Vasiliy Lomachenko vs. Richard Commey | ESPN - December 11, 2021

[oogiebe]

You may consider the remark “silly” but what is silly is the way he does it repeatedly.

Also, this is a stronger HW era than several others.

1 - being tagged a few times isn't "diving into punches"
2 - This ear is better than some, but worse than most IMHO.

Being tagged because you are diving in wide open is an unforced error. Not getting hit by lesser competition does not make the practice any less silly.

Agreed. But Anderson isn't "diving face first into punches every round." Stop exaggerating.

[margaret thatcher]

jah's looking like an absolute stud. although its fair to say he's so far fought totally outgunned guys, mostly a way off from the top. he still needs to prove he's not a front runner.

but i like what i see. and how many other hws can switch to southpaw and then rip in body shots? he's defo not the usual prospect

[p4p1]

117-110
119-108 X 2

Lomachenko wins a UD

I haven't watched the fight, but was there any argument to give Commey that many rounds? From the RBRs it seems not.

[oogiebe]

jah's looking like an absolute stud. although its fair to say he's so far fought totally outgunned guys, mostly a way off from the top. he still needs to prove he's not a front runner.

but i like what i see. and how many other hws can switch to southpaw and then rip in body shots? he's defo not the usual prospect

Totally agree. But I'll say again, he has that bit of overconfidence that could hurt him as he moves up to stiffer competition. I hope he works through the carelessness he shows in the beginning of some bouts.

[margaret thatcher]

117-110
119-108 X 2

Lomachenko wins a UD

I haven't watched the fight, but was there any argument to give Commey that many rounds? From the RBRs it seems not.

maybe 1 round for his effort, 3 rounds is a stretch

[p4p1]

117-110
119-108 X 2

Lomachenko wins a UD

I haven't watched the fight, but was there any argument to give Commey that many rounds? From the RBRs it seems not.

maybe 1 round for his effort, 3 rounds is a stretch

In that case then, I think scores like these need to be looked into. Just because the judge called the correct winner doesn't mean that his scoring shouldn't be looking into IMO. If judging is to get better and more consistent in boxing, then when they still have the correct winner but no one else can understand how they gave one guy x amount of rounds then there is IMO a problem. This problem shows itself down the line in closer fights when those rounds actually matter and the wrong guy gets the W.

[margaret thatcher]

well 119-108 is 11 rounds to 1, so hard to argue much with that not being one sided enough. the tv scorer had it the same iirc

9-3 is a generous card to commey, but couldnt see an investigation ever getting launched into it , since it was still wide and for the right guy. there were a couple rounds where loma wasnt very active

[Evander]

117-110
119-108 X 2

Lomachenko wins a UD

I haven't watched the fight, but was there any argument to give Commey that many rounds? From the RBRs it seems not.

It was one of those fights when the scorecards made little difference as Lomachenko was running away with it, I'd have to take another look at it and perhaps Commey nicked a round or two maybe.
Commey had some moments don't get me wrong but the mere accuracy of Lomachenko piled up the points time and again as he landed flush head shots and well placed body shots.
No question about the actual result though, Lomachenko was a very clear winner.

[p4p1]

well 119-108 is 11 rounds to 1, so hard to argue much with that not being one sided enough. the tv scorer had it the same iirc

9-3 is a generous card to commey, but couldnt see an investigation ever getting launched into it , since it was still wide and for the right guy. there were a couple rounds where loma wasnt very active

I was referring only to the 9-3 score card. This is my point though, yes it was still wide and to the right guy but I think the judge in question needs to give a explanation for why he scored it different to just about everyone else. His score didn't matter in this case, but his scoring of rounds, which at least by popular opinion is wrong, could decide fights in the future. I don't think I have seen a score that isn't a shutout or 119-108, that a judge scored an extra 2 rounds to Commey is alarm bells to me because it seems like in far too many fights there is at least one judge who's scoring is shithouse.

I think back to the first Kovalev vs Ward fight, the fight was close and the decision itself in a close fight didn't make a robbery but what did was one of the later rounds (I think it was rd10) that was a clear Kovalev round and realistically couldn't be seen any other way was inexplicably scored for Ward by the judges which gave him the W. I just think judges need to be more accountable for their scoring of each round. I know it can be a hard job, I have done it myself, but these guys are getting paid a good amount (IIRC judges doing an IBF world title fight get around $1500USD for the night) because they need to do their jobs right. When they don't there doesn't seem to be much if any consequence.

[ironbeard]

1 - being tagged a few times isn't "diving into punches"
2 - This ear is better than some, but worse than most IMHO.

Being tagged because you are diving in wide open is an unforced error. Not getting hit by lesser competition does not make the practice any less silly.

Agreed. But Anderson isn't "diving face first into punches every round." Stop exaggerating.

You are the one exaggerating. I am pointing out an extremely obvious problem that will lead to his demise if not corrected. I have already stated that he looks like a player in the division going forward.

You, otoh, are already playing the fanboy.

[ironbeard]

well 119-108 is 11 rounds to 1, so hard to argue much with that not being one sided enough. the tv scorer had it the same iirc

9-3 is a generous card to commey, but couldnt see an investigation ever getting launched into it , since it was still wide and for the right guy. there were a couple rounds where loma wasnt very active

I was referring only to the 9-3 score card. This is my point though, yes it was still wide and to the right guy but I think the judge in question needs to give a explanation for why he scored it different to just about everyone else. His score didn't matter in this case, but his scoring of rounds, which at least by popular opinion is wrong, could decide fights in the future. I don't think I have seen a score that isn't a shutout or 119-108, that a judge scored an extra 2 rounds to Commey is alarm bells to me because it seems like in far too many fights there is at least one judge who's scoring is shithouse.

I think back to the first Kovalev vs Ward fight, the fight was close and the decision itself in a close fight didn't make a robbery but what did was one of the later rounds (I think it was rd10) that was a clear Kovalev round and realistically couldn't be seen any other way was inexplicably scored for Ward by the judges which gave him the W. I just think judges need to be more accountable for their scoring of each round. I know it can be a hard job, I have done it myself, but these guys are getting paid a good amount (IIRC judges doing an IBF world title fight get around $1500USD for the night) because they need to do their jobs right. When they don't there doesn't seem to be much if any consequence.

I have watched Lomassiah v Commey a couple of times. In my opinion those giving Lomassiah a whitewash are farther off than the 117-110 card.

Of course, I had Ward by a point in the first fight.

Fans are quick to cry foul when a judge or an individual does not see the fight the way they do, especially when they have popular opinion on their side. What % of fans watch the fight as closely as the judges do, while talking with friends, drinking and eating, and listening to the commentators? How many are sat literally at ringside? How many are influenced by the subjective highlights of a punch or two between rounds?

I had it 118-109.

[margaret thatcher]

giving loma a whitewash is pretty easy tbh, i had it 11-1, 120-107s easier for me to see than 117-110 but none of them are really awful scores

but make no mistake, tons of fights judges deliver absolute crap, i dont buy that they do any better a job than most fans. you'll never see sh!t like all the fans having maestre winning by severaal points vs fox

[ironbeard]

giving loma a whitewash is pretty easy tbh, i had it 11-1, 120-107s easier for me to see than 117-110 but none of them are really awful scores

but make no mistake, tons of fights judges deliver absolute crap, i dont buy that they do any better a job than most fans. you'll never see sh!t like all the fans having maestre winning by severaal points vs fox

I 100% agree that there are corrupt, preordained decisions, like Campbell Hatton v Sonni Martinez, for example.

I must say that judging seems to have improved in the last year or two.

[Thomastearns]

Judging in boxing is always going to be controversial in nature.

However, the Las Vegas/ NSAC cartel is in a class all by itself.

[oogiebe]

Being tagged because you are diving in wide open is an unforced error. Not getting hit by lesser competition does not make the practice any less silly.

Agreed. But Anderson isn't "diving face first into punches every round." Stop exaggerating.

You are the one exaggerating. I am pointing out an extremely obvious problem that will lead to his demise if not corrected. I have already stated that he looks like a player in the division going forward.

You, otoh, are already playing the fanboy.

LMFAO! You're incredible.

[ironbeard]

Agreed. But Anderson isn't "diving face first into punches every round." Stop exaggerating.

You are the one exaggerating. I am pointing out an extremely obvious problem that will lead to his demise if not corrected. I have already stated that he looks like a player in the division going forward.

You, otoh, are already playing the fanboy.

LMFAO! You're incredible.

Thank you. Thank you very much.

[p4p1]

well 119-108 is 11 rounds to 1, so hard to argue much with that not being one sided enough. the tv scorer had it the same iirc

9-3 is a generous card to commey, but couldnt see an investigation ever getting launched into it , since it was still wide and for the right guy. there were a couple rounds where loma wasnt very active

I was referring only to the 9-3 score card. This is my point though, yes it was still wide and to the right guy but I think the judge in question needs to give a explanation for why he scored it different to just about everyone else. His score didn't matter in this case, but his scoring of rounds, which at least by popular opinion is wrong, could decide fights in the future. I don't think I have seen a score that isn't a shutout or 119-108, that a judge scored an extra 2 rounds to Commey is alarm bells to me because it seems like in far too many fights there is at least one judge who's scoring is shithouse.

I think back to the first Kovalev vs Ward fight, the fight was close and the decision itself in a close fight didn't make a robbery but what did was one of the later rounds (I think it was rd10) that was a clear Kovalev round and realistically couldn't be seen any other way was inexplicably scored for Ward by the judges which gave him the W. I just think judges need to be more accountable for their scoring of each round. I know it can be a hard job, I have done it myself, but these guys are getting paid a good amount (IIRC judges doing an IBF world title fight get around $1500USD for the night) because they need to do their jobs right. When they don't there doesn't seem to be much if any consequence.

I have watched Lomassiah v Commey a couple of times. In my opinion those giving Lomassiah a whitewash are farther off than the 117-110 card.

Of course, I had Ward by a point in the first fight.

Fans are quick to cry foul when a judge or an individual does not see the fight the way they do, especially when they have popular opinion on their side. What % of fans watch the fight as closely as the judges do, while talking with friends, drinking and eating, and listening to the commentators? How many are sat literally at ringside? How many are influenced by the subjective highlights of a punch or two between rounds?

I had it 118-109.

Like I said, I haven't gotten around to see the fight yet. So for all I know the 117-109 card could be just. I was talking more on a larger scale, my opinion being that boxing needs to nip the scores that are totally incorrect in the bud even when the judge has scored the fight to the right guy.

I don't really have a huge problem with a one point win for Ward in the first fight, a lot of rounds were close and some could be scored either way. But at the time, and I haven't watched the fight in a long time, I remember thinking (and I believe a lot of other people thought so too) there was no way that you could give Ward the 10th, which it seems only the judges did.

I don't know what the correct answer is to stop the inconsistency and what must be downright corruption in judging but I think more inquiries, debriefs etc could be part of the answer.

[ironbeard]

I was referring only to the 9-3 score card. This is my point though, yes it was still wide and to the right guy but I think the judge in question needs to give a explanation for why he scored it different to just about everyone else. His score didn't matter in this case, but his scoring of rounds, which at least by popular opinion is wrong, could decide fights in the future. I don't think I have seen a score that isn't a shutout or 119-108, that a judge scored an extra 2 rounds to Commey is alarm bells to me because it seems like in far too many fights there is at least one judge who's scoring is shithouse.

I think back to the first Kovalev vs Ward fight, the fight was close and the decision itself in a close fight didn't make a robbery but what did was one of the later rounds (I think it was rd10) that was a clear Kovalev round and realistically couldn't be seen any other way was inexplicably scored for Ward by the judges which gave him the W. I just think judges need to be more accountable for their scoring of each round. I know it can be a hard job, I have done it myself, but these guys are getting paid a good amount (IIRC judges doing an IBF world title fight get around $1500USD for the night) because they need to do their jobs right. When they don't there doesn't seem to be much if any consequence.

I have watched Lomassiah v Commey a couple of times. In my opinion those giving Lomassiah a whitewash are farther off than the 117-110 card.

Of course, I had Ward by a point in the first fight.

Fans are quick to cry foul when a judge or an individual does not see the fight the way they do, especially when they have popular opinion on their side. What % of fans watch the fight as closely as the judges do, while talking with friends, drinking and eating, and listening to the commentators? How many are sat literally at ringside? How many are influenced by the subjective highlights of a punch or two between rounds?

I had it 118-109.

Like I said, I haven't gotten around to see the fight yet. So for all I know the 117-109 card could be just. I was talking more on a larger scale, my opinion being that boxing needs to nip the scores that are totally incorrect in the bud even when the judge has scored the fight to the right guy.

I don't really have a huge problem with a one point win for Ward in the first fight, a lot of rounds were close and some could be scored either way. But at the time, and I haven't watched the fight in a long time, I remember thinking (and I believe a lot of other people thought so too) there was no way that you could give Ward the 10th, which it seems only the judges did.

I don't know what the correct answer is to stop the inconsistency and what must be downright corruption in judging but I think more inquiries, debriefs etc could be part of the answer.

One idea that has been put out there before is to have 5 judges and throw out the highest and lowest scores.

[p4p1]

Judging in boxing is always going to be controversial in nature.

However, the Las Vegas/ NSAC cartel is in a class all by itself.

I wonder if judges should be given more time after the round to weigh the round up in their mind. The thing that surprised me when judging was just how quickly you need to write down a score and hand it to the referee. It's not a problem in one sided rounds but when they're really close I did find it a bit more challenging. I know in the old days judges used to score a lot more even rounds, maybe that was fairer?

I don't think the system we use now in boxing is great either 10-9 rounds whether the round is close, clear or dominant but I can't see a better option that would work. When I started going through the materials I was given to start the process of being a judge the handbook laid the scoring out something like 10-9 close round, 10-8 clear round, 10-7 dominant round, 1 point for a knockdown etc. At first glance it seems like a much fairer system but it would open itself up to corruption and incompetency far more.

[p4p1]

One idea that has been put out there before is to have 5 judges and throw out the highest and lowest scores.

That's an interesting idea. I guess it makes corruption more expensive

[ironbeard]

One idea that has been put out there before is to have 5 judges and throw out the highest and lowest scores.

That's an interesting idea. I guess it makes corruption more expensive

Good point.

[Ruthless-RKO]

Lomachenko-Commey Fight Drew Peak Audience Of 1,243,000, Averaged 1,129,000 On ESPN

A seven-figure audience tuned in Saturday night for what evolved into a compelling clash between heavily favored Vasiliy Lomachenko and Richard Commey.

According to viewership figures released by Nielsen Media Research, the 12-round Lomachenko-Commey contest attracted an average audience of 1,129,000 viewers and a peak audience of 1,243,000 for ESPN, which televised their main event from Madison Square Garden in New York. Handicappers consistently listed Lomachenko as a 10-1 favorite over Commey, a former IBF lightweight champion who got up from a seventh-round knockdown and made their fight competitive and entertaining.

Ukraine’s Lomachenko (16-2, 11 KOs), who often stood his ground and traded with Commey, still won their bout by wide distances on all three scorecards (119-108, 119-108 and 117-110). Ghana’s Commey (30-4, 27 KOs) redeemed himself by exhibiting considerable courage two years after Teofimo Lopez stopped him in the second round of their December 2019 fight for Commey’s 135-pound championship at Madison Square Garden.

ESPN’s entire telecast, which included four fights, was watched by an average audience of 1,019,000. Nielsen’s numbers include only those that watched on ESPN’s linear channel, not ESPN+, which has an ever-growing subscriber base, or ESPN Deportes, both of which offered the card live as well.

The opener of ESPN’s four-bout broadcast, Nico Ali Walsh-Reyes Sanchez, drew a higher average audience than Lomachenko-Commey. That total – 1,147,000 – was boosted, however, by a strong lead-in, ESPN’s live coverage of college football’s Heisman Trophy ceremony.

Ali Walsh, the 21-year-old grandson of Muhammad Ali, improved to 3-0 when he defeated Sanchez by majority decision in a four-round middleweight match. Ali Walsh (3-0, 2 KOs), a senior at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas, beat Sanchez (6-1, 2 KOs), of Topeka, Kansas, on two scorecards (40-36, 39-37, 38-38).

The fight after Ali Walsh’s victory, lightweight prospect Keyshawn Davis’ second-round stoppage of Jose Zaragoza (8-4-1, 2 KOs), averaged 823,000 viewers. The 22-year-old Davis (4-0, 3 KOs), of Norfolk, Virginia, knocked out Zaragoza with a perfectly placed left hand to the body.

The co-feature Saturday night, heavyweight prospect Jared Anderson’s second-round TKO of Oleksandr Teslenko, drew an average audience of 939,000.

A right hand by Anderson (11-0, 11 KOs), of Toledo, Ohio, sent Teslenko to the canvas in the second round. Teslenko reached his feet before referee Danny Schiavone reached the count of 10, but Schiavone stopped their scheduled eight-rounder because Teslenko didn’t look like he should continue.

Later Saturday night, Showtime’s telecast of a live tripleheader that featured Nonito Donaire drew about as well as could’ve been expected based on the extremely late start time for the main event.

Donaire’s fourth-round knockout of fellow Filipino Reymart Gaballo was watched by an average of 187,000.

The Donaire-Gaballo bout didn’t begin until 1:13 a.m. ET. The 39-year-old Donaire (42-6, 28 KOs) knocked out the previously unbeaten Gaballo (24-1, 20 KOs), the mandatory challenger for Donaire’s WBC bantamweight title, with a right hand to the body.

The co-feature of Showtime’s broadcast, Cody Crowley-Kudratillo Abdukakhorov, drew a peak viewership of 215,000.

That 10-round welterweight bout began at 12:11 a.m. ET. Crowley (20-0, 9 KOs), a southpaw from Peterborough, Ontario, Canada, got up from a second-round knockdown and thoroughly out-boxed Uzbekistan’s Abdukakhorov (18-1, 10 KOs) to win a unanimous decision (98-91, 97-92, 95-94).

Nielsen’s numbers for Showtime include only those that watched live on that premium cable channel as well. Like ESPN+, ViacomCBS, which owns Showtime and BS.com, does not release its streaming numbers, which account for a significant number of viewers.

As a premium network, Showtime has slightly less than a third the number of subscribers as ESPN, a basic cable channel.

DAZN, which streamed cards from Russia and England on Saturday, doesn’t release its streaming numbers, either, nor are those figures tracked by Nielsen.