contravened one of the WBC's rules.

So when I detailed it, this middle aged emotionally disturbed individual unleashed a horrendous amount of abuse on me.

What did I do wrong in that situation?

If you're a forum moderator, then do your job.

If my behaviour really is morally reprehensible, then issue me with a permanent ban, otherwise consider the possibility that you need to be more vigilant in the role you're meant to perform.

I'm happy to receive a permanent ban if you can prove that I've behaved in an unreasonable manner.

It's up to you whether you want me to continue contributing to this forum.

I am absolutely mystified as to the nature of this post or why it has such a defensive nature from you. You seem to think something is going on that isn't...at least from my end. I'm honestly confused by this post, and what it is you think I meant with mine. I thought it made perfect sense myself, but apparently you thought I said I f*cked your mother or something.

I say ban the worthless POS troll.

[ClivePatrickLyons]

little ref no one knows in a big stadium in a big crowd in a big fight with imbercile judge's who give a fighter 1 or 2 round's the whole fight when he clearly won atleast 4 or 5 round's matter of fact there was a lot of round's that could have went either way but the home town fighter gets them all I guess that's why you get payed well to join the circus its not about who won because AJ got the nod anyway probably deserved it more then Parker but the 3 judge's and the ref and that promoter were sickening and the greed continues to rule the sport Don King would be envious of Eddie

[Heretic]

Yet another silly post.

I'm beginning to feel disappointed about the quality, integrity and factual accuracy of the posts being submitted to this forum.

Would you like to clarify what in the first post was incorrect fact?

In my opinion... All the facts are correct. There is integrity in the posts of the OP. He has always had stupid opinions.

Quality is quite ok too. He posted the punch stats. That's putting more quality and work in the post than many others would.

There are few typos there but not too many to make it hard to understand.

He did make hes point pretty well. I don't agree with the post but the post in itself was not bad

[candyslim]

Jesus is this guy still banging on?. In case anyone is wondering, I looked up the verb 'to grail'. Apparently it's the noise made by an infant when it hasn't been fed nor had it's nappy changed all day.

That might not be entirely true

[Heretic]

How? You're the only person who has your opinion. Literally nobody else including Joseph Parker thinks that Joseph Parker was robbed.

Also I'm beginning to think you're a troll because I have a hard time believing a Boxing fan is this delusional about a result that was fairly obvious.

I posted the compubox stats , they are plain to see.

Yeah...Alright. Let me show you the way back under your bridge troll.

I hope this doesn't mean what I think it means.

We can't ban all the idiots. There will be nobody left to talk...

Grailer was boasting before the fight how Parker is going to win the fight.

The fight was lot closer than the official scorecards suggest. The punch stats reflect this. They don't take into consideration the quality of the punches or ring generalship. That makes them worthless as a method to score boxing match.

In the end Grailer does kind of have point. If you score all of the relatively close rounds for Parker he gets a draw or maybe even close win. That's exactly what they did for Joshua to have him win so wide.

Trolls should be banned... Stupid fanboys should be tolerated.

I don't agree with Grailer here. In my opinions Joshua won clearly.

Despite that we all have a right to have our own opinions

[Heretic]

Jesus is this guy still banging on?. In case anyone is wondering, I looked up the verb 'to grail'. Apparently it's the noise made by an infant when it hasn't been fed nor had it's nappy changed all day.

That might not be entirely true

Nah it is different guy this time

I have bad feeling about the ban hammer falling on wrong target this time

[candyslim]

Nothing wrong with holding an opinion and voicing it. It's important though to say your piece and to know when it's time to stop flogging the dead horse. I don't believe in banning him but it would be reasonable to expect him to STFU now.

[oogiebe]

Dear Lord, I left this 12 hours ago believing it was done, however...

[Covfefe]

I named the rounds Parker should have won. The compubox numbers don’t lie I checked them out.

There is no way in hell AJ won round 2 legit

Anyone who uses CompuBox to judge a fight needs to find another sport to watch! Try watching the rounds and forming your own opinions. Joshua won the fight. Not as wide as the inept judges had it but he clearly won. Get a grip and stop consulting CompuBox for scores! It's fuckin embarrassing!

Inept Judges? These guys are professional boxing judges and you think you can do a better job than 3 professional boxing judges?

Compubox is just numbers , it isn’t biased , it doesn’t care about looks or style etc all it does it show what scoring punches land etc.

Key word: Scoring

So three professional judges are infallible yet you’re disputing the fornicating decision of three professional judges? Are you high?

[oogiebe]

Covering all bases, I guess. I scored the fight as it occurred. I'm no great judge, but I seem to have taken a lot of flack, although as time went by, I think I did a pretty fair job.

I had the fight 4-4-4 with the even rounds I just couldn't see a clear cut winner. The funny thing is, as an overall fight, I thought AJ won. When I added up my scorecard, I actually felt I made mistakes on a couple of even rounds and still believed AJ won. When I scored the fight a second time after watching a second time, I had it 7-3-2 Joshua. Watching as a fan and watching as a 'judge' were interesting to do. the first time I was both. The second time I was better able to be unbiased.


NOTE: I'm a Wilder fan.

[Impractical Poster]

OK...now what?

Joshua won round 1, 4 , 7,8, 12

What now? Well now I know the true results of the
Fight and can argue about who wins a rematch lol

Dude, you understand scoring is subjective.

Going by punch stats alone is extremely faulty. Joshua was the aggressor. Judges are supposed to score clean effective punching. How effective were Parker's shots of they did not keep Joshua from backing him up?

[danconnollyeire]

My mum always told me when I was a boy, 'you'll never win an arguement with an idiot'.....

I love that, so true, your mum's a wise woman

[oogiebe]

My mum always told me when I was a boy, 'you'll never win an arguement with an idiot'.....

I love that, so true, your mum's a wise woman

Similarly, my dad said, "if you get pissed by someone you know is an idiot...then who is the idiot?"

[dickbelden]

had it 8 rounds to 4 AJ--- PARKER lost but was 1st man to last 12 rounds with AJ.

[Impractical Poster]

Covering all bases, I guess. I scored the fight as it occurred. I'm no great judge, but I seem to have taken a lot of flack, although as time went by, I think I did a pretty fair job.

I had the fight 4-4-4 with the even rounds I just couldn't see a clear cut winner. The funny thing is, as an overall fight, I thought AJ won. When I added up my scorecard, I actually felt I made mistakes on a couple of even rounds and still believed AJ won. When I scored the fight a second time after watching a second time, I had it 7-3-2 Joshua. Watching as a fan and watching as a 'judge' were interesting to do. the first time I was both. The second time I was better able to be unbiased.


NOTE: I'm a Wilder fan.

I thought it was closer than most thought as well. Extremely close actually. I thought Parker did a better job boxing. But Joshua did a good job pressuring Parker and landing the more meaning blows. However, I have Joshua edging it. IMO, it's really hard to score a fight for the guy moving backwards for the majority of the bout. You reward a fighter for that kind of fighting, you are setting a precedent for boring fights in the future.

[oogiebe]

Covering all bases, I guess. I scored the fight as it occurred. I'm no great judge, but I seem to have taken a lot of flack, although as time went by, I think I did a pretty fair job.

I had the fight 4-4-4 with the even rounds I just couldn't see a clear cut winner. The funny thing is, as an overall fight, I thought AJ won. When I added up my scorecard, I actually felt I made mistakes on a couple of even rounds and still believed AJ won. When I scored the fight a second time after watching a second time, I had it 7-3-2 Joshua. Watching as a fan and watching as a 'judge' were interesting to do. the first time I was both. The second time I was better able to be unbiased.


NOTE: I'm a Wilder fan.

I thought it was closer than most thought as well. Extremely close actually. I thought Parker did a better job boxing. But Joshua did a good job pressuring Parker and landing the more meaning blows. However, I have Joshua edging it. IMO, it's really hard to score a fight for the guy moving backwards for the majority of the bout. You reward a fighter for that kind of fighting, you are setting a precedent for boring fights in the future.

Thanks! There are so many more aspects than punchstats. Ring generalship; aggressiveness; more "meaningful" punches; pressing the action, etc.

[oogiebe]

...not to mention that Parker did not do NEARLY enough to beat a title holder.

[gilgamesh]

I hope this doesn't mean what I think it means.

We can't ban all the idiots. There will be nobody left to talk...

Grailer was boasting before the fight how Parker is going to win the fight.

The fight was lot closer than the official scorecards suggest. The punch stats reflect this. They don't take into consideration the quality of the punches or ring generalship. That makes them worthless as a method to score boxing match.

In the end Grailer does kind of have point. If you score all of the relatively close rounds for Parker he gets a draw or maybe even close win. That's exactly what they did for Joshua to have him win so wide.

Trolls should be banned... Stupid fanboys should be tolerated.

I don't agree with Grailer here. In my opinions Joshua won clearly.

Despite that we all have a right to have our own opinions

I consider it trolling when an argument is over and you go right back to square one in an attempt to start the argument over again. Which he did multiple times in that thread.

I've had my fill of having conversations with idiots personally, and would much rather see posters actually capable of expressing a knowledgeable opinion on the sport. I don't care if I agree with you or not, but I care if you're gonna keep arguing with people just for the sake of arguing.

[Impractical Poster]

Is Grailer gone?