BoxRec

ValMar wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Ok

And you put the money on the all possible results. I will try to explain you on tennis (only two possible results).

Bookmakers in Spain : Đoković - Nadal -----1 = 2,10 2 = 1,70
Bookmakers in Serbia: 1 = 1,70 2 = 2,10

The odds are very different, beacause of "patriotic betting"... Of course, it is advantage for "the clever guys"...........

You bet on Đoković in Spain, and on Nadal in Serbia (by e-mail, of course). You will earn in the both cases. This is the simplest case of sure bet.

Still lol ?

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

ValMar wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Ok

And you put the money on the all possible results. I will try to explain you on tennis (only two possible results).

Bookmakers in Spain : Đoković - Nadal -----1 = 2,10 2 = 1,70
Bookmakers in Serbia: 1 = 1,70 2 = 2,10

The odds are very different, beacause of "patriotic betting"... Of course, it is advantage for "the clever guys"...........

You bet on Đoković in Spain, and on Nadal in Serbia (by e-mail, of course). You will earn in the both cases. This is the simplest case of sure bet.

Still lol ?

ValMar wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

ValMar wrote:
And you put the money on the all possible results. I will try to explain you on tennis (only two possible results).

Bookmakers in Spain : Đoković - Nadal -----1 = 2,10 2 = 1,70
Bookmakers in Serbia: 1 = 1,70 2 = 2,10

The odds are very different, beacause of "patriotic betting"... Of course, it is advantage for "the clever guys"...........

You bet on Đoković in Spain, and on Nadal in Serbia (by e-mail, of course). You will earn in the both cases. This is the simplest case of sure bet.

Still lol ?

The possibility for Mrs Byrd and her team : It is pretty simple, excluding win by decision for any figher, they might bet on KO/TKO win for any fighter and on draw (and DQ, but I suppose it is extremely high odd).....If you do not understand, it is your fault, not mine.
As I said, when I was younger, I "bet" on sure bet - football, first half-time. I had earned (for a year) perhaps 80 % of my recent year earnings, and I have a quite solid job in my country.
Lol

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

ValMar wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

The possibility for Mrs Byrd and her team : It is pretty simple, excluding win by decision for any figher, they might bet on KO/TKO win for any fighter and on draw (and DQ, but I suppose it is extremely high odd).....If you do not understand, it is your fault, not mine.
As I said, when I was younger, I "bet" on sure bet - football, first half-time. I had earned (for a year) perhaps 80 % of my recent year earnings, and I have a quite solid job in my country.
Lol

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Yes, you've wasted your time.

ValMar wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Yes, you've wasted your time.

Let it be the worst evil !

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

ValMar wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Yes, you've wasted your time.

Let it be the worst evil !

Yes, you should stop.

Tony1244 wrote:I will distance myself from my previous remarks.

Byrd may have been off but this was hardly a high crime. If 115-113 GGG is reasonable, 118-112 really isn't that far behind.

This reminds me of Leonard-Hagler where virtually every round was close and everyone had a really strong opinion. I think 1 judge in that fight also had it 118-112.

The judges and fans disagreed on many rounds. So no I don't think Byrd should be fired; the rounds were too close.

dagilechia wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:I will distance myself from my previous remarks.

Byrd may have been off but this was hardly a high crime. If 115-113 GGG is reasonable, 118-112 really isn't that far behind.

This reminds me of Leonard-Hagler where virtually every round was close and everyone had a really strong opinion. I think 1 judge in that fight also had it 118-112.

The judges and fans disagreed on many rounds. So no I don't think Byrd should be fired; the rounds were too close.

she had it 118-110 not 118-112. There is a big difference between 113-115 and 118-110 isn't it? it's almost half of fight (5 rounds) scored different

Judge Adalaide Byrd stood down from major fights after her scoring in GGG draw with Canelo sparks fury

The judge who sparked controversy with her scoring in Gennady Golovkin’s thrilling draw with Canelo Alvarez on Saturday night is being temporarily stood down from major fights.

Adalaide Byrd, who has developed a reputation for debatable scoring, had the Mexican winning 118-110, a score which perplexed most observers and put her at odds with her fellow judges.

Judge Dave Moretti scored the bout 115-113 in favour of the still unbeaten Golovkin, while Don Trella scored it 114-114 to create the split decision draw. Yet across the five rounds that Moretti and Trella scored for Golovkin, Byrd awarded each round to Alvarez.

There was also peculiar scoring from Trella in the seventh round, which was won decisively by Golovkin. His scoring of that round ultimately made the contest a draw overall, yet it was Byrd’s performance which attracted most criticism from within the fighting fraternity.

Golovkin, who retained his three middleweight belts, branded Byrd’s scorecard “terrible, unbelievable” after landing 218 punches to Canelo’s 169. “This is not good for the sport of boxing,” he added.

Bob Bennett, the executive director of the Nevada Athletic Commission, defended his officials after the bout but said that judge Byrd will be asked to take “a small break” from major fights.

“I’m not going to put her right back in,” Bennett said. “She’ll still be in the business, but she needs to catch her breath.”

Bennett said Byrd would be asked to explain her scoring at an inquiry and that NSAC would go through the rounds on replay with the judge and would be asked to explain her thinking. “Like in any profession, you have a bad night,” Bennett said. “Unfortunately, she didn’t do well. I can tell you she conducts training for us, takes judges under her wing, but her score was too wide.”

The skewed set of judges’ scores overshadowed the brilliance displayed by both men in boxing’s biggest showdown of the year, and cast a pall over the sport. The thrilling encounter - a brutal chess match involving heart, chins, stamina and desire - saw Golovkin and Alvarez deliver. Yet the judges clearly did not, and the announcement of their scores was greeted with howls of derision both inside the arena and on social media, with one Twitter user branding Byrd’s scorecard “a federal offence”.

Golovkin’s team were highly critical of the scoring, insisting that it had brought boxing into disrepute. “I think she (Adalaide Byrd) turned in her scorecard before the fight started,” said Abel Sanchez, Golovkin’s trainer. “I had suspicions when they gave us the list of judges. I think she needs to go back to school and learn how to judge a fight. But something has to be done about the judging.”

Tom Loeffler, Golovkin’s promoter, added: “Scoring it that way for Canelo takes away from the greatness of the performance in the ring. Frankly, it is not good for the sport of boxing. You can make an argument there were close rounds, but HBO had Gennady winning by four rounds.”

Even Oscar De La Hoya, Alvarez’s promoter, said: “What was that? People are scratching their heads. They’re confused. I’ve been a fighter and as a promoter you want the best for the sport. I’m shocked by that score. I can assure you there is no influence whatsoever (on which judges are selected).”

The last time a Nevada boxing judge returned to a major fight after producing a heavily critiqued scorecard, they were struck off.

In 2013, CJ Ross turned in a heavily-disputed card that allowed Timothy Bradley to defeat Manny Pacquiao, and the same year scored the Alvarez-Floyd Mayweather fight a draw. It was clearly won by Mayweather, and Ross’ career was over.

This contest itself, nonetheless, will go down as a classic. Golovkin stalked his prey, Alvarez moved brilliantly, and the exchanges and high-level boxing lived up to the billing. Significantly, the Mexican, eight years younger, took all that Golovkin could throw at him and was wary in the middle rounds before having a second wind, to finish the fight the stronger. We now know that he can weather the ‘GGG’ storm.

It was the Kazakh, eight years older, who was exhausted as the bout’s denouement unfolded.

Indeed, Canelo, asked why he had circled left for most of the contest, using the reaches of the ring, explained: “It was the plan in the fight: use the ring; fight in the centre; use the ropes. I had no doubt at the end that I won the fight. He has power, different to other fighters I have faced. But he is not the monster they have talked about. This is my era, the era of Canelo.”

When they meet again, almost certain to be May 5 next year, one of the traditionally big pay-per-view nights due to the Mexican holiday, Canelo will be wiser, and Golovkin, now 35, just older. It simply plays into the younger fighter’s hands.

RScarf1 wrote:I thought that Floyd and his fans wanted Canelo to win because they don't want GGG to be 50-0. Of course, he probably won't fight that long to reach that and it's a moot point because the draw is a blemish on his record. So Floyd did not want GGG to have a better performance than him against Canelo. I can understand why Floyd wanted Canelo to win, but now Floyd's fans are commenting that Canelo deserved to win. That is either stupidity or bias.

Blodhemn wrote:

RScarf1 wrote:I thought that Floyd and his fans wanted Canelo to win because they don't want GGG to be 50-0. Of course, he probably won't fight that long to reach that and it's a moot point because the draw is a blemish on his record. So Floyd did not want GGG to have a better performance than him against Canelo. I can understand why Floyd wanted Canelo to win, but now Floyd's fans are commenting that Canelo deserved to win. That is either stupidity or bias.

Floyd fans have been the biggest GGG haters from the start. They have a collective interest in degrading GGG to further clear out their shrine to Floyd. The opportunity of having a common opponent finally comes along, so you best bet they were hoping for a Canelo win.

RScarf1 wrote:

Blodhemn wrote:

RScarf1 wrote:I thought that Floyd and his fans wanted Canelo to win because they don't want GGG to be 50-0. Of course, he probably won't fight that long to reach that and it's a moot point because the draw is a blemish on his record. So Floyd did not want GGG to have a better performance than him against Canelo. I can understand why Floyd wanted Canelo to win, but now Floyd's fans are commenting that Canelo deserved to win. That is either stupidity or bias.

Floyd fans have been the biggest GGG haters from the start. They have a collective interest in degrading GGG to further clear out their shrine to Floyd. The opportunity of having a common opponent finally comes along, so you best bet they were hoping for a Canelo win.

Now I see why their biased. I didn't realize it before. Really, it is comparing apples and oranges. The Canelo that fought Floyd had less experience and was not in his prime. This is so petty. Both journalists for Fight Hype scored it a draw. I guess they couldn't score the fight as a win for Canelo because then their bias would be too obvious.

dagilechia wrote:If someone thinks that GGG drew or lost to Canelo, he must agree then that Floyd's record shouldn't be 50-0-0

Ricky_ wrote:

dagilechia wrote:If someone thinks that GGG drew or lost to Canelo, he must agree then that Floyd's record shouldn't be 50-0-0

The type of person that would score generously for Canelo running away from Golovkin, is the type of person who would score favourably for Floyd.

dagilechia wrote:

Ricky_ wrote:

dagilechia wrote:If someone thinks that GGG drew or lost to Canelo, he must agree then that Floyd's record shouldn't be 50-0-0

The type of person that would score generously for Canelo running away from Golovkin, is the type of person who would score favourably for Floyd.

This type of person must be a hypocrite then