World Championships - Schedules and Results - Oct 23-Nov 3
Hey Mel,
I am not in Chicago:( But have a lot of friends there:))) And they told me that every day there will come more and more Bulgarians in the hall:)))
Watch out for today hopes - Salim Salimov at 51 and my neighbor Ognian Kolev (who caries the same name as me:) I went time by time to train at the same hall as Kolev. Boris Georgiev also started his career in our hall and he was until last year at the same team as Kolev.
I am not in Chicago:( But have a lot of friends there:))) And they told me that every day there will come more and more Bulgarians in the hall:)))
Watch out for today hopes - Salim Salimov at 51 and my neighbor Ognian Kolev (who caries the same name as me:) I went time by time to train at the same hall as Kolev. Boris Georgiev also started his career in our hall and he was until last year at the same team as Kolev.
And I didn't know there were that many Bulgarians in the area! I like to look at the raw score as the measure of each judges individual evaluation, whereas the accepted score is more of a inter-relational measure between the judges. Looking at both often gives me an idea of what might have happened in the fight. Of course some judges score far more blows than others, which I've seen in almost every fight, but you don't see too many fights with such wildly divergent raw scoring ratios as there was in the Wilder fight.boxmel wrote:Emile, first of all you are looking at the "raw" score as opposed to the "accepted" score. The "raw" score is always higher. And it was a 3-2 decision - close. To me, looking at the accepted score, the CMR judge was very low as compared to the other 4 judges.
It seems that two judges did not score much for Wilder compared to the other three, and that Wilder had a generally lower percentage of accepted scores than Zimnoch. This does not make me assume the judging was bad, but probably means that his inexperience caused him to not use his height effectively and get tied in where his punches could not be seen by all the judges. I was hoping he might show himself to be a natural at this, but he will clearly need all of the coaching they can get him from now until the Olympic Qualifiers.
Looking into the details of today's US opponents does not fill me with confidence.
Downs is in big trouble. Not much to say there - Sillakh wrecked people at the last Euro Championships and gave Beterbiyev a good fight, and Downs has never been able to beat top fighters at this weight.
I knew Jvania was decent, but he might be tougher than I thought and might be Georgia's best fighter. In the Euro Championships, he beat several B level fighters and lost by a small margin to Spas Genov. I still think Andrade will win, but this is no easy task.
Sadam Ali's opponent was unknown to me - Jose Pedraza of Puerto Rico. Pedraza had decent results at the Pan Ams - beating Lisandro Bolivar and making it to the semis before losing to the Brazilian homeboy. Ali's lack of international experience may hurt him, and Pedraza is only 18 so like Ali he should only be getting better. I'd have to rate this a toss-up at best.
Rau'Shee got a bad draw against Doniyarov, who did very well in the 2004 Olympics, including a major crushing of Ron Siler - before bowing out in the quarters to Jerome Thomas. The good news here is that Doniyarov hasn't done that well since then, getting knocked out of the last Worlds by a Tunisian and not showing for the last Asian competitions. I like Warren to win, but this is an unsettling matchup to get started with.
Downs is in big trouble. Not much to say there - Sillakh wrecked people at the last Euro Championships and gave Beterbiyev a good fight, and Downs has never been able to beat top fighters at this weight.
I knew Jvania was decent, but he might be tougher than I thought and might be Georgia's best fighter. In the Euro Championships, he beat several B level fighters and lost by a small margin to Spas Genov. I still think Andrade will win, but this is no easy task.
Sadam Ali's opponent was unknown to me - Jose Pedraza of Puerto Rico. Pedraza had decent results at the Pan Ams - beating Lisandro Bolivar and making it to the semis before losing to the Brazilian homeboy. Ali's lack of international experience may hurt him, and Pedraza is only 18 so like Ali he should only be getting better. I'd have to rate this a toss-up at best.
Rau'Shee got a bad draw against Doniyarov, who did very well in the 2004 Olympics, including a major crushing of Ron Siler - before bowing out in the quarters to Jerome Thomas. The good news here is that Doniyarov hasn't done that well since then, getting knocked out of the last Worlds by a Tunisian and not showing for the last Asian competitions. I like Warren to win, but this is an unsettling matchup to get started with.
Emile -
By the way - the Americas qualifiers are (1) Trinidad & Tobago, 3/10-18 and Guatamala, 4/27-30. I'm really disappointed one of them won't be in Tijuana again. I have really enjoyed attending the finals there. I just hope someone is able to post results - that has always been lacking.
I think there are more than you think; we don't often get to see the judges scoring. In looking at the accepted score, and that IS the bottom line, the three judges for Zimnoch were very close in their scoring, as was the MRI judge for Wilder. Those scores are not out of line. CMR, on the other hand, was was off at 16:7 - he wasn't close to the other 4. And I thought most of the judges were in line with each other, with the exception of the CMR judge. In the accepted score, two judges had a 1 point difference for Zimnoch; The Fin judges 14:19 for Zimnoch probably skewed Zimnoch's points higher. The reason we have the accepted score is to offset any judge who is scoring every punch he sees, whether or not it's legal.but you don't see too many fights with such wildly divergent raw scoring ratios as there was in the Wilder fight.
But if you look at the round scores (in the "raw), you will see that the India judge had 2 rounds for Zimnoch and 2 rounds for Wilder, with the biggest point spread a 5; the biggest point spread the Mexico judge had for Zimnoch was 5, the rest of the 4 rounds were close.It seems that two judges did not score much for Wilder compared to the other three
Not sure how you would figure this out, but he lost by 1 point on India's, 5 points on Finland's and 1 point on Mexicos. Again, with the exception of CMR, I think the rest of the scores were fairly close - it was a 3/2 (remember, it depends on where you're sitting and what you can see and, unfortunately, we aren't able to actually watch the bouts). All of the preceeding just my opinion.and that Wilder had a generally lower percentage of accepted scores than Zimnoch.
He definitely showed a lack of experience at the Trials, but there is plenty of time to work on this.I was hoping he might show himself to be a natural at this, but he will clearly need all of the coaching they can get him from now until the Olympic Qualifiers.
By the way - the Americas qualifiers are (1) Trinidad & Tobago, 3/10-18 and Guatamala, 4/27-30. I'm really disappointed one of them won't be in Tijuana again. I have really enjoyed attending the finals there. I just hope someone is able to post results - that has always been lacking.
Well, expect if any American fighter wins big for people to cry about hometown judging. I was reading another fight and someone was surprised Raynell won, and big, and said "maybe with a bit of home judging?" Jeez, this bashing of American fighters and assuming that anytime they win is because of friendly judges is annoying. I hope team USA has a particularly impressive World Championships just to spite the haters.
As an aside, from people who can see it and what not; do you believe the scoring has been accurate; and aren't the officials from all over the world?
As an aside, from people who can see it and what not; do you believe the scoring has been accurate; and aren't the officials from all over the world?
I'm sure that a statistic could be derived using the raw, accepted, and actual scores to show which judges were most out of synch with the others. When I say Wilder had a lower percentage of accepted scores, I'm saying that he translated fewer of his raw score into accepted, which could mean that he was less proficient at getting his punches where the judges could see, assuming that this lower percentage was across the board with all judges.boxmel wrote:Not sure how you would figure this out, but he lost by 1 point on India's, 5 points on Finland's and 1 point on Mexicos. Again, with the exception of CMR, I think the rest of the scores were fairly close - it was a 3/2 (remember, it depends on where you're sitting and what you can see and, unfortunately, we aren't able to actually watch the bouts). All of the preceeding just my opinion.and that Wilder had a generally lower percentage of accepted scores than Zimnoch.
The decisive fourth round of that fight was interesting. Zimnoch won it 10-5, but only one judge had anything close to that type of margin for Zimnoch, the judge from Mauritius who had it 15-6. The other four judges tabbed the round fairly even, with two of them favoring Wilder with their raw scores, including the Cameroonian judge who had been so stingy with Wilder in the first three rounds. But wilder fared poorly translating that into accepted scores, with a 50% or lower rate with every judge. Credit Zimnoch with adjusting in the last two rounds (whatever he did - land more decisively or create distance so the judges could see), while Wilder was unable to make the same adjustment.
Great win for Warren. Appears he was never really in any trouble, and should have an easy time with the Mexican in the next round. Balakshin romped over Jerome Thomas, and he and Warren look to be heading for another battle that could very well decide the gold medal in the quarterfinals.
You can see the judges sheets for all of the fights - where they were from and how they scored every round.Kolya wrote:Well, expect if any American fighter wins big for people to cry about hometown judging. I was reading another fight and someone was surprised Raynell won, and big, and said "maybe with a bit of home judging?" Jeez, this bashing of American fighters and assuming that anytime they win is because of friendly judges is annoying. I hope team USA has a particularly impressive World Championships just to spite the haters.
As an aside, from people who can see it and what not; do you believe the scoring has been accurate; and aren't the officials from all over the world?
Raynell's win was no fluke. All five judges favored him with their raw scores, and he put up some of the highest punch totals of the entire tournament so far. The New Zealand judge, who based on other results appears to have the quickest fingers in Chicago, gave 70 hits to Raynell and another judge had 55. He didn't get the highest overall score, but it gives me the impression he was very busy. I've been wondering if any of these young Americans would show a natural feel for the scoring system and just break out - and Raynell looks like he might be the guy who becomes the surprising star of the team. We'll find out more on Saturday, because he has another really tough fight.
Sorry to make so many posts, but I thought a better explanation of what I'm talking about with reading the judging sheets was shown by Ayrepetyan, who crushed the very talented Mongolian Serdamba 34-7 at 48kg.
Ayrepetyan scored 34 with the five judges raw scores being 41,25,33,35,33 - meaning he actually scored more points than three of the judges awarded him! In the first round, he collected five points, despite not getting any more than four clicks from any single judge. Pretty amazing, speaking to the talent of the Russians to be efficient and clear with their punches.
Ayrepetyan scored 34 with the five judges raw scores being 41,25,33,35,33 - meaning he actually scored more points than three of the judges awarded him! In the first round, he collected five points, despite not getting any more than four clicks from any single judge. Pretty amazing, speaking to the talent of the Russians to be efficient and clear with their punches.
Emile, the computer program has a system whereby it figures out all the judge's percentages - unless I can see that, I can't intelligently (hah hah) discuss same. It gives "cautions" and "warnings" to judges who are in outer space, so to speak, i.e., not in line with their fellow officials. It's the way judges are evaluated.
Some of the U.S. boxers have fairly easy brackets up until the quarters; others will have to struggle from the git go.
This is the bane of all boxers; learning how to do this is paramount. It mostly equates to staying in the middle of the ring and moving so all the judges can see you. It's pure murder to stay on the ropes or in the corners.which could mean that he was less proficient at getting his punches where the judges could see, assuming that this lower percentage was across the board with all judges.
Now you're comparing raw scores with accepted. Can't do that.The decisive fourth round of that fight was interesting. Zimnoch won it 10-5, but only one judge had anything close to that type of margin for Zimnoch, the judge from Mauritius who had it 15-6.
Don't forget they are seeing the round scores up until Round 3, so they know when to make adjustments. I'm also sure Zimnoch has the experience factor over Wilder.Credit Zimnoch with adjusting in the last two rounds (whatever he did - land more decisively or create distance so the judges could see), while Wilder was unable to make the same adjustment.
My fingers are crossed.Great win for Warren.
Some of the U.S. boxers have fairly easy brackets up until the quarters; others will have to struggle from the git go.Ummmmm - and I'm asking this seriously, sort of - do you really feel that it's possible for a boxer to throw 70 legal effective punches to land in the scoring area with the white knuckle surface in 2 minutes? If you need a detailed definition of a legal effective punch, I'll be happy to provide it. :PThe New Zealand judge, who based on other results appears to have the quickest fingers in Chicago, gave 70 hits to Raynell and another judge had 55.
Frankly, I think that's not possible unless a judge is counting slaps, punches landing while a foul is being committed, or hitting the button before the punch lands.
Is that what the J and W mean on the sheets? I had been wondering about that. Are those made to the judge - are they told in the middle of a fight that they are off, or is it just something that they find out about afterwards?boxmel wrote:Emile, the computer program has a system whereby it figures out all the judge's percentages - unless I can see that, I can't intelligently (hah hah) discuss same. It gives "cautions" and "warnings" to judges who are in outer space, so to speak, i.e., not in line with their fellow officials. It's the way judges are evaluated.
Also, how do knockdowns and warnings work? Do they have any point influence? I see they are noted on the sheets as well.
No, the judges' evaluation sheet is determined after the bout is over and you won't ever see it published because it wouldn't make sense to anyone but the officials.Is that what the J and W mean on the sheets? I had been wondering about that.
See above. They find out afterwards.or is it just something that they find out about afterwards?
The legend on the "contest sheets" are:Also, how do knockdowns and warnings work? Do they have any point influence? I see they are noted on the sheets as well.
J - is when a judge gives a warning of his/her own. We can do that in scoring other than the computer, i.e., the "clickers." It's impossible for a judge to give a warning unless a majority of 3 judges do it within the 1-second scoring window. I have no idea why AIBA has that.
X - Same with the "X." This is only used when scores are translated to paper, i.e. with the clickers. If a referee gives a warning a computer judge disagrees with, he/she can just not push the warning button.
In AIBA language, a KD would amount to a RSC. A KD/H is the same as an RSCH (which comes with a restriction period). There is no point influence unless the RSC or RSCH comes as the result of a legal blow and then it is only one point for the boxer who threw the blow.
The "W" is when a referee gives a warning and the judges agree. At this time, the computer awards 2 points to the opponent.
