If Kovalev gets robbed again, I won't follow boxing anymore

[SaadOffTheDeck]

You were right not too, fakest image ever.

[jockpunk]

True. I was just reading his 11 and typed it in. My bad. Yes to the point, it was a very close fight. I had it 114-113 Ward one time and 114-114 another time. But the OP has it a robbery! That's biased malarky. Thats the point. Not how much older I am than Saad. Not my careless moronic math.

I was rooting for Kovalev and had it 114-113 Ward. I can see if somebody thought Kovalev took it by 1 to 3 points and thought the decision to be bad. However, I can't see anybody calling it a robbery. Like Saad...stated, the Ward fight wasn't even the worst decision on the card. The Hooker/Perez fight being a draw, now THAT was a robbery. I think I had Perez winning 98-92.

You didn't fully understand what Saad said. One had to have give Ward ALL remotely close rounds to have him win. That is a definition of a bias and thus robbery. A close fight can still be a robbery. And it was in fact the worst robbery on the card if you take a profile of this fight in consideration and that it was a holder of 3 titles who was robbed.

That is actually not the definition of bias.

The Cavs could lose game three by a point and while it would have been a close game, they still would have deservingly lost. Same thing with a prize fight. The rounds could be close, but a judge is under no obligation to give one guy a close round because he gave the other guy the last close round. A fighter could barely win every round and still win a 120-108 decision.

[boxing_rocks]

I was rooting for Kovalev and had it 114-113 Ward. I can see if somebody thought Kovalev took it by 1 to 3 points and thought the decision to be bad. However, I can't see anybody calling it a robbery. Like Saad...stated, the Ward fight wasn't even the worst decision on the card. The Hooker/Perez fight being a draw, now THAT was a robbery. I think I had Perez winning 98-92.

You didn't fully understand what Saad said. One had to have give Ward ALL remotely close rounds to have him win. That is a definition of a bias and thus robbery. A close fight can still be a robbery. And it was in fact the worst robbery on the card if you take a profile of this fight in consideration and that it was a holder of 3 titles who was robbed.

That is actually not the definition of bias.

The Cavs could lose game three by a point and while it would have been a close game, they still would have deservingly lost. Same thing with a prize fight. The rounds could be close, but a judge is under no obligation to give one guy a close round because he gave the other guy the last close round. A fighter could barely win every round and still win a 120-108 decision.

So, what would be a reason for a judge to give ALL close and not so close rounds to one of the boxers?

[Tony1244]

I was rooting for Kovalev and had it 114-113 Ward. I can see if somebody thought Kovalev took it by 1 to 3 points and thought the decision to be bad. However, I can't see anybody calling it a robbery. Like Saad...stated, the Ward fight wasn't even the worst decision on the card. The Hooker/Perez fight being a draw, now THAT was a robbery. I think I had Perez winning 98-92.

You didn't fully understand what Saad said. One had to have give Ward ALL remotely close rounds to have him win. That is a definition of a bias and thus robbery. A close fight can still be a robbery. And it was in fact the worst robbery on the card if you take a profile of this fight in consideration and that it was a holder of 3 titles who was robbed.

That is actually not the definition of bias.

The Cavs could lose game three by a point and while it would have been a close game, they still would have deservingly lost. Same thing with a prize fight. The rounds could be close, but a judge is under no obligation to give one guy a close round because he gave the other guy the last close round. A fighter could barely win every round and still win a 120-108 decision.

Makes me think of Leonard-Hagler. Very close fight and I believe almost every round was close. One judge had Leonard winning something like 118-110 and he caught a lot of flak for his card. But rounds were close so if you liked the style, it's understandable. I hardly think it was an outrageous card.

[crow]

So, Bernstein says it was a bad decision.

But on the other hand, the internet wise guys here know better and call it a close fight.

Naturally, the internet residents must know better, isn't it ?

[jockpunk]

You didn't fully understand what Saad said. One had to have give Ward ALL remotely close rounds to have him win. That is a definition of a bias and thus robbery. A close fight can still be a robbery. And it was in fact the worst robbery on the card if you take a profile of this fight in consideration and that it was a holder of 3 titles who was robbed.

That is actually not the definition of bias.

The Cavs could lose game three by a point and while it would have been a close game, they still would have deservingly lost. Same thing with a prize fight. The rounds could be close, but a judge is under no obligation to give one guy a close round because he gave the other guy the last close round. A fighter could barely win every round and still win a 120-108 decision.

So, what would be a reason for a judge to give ALL close and not so close rounds to one of the boxers?

He thought that although the round was close, one fighter did a hair more. Like I said in another post, I had kovalev winning and I personally could not have found a 7th round to give to ward, but just because a judge did isn't some travesty.

[crow]

Keep trying to convince yourself of that, box of rocks. You are far too emotionally invested in this fight. Chanting the same tired sh!t over and over again is not going to affect the outcome of the fight.

Tanzidiot-my opinion is golden- Bradley beat Pac- and Ward beat Kovalev- because the judges said so- and their opinion is golden like mine.

We get it, weirdo.

[armageto]

I'm not an American.

And even if I were American, I would not be overly nationalistic and be objective enough to score a fight fairly.
I was rooting for Duran against Leonard when I was 25. Guess that makes me 5 years older. The fight happened here in Canada: "the Brawl in Montreal".

Well, being that old, you won't miss a lot of boxing if Kovalev is "robbed" again and you stop watching. Bright side to everything if you look hard enough...

Ha! I'm just saying in the case of Freedom if he was to stop watching, he's not missing a ton of years. Not like the guy is going to stop at 22 and miss a lifetime of boxing.


Hey! I have to defend Freedom here being I'm only about 5 years younger.

[Taansend]

A sport needs honest officiating to be legitimate.

If Kovalev loses fairly, I'll still follow the sport.

But if he loses because the ref permits Ward to use illegal tactics like deliberate head butts, or because the judges are corrupt, then I'm no longer going to follow the sport of boxing.

I hope he does get robbed so we don't have to read this hysterical nonsense anymore

[Tanzio]

Keep trying to convince yourself of that, box of rocks. You are far too emotionally invested in this fight. Chanting the same tired sh!t over and over again is not going to affect the outcome of the fight.

Tanzidiot-my opinion is golden- Bradley beat Pac- and Ward beat Kovalev- because the judges said so- and their opinion is golden like mine.

We get it, weirdo.

You actually do have a crowbar lodged in your brain, don't you blackturd?

[jezzamundo]

A sport needs honest officiating to be legitimate.

If Kovalev loses fairly, I'll still follow the sport.

But if he loses because the ref permits Ward to use illegal tactics like deliberate head butts, or because the judges are corrupt, then I'm no longer going to follow the sport of boxing.

The first fight wasn't a robbery - it was a very close fight where Ward was lucky to get the nod. I watched it live at home, all the time hoping that Kovalev would knock Ward out, but I had Ward winning 114-113, the same as all three judges. I was surprised that so many were calling it a robbery, so I rewatched it and had Kovalev winning by a point. For me the real injustice was the scoring of the 10th round, which Kovalev clearly won, so to me 114-113 Kovalev is the best way to score the fight and I can't call a fight that close a robbery. Lewis-Holyfield 1 and Whitaker-Chavez were robberies, Ward-Kovalev just isn't in that category.

Do you remember what rounds of the first 6 that you gave to Ward?

Yes, the 3rd and the 5th - though I scored one of those even upon second viewing.

[jezzamundo]

A sport needs honest officiating to be legitimate.

If Kovalev loses fairly, I'll still follow the sport.

But if he loses because the ref permits Ward to use illegal tactics like deliberate head butts, or because the judges are corrupt, then I'm no longer going to follow the sport of boxing.

The first fight wasn't a robbery - it was a very close fight where Ward was lucky to get the nod. I watched it live at home, all the time hoping that Kovalev would knock Ward out, but I had Ward winning 114-113, the same as all three judges. I was surprised that so many were calling it a robbery, so I rewatched it and had Kovalev winning by a point. For me the real injustice was the scoring of the 10th round, which Kovalev clearly won, so to me 114-113 Kovalev is the best way to score the fight and I can't call a fight that close a robbery. Lewis-Holyfield 1 and Whitaker-Chavez were robberies, Ward-Kovalev just isn't in that category.

So, a champion drops a challenger and wins at least 6 rounds (some say 8-9), but he is not getting a nod, and that is not a robbery?

Both times watching the fight I thought Kovalev won 5 rounds (I scored a couple of even rounds the second time) though I can see an argument for more, there were so many close rounds. Definitely a controversial decision, but not a robbery IMO.

[jezzamundo]

The first fight wasn't a robbery - it was a very close fight where Ward was lucky to get the nod. I watched it live at home, all the time hoping that Kovalev would knock Ward out, but I had Ward winning 114-113

Well, for every person like you giving Ward the nod, there's 3 other ones giving the victory to Kovalev.

3 to 1.

Who's more likely to be wrong?

It's possible that neither is wrong. Upon re-watching the fight and giving it to Kovalev by a point and considering he poor judging of the 10th round, I now view Kovalev as the more deserving winner, but I've got no problem with anyone scoring it close for Ward.

[Badhusker]

The first fight wasn't a robbery - it was a very close fight where Ward was lucky to get the nod. I watched it live at home, all the time hoping that Kovalev would knock Ward out, but I had Ward winning 114-113, the same as all three judges. I was surprised that so many were calling it a robbery, so I rewatched it and had Kovalev winning by a point. For me the real injustice was the scoring of the 10th round, which Kovalev clearly won, so to me 114-113 Kovalev is the best way to score the fight and I can't call a fight that close a robbery. Lewis-Holyfield 1 and Whitaker-Chavez were robberies, Ward-Kovalev just isn't in that category.

So, a champion drops a challenger and wins at least 6 rounds (some say 8-9), but he is not getting a nod, and that is not a robbery?

Both times watching the fight I thought Kovalev won 5 rounds (I scored a couple of even rounds the second time) though I can see an argument for more, there were so many close rounds. Definitely a controversial decision, but not a robbery IMO.

Not sure if it has been pointed out yet, but Kovalev said in an interview that he thought he won the early rounds. He ALSO pointed out that he gassed the second half of the fight due to over-training. He is admitting that he was not winning the second half of the fight at least, so please simmer the bitching about a robbery. Everyone that was pro Kovalev was so sure he would KO Ward.

Maybe folks should just admit Kovalev lost a close fight and quit bitching, crying, moaning, etc.? Personally I think it will be an even wider win by Ward in the rematch.

[lazboy]

So, a champion drops a challenger and wins at least 6 rounds (some say 8-9), but he is not getting a nod, and that is not a robbery?

Both times watching the fight I thought Kovalev won 5 rounds (I scored a couple of even rounds the second time) though I can see an argument for more, there were so many close rounds. Definitely a controversial decision, but not a robbery IMO.

Not sure if it has been pointed out yet, but Kovalev said in an interview that he thought he won the early rounds. He ALSO pointed out that he gassed the second half of the fight due to over-training. He is admitting that he was not winning the second half of the fight at least, so please simmer the bitching about a robbery. Everyone that was pro Kovalev was so sure he would KO Ward.

Maybe folks should just admit Kovalev lost a close fight and quit bitching, crying, moaning, etc.? Personally I think it will be an even wider win by Ward in the rematch.

No he's not admitting that he lost the last half, he's admitting that he gassed out after the 5th. He still thinks he won rounds, running on empty so do I. Maybe we should all just admit that ward lost rounds to a gassed out kovalev.

[Tanzio]

If Krusher loses again his fans should all immediately play dead in their living rooms for two weeks in protest.

[crow]

Maybe folks should just admit Kovalev lost a close fight and quit bitching, crying, moaning, etc.? Personally I think it will be an even wider win by Ward in the rematch.

Or maybe Ward (and the ref, for that matter) should be made to explain himself on why the double leg take down attempt took place?

Hypocrite Ward still roaming the streets and the airwaves claiming he's not a dirty fighter and how he's god's christian son.

[NateJR]

First off the fight wasn't a robbery. If you cant distinguish the difference between a robbery and a close fight maybe you shouldn't watch boxing to begin with. I watched the fight once and I thought it was a razor close fight, the first few rounds were close, Kovalev got the KD and it seemed Ward took control later in the fight with a few swing rounds. There were alot of close rounds from beginning to end with very few rounds in which there was a clear winner. Honestly a draw could have very well been warranted, it's just hilarious people have gotten so emotionally upset over the decision because their guy simply didn't win. Grow the hell up.. If Kovalev is such the superior boxer he will win the next fight and there won't be so many close rounds. But the truth is, they are both great fighters that compete at a high level and it will more than likely be damn near the same fight, without a knock down and Ward will win another close decision you can cry about.

[caldo2025]

A sport needs honest officiating to be legitimate.

If Kovalev loses fairly, I'll still follow the sport.

But if he loses because the ref permits Ward to use illegal tactics like deliberate head butts, or because the judges are corrupt, then I'm no longer going to follow the sport of boxing.

I'll admit that I felt the same way when they read off the scores at the end of the Kov/Ward 1. I was livid and just pissed off at the sport and wondered why i put so much into it if they can just hand a victory to someone that did nothing to deserve it. Then I looked at the facts...the venue, the judges, the ref....everything is going against Kovalev. Why should I have been surprised.

Then i thought, does this have anything to do with Kovalev's promoter Kathy Duva? Boxing is years and years behind society in terms of equal rights. My feeling is that Boxing is not prepared to have it's #1 P4P star, which Kovalev would have been had he won that fight, be managed by a woman.

This time, i'm going in with the right mindset. Kovalev needs either a knockout or multiple knockdowns in this one to win. He's not winning a decision. I might not even listen to the decision if it goes the distance.

[boxing_rocks]

A sport needs honest officiating to be legitimate.

If Kovalev loses fairly, I'll still follow the sport.

But if he loses because the ref permits Ward to use illegal tactics like deliberate head butts, or because the judges are corrupt, then I'm no longer going to follow the sport of boxing.

I'll admit that I felt the same way when they read off the scores at the end of the Kov/Ward 1. I was livid and just pissed off at the sport and wondered why i put so much into it if they can just hand a victory to someone that did nothing to deserve it. Then I looked at the facts...the venue, the judges, the ref....everything is going against Kovalev. Why should I have been surprised.

Then i thought, does this have anything to do with Kovalev's promoter Kathy Duva? Boxing is years and years behind society in terms of equal rights. My feeling is that Boxing is not prepared to have it's #1 P4P star, which Kovalev would have been had he won that fight, be managed by a woman.

This time, i'm going in with the right mindset. Kovalev needs either a knockout or multiple knockdowns in this one to win. He's not winning a decision. I might not even listen to the decision if it goes the distance.

The only way the robbery is related to Duva is that she didn't "work with judges" like a main promoter usually does.

[boxing_rocks]

First off the fight wasn't a robbery. If you cant distinguish the difference between a robbery and a close fight maybe you shouldn't watch boxing to begin with. I watched the fight once and I thought it was a razor close fight, the first few rounds were close, Kovalev got the KD and it seemed Ward took control later in the fight with a few swing rounds. There were alot of close rounds from beginning to end with very few rounds in which there was a clear winner. Honestly a draw could have very well been warranted, it's just hilarious people have gotten so emotionally upset over the decision because their guy simply didn't win. Grow the hell up.. If Kovalev is such the superior boxer he will win the next fight and there won't be so many close rounds. But the truth is, they are both great fighters that compete at a high level and it will more than likely be damn near the same fight, without a knock down and Ward will win another close decision you can cry about.

If a champion who won 6-9 rounds and knocked a challenger down loses his titles, it is a robbery even if a fight was close.

[Tony1244]

First off the fight wasn't a robbery. If you cant distinguish the difference between a robbery and a close fight maybe you shouldn't watch boxing to begin with. I watched the fight once and I thought it was a razor close fight, the first few rounds were close, Kovalev got the KD and it seemed Ward took control later in the fight with a few swing rounds. There were alot of close rounds from beginning to end with very few rounds in which there was a clear winner. Honestly a draw could have very well been warranted, it's just hilarious people have gotten so emotionally upset over the decision because their guy simply didn't win. Grow the hell up.. If Kovalev is such the superior boxer he will win the next fight and there won't be so many close rounds. But the truth is, they are both great fighters that compete at a high level and it will more than likely be damn near the same fight, without a knock down and Ward will win another close decision you can cry about.

I think you summed it up better than anyone.

[Tony1244]

If Krusher loses again his fans should all immediately play dead in their living rooms for two weeks in protest.

They should all go on hunger strikes.

[Kalan]

Americans always cheat and will always cheat lol, why do you think Wilder doesn't fight Povetkin?

That's funny coming from a fan of Russian fighters.

You don't need to be a fan of Russian boxing to despise Victor Conte, VADA, the NSAC, and the WBC. Or to appreciate the quality of the top Eastern European boxers out there today who are denied top fights, and then robbed if they get them because of public pressure. The wolves have taken over the hen house.

[Evander]

Come on Freedom you have been a boxing fan a long time, certainly longer than most and have seen these types of things happen much like I have over and over again.
Like you I thought Kovalev won the fight and at this point unless something out of the ordinary happens I think he'll beat Andre Ward again.
I was catching up with the social media aspect of the bout just yesterday and the first thing that struck me was how they are trying to wind Kovalev up, hopefully Segey keeps his cool laughs it off answers the questions and goes on his way and executes in the fight.
For me the power difference between the two boxers is clearly in favor of Kovalev, I noticed it at the T Mobile live and I saw it just as clear on the tv replays at home.
That said I'm not going to underestimate Ward he's a very good boxer and showed a lot of heart during the first encounter, but there's a side of me that thinks Andre knows exactly how hard Kovalev hits and may opt for a safety first approach this time around.
Perhaps I'm going out there a bit on this one but if Ward did decide to come and fight there a good chance Sergey Kovalev could stop him inside the distance it would'nt surprise me.