Post Your Scorecards

[gilgamesh]

James Toney vs Montell Griffin

1. Griffin
2. Griffin
3. Toney
4. Toney
5. Toney *
6. Toney
7. Griffin
8. Toney
9. Griffin
10. Griffin *
11. Toney
12. Toney

115-113 Toney

[Casablanca]

I just watched it. What a vicious fight between two huge punchers for their weight level. Here was my card:

Humberto Gonzalez vs. Michael Carbajal I (3-13-1993)

R1: 10-9 Gonzalez
R2: 10-8 Gonzalez (knockdown)
R3: 10-9 Gonzalez
R4: 10-9 Carbajal
R5: 10-8 Gonzalez (knockdown)
R6: 10-9 Carbajal
R7: Carbajal wins by Knockout

That fifth round was a roller coaster. Gonzalez was looking like he'd sealed the deal, with a heavy early knockdown. By the midway point I was starting to wonder if he would win the round at all. Probably the closest 10-8 round I've ever seen.

Yeah, it was a savage round in a savage and vicious fight.

[witherspoon]

Humberto Gonzalez v Michael Carbajal 2

https://youtu.be/UzfqXaNI_v4?si=wwxzuc37RmFVv0G8

R 1 10-9 HG10-9
R2 10-9 HG20-18
R3 10-9 HG30-27
R4 10-10 40-37
R5 10-9 HG50-46
R6 9-10 MC59-56
R7 9-10 MC 68-66
R8 10-9 HG 78-75
R9 10-9 HG 88-84
R10 10-9 HG 98-93
R11 10-9 HG 108-102
R12 10-9 HG 118-111


118-111 HG

I've got alot to say about this one.

Firstly, I found myself admiring Gonzalez' poker face in fight 1, and it was very satisfying to me that he chose the very moment (at the end of round 9, when I had him in a 4 point lead with 3 to go) to finally release some emotion and raise a fist in triumph.

I could sum this fight up very succinctly : Gonzalez did a brilliant Willie Pep impersonation for 12 rounds and Michael Carbajal was so surprised that he forgot to fight.

I've watched this fight twice now (I just had to know what they were telling Carbajal between rounds) and I don't understand the complacency. He was getting hit cleanly way too often, Gonzalez seemed to be keeping a mental tally of exactly how much he had to do to win each round and his ability to focus on the tactics necessary to achieve that were really impressive. Like I said, it felt like he was following my scorecard and knew exactly when he'd crossed the line.

Much like Barrera v Morales 2, this was not nearly as exciting as fight 1 but I found it much more interesting. I love it when a fighter chooses to fight out of his comfort zone tactically and manages to pull it off.

And that's exactly what Gonzalez did here, it felt like there were moments where he could have been more aggressive and followed up with combinations when he'd got Carbajal hurt.

But he chose to keep the fight at the distance that served him well in fight 1. He was determined to not fall into the trap again of putting himself in Carbajals range while chasing a knockout.

*What the hell was Sean O'Grady watching? I've never been more at odds with a commentators take on a fight.

[gilgamesh]

Michael Dokes vs Jimmy Young

1. Dokes
2. Dokes
3. Dokes
4. Dokes
5. Young
6. Young *
7. Dokes
8. Dokes
9. Young
10. Dokes

97-93 Dokes

Young had lost a little step here, but was still a difficult man to hit cleanly as Dokes found out.

[Casablanca]

Michael Dokes vs Jimmy Young

1. Dokes
2. Dokes
3. Dokes
4. Dokes
5. Young
6. Young *
7. Dokes
8. Dokes
9. Young
10. Dokes

97-93 Dokes

Young had lost a little step here, but was still a difficult man to hit cleanly as Dokes found out.

If you get a chance to check out Jimmy Young vs. Ossie Ocasio, let us know how you scored it.

[gilgamesh]

Michael Dokes vs Jesse Ferguson

1. Ferguson
2. Ferguson *
3. Ferguson *
4. Dokes
5. Dokes *
6. Dokes
7. Dokes
8. Even 9-9 (Ferguson gets a point deducted for hitting after the bell)
9. Dokes
10. Dokes

96-93 Dokes

Good fight

[Casablanca]

Just looking back through the thread now to see what great fights from the ‘30’s through the ‘60’s have already been scored by others. Some great fights missing.

[Casablanca]

Muhammad Ali vs Joe Frazier 2
January 28, 1974

Round 1: Ali
Round 2: Ali
Round 3: Ali
Round 4: Ali
Round 5: Ali
Round 6: Ali
Round 7: Frazier
Round 8: Ali *
Round 9: Ali
Round 10: Frazier
Round 11: Ali *
Round 12: Ali

I never realized how comfortably Ali controlled this one. Mostly shutting down Frazier at every turn with the clinching. He takes some good shots in there, but mostly is able to shut down the offense of Joe.

The * indicates rounds I feel could be argued the other way.

Here is how I scored it (taking my card from where it already was):

Muhammad Ali vs. Joe Frazier II (1-28-1974)

R1: 10-9 Ali
R2: 10-9 Ali
R3: 10-9 Ali
R4: 10-9 Ali
R5: 10-9 Frazier
R6: 10-9 Ali
R7: 10-9 Frazier
R8: 10-9 Frazier
R9: 10-9 Ali
R10: 10-9 Ali
R11: 10-9 Ali
R12: 10-9 Frazier

116-112 Ali

[Seamus]

Gerrie Coetzee v Michael Dokes

R1.10-9 GC
R2.10-9 GC
R3.10-9 MD
R4.EVEN
R5.10-8 GC Dokes down from a right to the head
R6.10-9 GC
R7.10-9 GC
R8.10-9 MD
R9.EVEN
R10 Coetzee knocks out Dokes 88-84 Coetzee at the time

Coming into this fight I predicted Dokes by a late stoppage. I also was sure if Coetzee did win it would be by early KO. Neither happened. Instead of really establishing his superior jab, Dokes was very tentative, and I got the impression Coetzee might have taken him earlier if he'd have made the effort.

[Casablanca]

Kid Gavilan vs. Carmen Basilio (9-18-1953)

R1: 10-9 Gavilan
R2: 10-8 Basilio (knockdown)
R3: 10-9 Gavilan
R4: 10-9 Basilio
R5: 10-9 Basilio
R6: 10-9 Gavilan
R7: 10-10 Even
R8: 10-9 Gavilan
R9: 10-9 Basilio
R10: 10-9 Gavilan
R11: 10-9 Gavilan
R12: 10-9 Basilio
R13: 10-9 Gavilan
R14: 10-9 Gavilan
R15: 10-9 Gavilan

144-141 Gavilan

That would be 9-5-1 in rounds for Gavilan and he retains his welterweight championship. The judges agreed and Gavilan won a narrow decision to retain his championship.

[scartissue]

Muhammad Ali vs Joe Frazier 2
January 28, 1974

Round 1: Ali
Round 2: Ali
Round 3: Ali
Round 4: Ali
Round 5: Ali
Round 6: Ali
Round 7: Frazier
Round 8: Ali *
Round 9: Ali
Round 10: Frazier
Round 11: Ali *
Round 12: Ali

I never realized how comfortably Ali controlled this one. Mostly shutting down Frazier at every turn with the clinching. He takes some good shots in there, but mostly is able to shut down the offense of Joe.

The * indicates rounds I feel could be argued the other way.

Here is how I scored it (taking my card from where it already was):

Muhammad Ali vs. Joe Frazier II (1-28-1974)

R1: 10-9 Ali
R2: 10-9 Ali
R3: 10-9 Ali
R4: 10-9 Ali
R5: 10-9 Frazier
R6: 10-9 Ali
R7: 10-9 Frazier
R8: 10-9 Frazier
R9: 10-9 Ali
R10: 10-9 Ali
R11: 10-9 Ali
R12: 10-9 Frazier

116-112 Ali

Muhammad Ali v Joe Frazier II (NY rounds scoring basis)

Round 1: Ali
Round 2: Ali
Round 3: Ali
Round 4: Even
Round 5: Ali
Round 6: Ali
Round 7: Frazier
Round 8: Frazier
Round 9: Ali
Round 10: Frazier
Round 11: Ali
Round 12: Frazier

Total: 7-4-1 Ali (actual scores: 7-4-1, 6-5-1 and 8-4 all for Ali)

We all know Frazier is a slow starter, but IMO, he didn't put together a sustained attack until that 7th round. Ali, ever the ring general, was always able to keep combos in Joe's face throughout, even if many of them had little on it. It wasn't FOTC, but hey, it was Ali and Frazier and always an event.

[scartissue]

Gerrie Coetzee v Michael Dokes

R1.10-9 GC
R2.10-9 GC
R3.10-9 MD
R4.EVEN
R5.10-8 GC Dokes down from a right to the head
R6.10-9 GC
R7.10-9 GC
R8.10-9 MD
R9.EVEN
R10 Coetzee knocks out Dokes 88-84 Coetzee at the time

Coming into this fight I predicted Dokes by a late stoppage. I also was sure if Coetzee did win it would be by early KO. Neither happened. Instead of really establishing his superior jab, Dokes was very tentative, and I got the impression Coetzee might have taken him earlier if he'd have made the effort.

Michael Dokes v Gerrie Coetzee (heavyweight title)

Round 1: 10-10 Even
Round 2: 10-9 Coetzee
Round 3: 10-10 Even
Round 4: 10-9 Coetzee
Round 5: 10-8 Coetzee (scores a knockdown)
Round 6: 10-9 Dokes
Round 7: 10-9 Coetzee
Round 8: 10-9 Coetzee
Round 9: 10-9 Coetzee
Round 10: Coetzee drops and stops Dokes

Total through 9 completed rounds: 89-83 Coetzee (actual scores: 87-85, 88-85 and 87-86 all for Coetzee)

Seamus, I felt Dokes didn't do as bad as some of the things I had heard about him in this fight over the years. I felt when you see this in its entirety, it paints a completely different picture than what we're used to hearing about. I half expected to see Dokes waddling around the ring in search of shelter with the things I've heard on this fight. But to tell you the truth, Dokes didn't look bad at all. His weight was under control, he was spry, agile and not huffing and puffing the way we've seen him over the years. I think the coked out story was just that, a story to paper over the cracks of his defeat and it really does an injustice to Coetzee's deserved victory.

[gilgamesh]

Speaking of which (The Rounds system being used in Ali vs Frazier 2 made me think of this) what do you guys think would be the ideal way to score a fight? I don't wanna get too far off topic here, but since this thread is about our scorecards it kinda is the topic.

To me the most common sense way to do Boxing scoring would simply be if a fighter wins a round, it's 1 point. If a fighter wins a round while scoring a knockdown, 2 points. 2 knockdowns...3 points. Etc. With 0 points to the guy that lost the round.

And of course point deductions could still be given for fouls same as ever.

Making it 10 points or 5 points adds in a whole other "We gotta do math" element to it that's not necessary

[Casablanca]

Speaking of which (The Rounds system being used in Ali vs Frazier 2 made me think of this) what do you guys think would be the ideal way to score a fight? I don't wanna get too far off topic here, but since this thread is about our scorecards it kinda is the topic.

To me the most common sense way to do Boxing scoring would simply be if a fighter wins a round, it's 1 point. If a fighter wins a round while scoring a knockdown, 2 points. 2 knockdowns...3 points. Etc. With 0 points to the guy that lost the round.

And of course point deductions could still be given for fouls same as ever.

Making it 10 points or 5 points adds in a whole other "We gotta do math" element to it that's not necessary

I think that the 10 point system works pretty well. You don’t really like it?

[gilgamesh]

It's fine. I just don't see the point the give them 9 extra points when you could just keep it simple and say. They won the round. 1 point to 0.

Simplicity is generally best.

[Seamus]

I think I probably score more even rounds than most and I've heard commentators say you shouldn't be judging a fight if you're doing that, but I completely disagree with them, because contrary to what they may claim, it has a very long history in the sport.

[Casablanca]

I think I probably score more even rounds than most and I've heard commentators say you shouldn't be judging a fight if you're doing that, but I completely disagree with them, because contrary to what they may claim, it has a very long history in the sport.

I score rounds even if I just can’t tell who won it after watching it through. You can see that from my cards.

[Casablanca]

It's fine. I just don't see the point the give them 9 extra points when you could just keep it simple and say. They won the round. 1 point to 0.

Simplicity is generally best.

It just allows for knockdowns and point deductions.

[Casablanca]

Joe Frazier vs. Joe Bugner (7-02-1073)

R1: 10-9 Bugner
R2: 10-9 Bugner
R3: 10-9 Frazier
R4: 10-9 Frazier
R5: 10-9 Frazier
R6: 10-9 Frazier
R7: 10-9 Frazier
R8: 10-9 Frazier
R9: 10-9 Frazier
R10: 10-8 Frazier (knockdown)
R11: 10-9 Frazier
R12: 10-9 Frazier

118-109 Frazier

Was very close in the first half of the fight, but Frazier took control in the second half of the fight and dominated through the end.

[Casablanca]

Muhammad Ali vs Joe Frazier 2
January 28, 1974

Round 1: Ali
Round 2: Ali
Round 3: Ali
Round 4: Ali
Round 5: Ali
Round 6: Ali
Round 7: Frazier
Round 8: Ali *
Round 9: Ali
Round 10: Frazier
Round 11: Ali *
Round 12: Ali

I never realized how comfortably Ali controlled this one. Mostly shutting down Frazier at every turn with the clinching. He takes some good shots in there, but mostly is able to shut down the offense of Joe.

The * indicates rounds I feel could be argued the other way.

Here is how I scored it (taking my card from where it already was):

Muhammad Ali vs. Joe Frazier II (1-28-1974)

R1: 10-9 Ali
R2: 10-9 Ali
R3: 10-9 Ali
R4: 10-9 Ali
R5: 10-9 Frazier
R6: 10-9 Ali
R7: 10-9 Frazier
R8: 10-9 Frazier
R9: 10-9 Ali
R10: 10-9 Ali
R11: 10-9 Ali
R12: 10-9 Frazier

116-112 Ali

Muhammad Ali v Joe Frazier II (NY rounds scoring basis)

Round 1: Ali
Round 2: Ali
Round 3: Ali
Round 4: Even
Round 5: Ali
Round 6: Ali
Round 7: Frazier
Round 8: Frazier
Round 9: Ali
Round 10: Frazier
Round 11: Ali
Round 12: Frazier

Total: 7-4-1 Ali (actual scores: 7-4-1, 6-5-1 and 8-4 all for Ali)

We all know Frazier is a slow starter, but IMO, he didn't put together a sustained attack until that 7th round. Ali, ever the ring general, was always able to keep combos in Joe's face throughout, even if many of them had little on it. It wasn't FOTC, but hey, it was Ali and Frazier and always an event.

Appreciate your card. I saw that you scored Frazier-Bugner back in 2017, as well.

[Seamus]

I watched Michael Nunn v William Guthrie earlier today and after a good first round, Guthrie was out of it. 2 knockdowns, one from a jab, and 3 standing 8's before the ref stopped it. Guthrie was 24-1

[gilgamesh]

It's fine. I just don't see the point the give them 9 extra points when you could just keep it simple and say. They won the round. 1 point to 0.

Simplicity is generally best.

It just allows for knockdowns and point deductions.

You could do that also by doing what I said. 2 points for a knockdown. 3 for 2 knockdowns. Etc.

The other 9 points in a 10 point system are pointless.

Ultimately it would work the same way as the 10 point must system what im suggesting, it just wouldn't have extra points for no reason other than to make the math harder at the end of the fight.

[Ambling Alp II]

It would be pointless if rounds that aren't that close would be scored 10-8, 10-7, but they aren't.

Always hated this scenario:
Fighter A does just enough to win round 1.
In round 2, Fighter B completely outboxes fighter B but doesn't score a knockdown.

Both rounds are always scored 10-9.

[Seamus]

It's worse than that. You can have situations where the so called experts say "that 1st round really could have gone either way, but I gave it to Fighter A (why ?) followed by, Fighter B really came back in that 2nd round and it was almost a 10-8 round (but wasn't scored that way) At that point the expert has the fight 19-19 which is ridiculous because he scored a near toss up round and a near 10-8 round the same.

[Casablanca]

Tommy Hearns vs. Iran Barkley I (6-06-1988)

R1: 10-9 Hearns
R2: 10-9 Hearns
R3: Barkley wins by TKO