BoxRec

boxing_rocks wrote:

NateJR wrote: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.

Freedom2013 wrote:Many people are saying Andre Ward is not enrolled in VADA testing for Ward-Kovalev II.

https://twitter.com/bappi_bear/status/8 ... 2788869120

https://twitter.com/pog_boom1993/status ... 8099339265

https://twitter.com/WesamAlmahdi1/statu ... 2900976640

man wrote:he wasn't robbed, a close match was
decided against him. most so called
"robberies" in recent years where just
narrow decisions that could go either
way and fans got over-excited.

lazboy wrote:

Freedom2013 wrote:Many people are saying Andre Ward is not enrolled in VADA testing for Ward-Kovalev II.

https://twitter.com/bappi_bear/status/8 ... 2788869120

https://twitter.com/pog_boom1993/status ... 8099339265

https://twitter.com/WesamAlmahdi1/statu ... 2900976640

If this is true its really not fair. We know everyone's juicing when they can, its boxing.

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:

Freedom2013 wrote:Many people are saying Andre Ward is not enrolled in VADA testing for Ward-Kovalev II.

https://twitter.com/bappi_bear/status/8 ... 2788869120

https://twitter.com/pog_boom1993/status ... 8099339265

https://twitter.com/WesamAlmahdi1/statu ... 2900976640

If this is true its really not fair. We know everyone's juicing when they can, its boxing.

Instead of taking the word of “many people”, whereby every single one of them are totally anonymous and merely casual fight fans, why don’t you all perform some fact-checking prior to casting aspersions?

It really annoys the eff out of me that I’m considered an “annoying troll” by lazy ársed fúckíng bástárds who persistently formulate their opinions on the basis of absolutely búgger all, whereas I studiously research situations prior to articulating my educated thoughts!

In regards to Andre Ward being tested for PED’s, here’s what the official VADA website has to say on the matter:

"Andre Ward re-entered our program in March 2017 as he prepares to face Sergey Kovalev June 17th in Las Vegas."

Also, here’s an extract of an article about Andre Ward’s actual situation with VADA, which was only published two days ago:

The first question posed to Andre was about “some different views and uncertainty about where things stand with you and VADA.” Ward was quick to respond, “I don’t know what you’re talking about. I just saw VADA yesterday. I’ve been enrolled. It was actually my idea to get enrolled and get both of the fighters enrolled. I think I’ve been tested maybe 5 times in this camp.”

Click on the blue hyperlink text for both quotes to see the proof for yourselves!

I’m not being funny, but it would have been far quicker for you guys to check the VADA website to ascertain the truth in comparison to submitting a post on this forum quoting the thoughts of “many people”.

If you choose to dislike Andre Ward, then that's fine by me, as it's your prerogative to feel that way, but to behave like lazy cûnts, whilst expressing all sorts of derogatory claims that are based on nothing but pure unadulterated bûllshît, well that's just totally unacceptable!

lazboy wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

lazboy wrote:
If this is true its really not fair. We know everyone's juicing when they can, its boxing.

Instead of taking the word of “many people”, whereby every single one of them are totally anonymous and merely casual fight fans, why don’t you all perform some fact-checking prior to casting aspersions?

It really annoys the eff out of me that I’m considered an “annoying troll” by lazy ársed fúckíng bástárds who persistently formulate their opinions on the basis of absolutely búgger all, whereas I studiously research situations prior to articulating my educated thoughts!

In regards to Andre Ward being tested for PED’s, here’s what the official VADA website has to say on the matter:

"Andre Ward re-entered our program in March 2017 as he prepares to face Sergey Kovalev June 17th in Las Vegas."

Also, here’s an extract of an article about Andre Ward’s actual situation with VADA, which was only published two days ago:

The first question posed to Andre was about “some different views and uncertainty about where things stand with you and VADA.” Ward was quick to respond, “I don’t know what you’re talking about. I just saw VADA yesterday. I’ve been enrolled. It was actually my idea to get enrolled and get both of the fighters enrolled. I think I’ve been tested maybe 5 times in this camp.”

Click on the blue hyperlink text for both quotes to see the proof for yourselves!

I’m not being funny, but it would have been far quicker for you guys to check the VADA website to ascertain the truth in comparison to submitting a post on this forum quoting the thoughts of “many people”.

If you choose to dislike Andre Ward, then that's fine by me, as it's your prerogative to feel that way, but to behave like lazy cûnts, whilst expressing all sorts of derogatory claims that are based on nothing but pure unadulterated bûllshît, well that's just totally unacceptable!

Why thank you for clearing that up. I'm glad he's being vada tested but most of all I'm glad I'm not you, I would prefer to be all the things you most eloquently mentioned then a drivelling troll creature with bat like wings and claws for hands such as you are. Inhuman vile fiend

greg wrote:..it was close..however, every time the organisers appoint local judges to officiate, especially in a high profile fight for an INTERNATIONAL crown, they set the time bomb encouraging a lot of boxing fans outside of the host country to question the integrity of the whole event...so, I wouldn't blame "over-excited" fans but rather the organisers for all these negative responces they're getting...

Kalan wrote:

Evander wrote:

Kalan wrote:
Their main beef is the judging -- which was a flat out robbery.. But also of concern was Robert Byrd.. He allowed Ward to foul away like crazy.

It wasn't that bad.
If it was blatant I'd have been all over it.

Then you're blind... Pushing and shoving with head, shoulders, gloves, or forearms are fouls.

Blodhemn wrote:Ward didn't fight dirty in this fight, but that's because he simply wasn't able to.

man wrote:

greg wrote:..it was close..however, every time the organisers appoint local judges to officiate, especially in a high profile fight for an INTERNATIONAL crown, they set the time bomb encouraging a lot of boxing fans outside of the host country to question the integrity of the whole event...so, I wouldn't blame "over-excited" fans but rather the organisers for all these negative responces they're getting...

to me you can't get "robbed" in
a close fight. theoretically you
can, it can be close, yet crystal
clear, but that rarely happens
and it didn't happen here.

Kalan wrote:

jezzamundo wrote:

Kalan wrote:
That was clearly not the case... There wasn't a lot of swing rounds... They needed to take the 10th -- a round Kovalev clearly won -- and give it to Ward.

I know you don't think that was the case, but I disagree there's anything clear about it. After the first two rounds I thought rounds 3-6 all could have gone either way, though I gave Ward the 3rd and 5th and Kovalev the 4th and 6th. Ward clearly won round 7, the 8th and 9th were both close but clear to Ward, Kovalev clearly won the 10th, Ward won a close 11th round and the 12th was another swing round - I gave it to Ward on first viewing, but on second viewing scored it even.

The first round Ward won, in my opinion, was the 7th, but forget all those rounds you claim are "close" rounds... You admit Kovalev clearly won the 10th... All 3 judges gave Ward the 10th round and it was a desperate situation for Ward at that point.. Ward absolutely needed the 10th round to win... The judges clearly coordinated their scores to make the judging look less suspicious and not all over the map on their scorecards. The crooks discovered the media loves to talk about divergent scorecards from judges watching different fights -- but coming up with the same winner.

Like Jerry Roth scoring the 12th round of Trinidad-De La Hoya for Oscar to make his card look more reasonably close as the fight was.. Oscar clearly gave that round away. He was running full tilt as Trinidad chased him around the ring landing big shots on Oscar's chin. Everyone in the media caught that ridiculous 12th round score by Roth. It looked like Roth was playing back-n-fill to try to make his card look more reasonably close.. Roth made the same excuse Ford did when called before the commission---as though they were going to do anything to him or change the score. "I scored that round wrong. I'm human. I make mistakes." Yeah right.. so contrite.. but still get appointed to every big fight.

The media openly questioned the appointment of CJ Ross for the Mayweather-Alvarez Fight. "She messed up so many times" -- and here she was judging the biggest PPV in fistic history up to that point. Why use her??? Luckily her scorecard didn't effect the outcome---but in that same fight, Dave Moretti also seemed to be giving every possible close round to Alvarez.. If that fight were close Canelo would have won it -- no question.

Remember the 1st Hopkins-Taylor Fight??? That result was fixed... The tell wasn't the scores, but the scorecard of Duane Ford, who also was a judge who voted for Bradley over Pacquiao along with CJ Ross... To secure the fight for Taylor, Ford had to give him the 12th round -- even though Taylor was out-punched 2-1 in that round and hurt... It was something the media caught on to right away---like the horrible scores of Lara-Williams from all 3 judges that the media pounced on.. The commissioners who appointed Ford quieted down the complaints by publicly calling Ford on the carpet -- even though they were a party to the fix.. Ford said, "I blew it.. I just voted for the wrong guy in that round" which was critical in throwing the fight to Taylor. Calling Ford on the carpet was a dog and pony show. The commission wasn't going to change the result.. or fire Ford.. or even suspend him. If they were party to the fix why would they?

man wrote:he wasn't robbed, a close match was
decided against him. most so called
"robberies" in recent years where just
narrow decisions that could go either
way and fans got over-excited.

Thomastearns wrote:Boxing appears to be the most corrupt sport as far as judging goes. The list of dodgy decisions is endless disappearing down the decades.

man wrote:

Thomastearns wrote:Boxing appears to be the most corrupt sport as far as judging goes. The list of dodgy decisions is endless disappearing down the decades.

i rewatched two of the most discussed
"robberies" of recent years. pac-bradley1
and DLH-trinidad. i agree with the critics
that both decisions were wrong, but i
vehemently disagree that they were
robberies. both were tight fights and if
you watch closely you can see how a judge
could end up with the from my perspective
wrong decision. which means there was no
robbery, because that would imply a judge
seeing it one way, but deciding to nevertheless
score in the other.

there are sneaky things happening in boxing,
no doubt about it, but they don't happen in
plain sight with cameras running. these days
the corruption takes place with rankings, drugs
and promotion.

Thomastearns wrote:Boxing appears to be the most corrupt sport as far as judging goes. The list of dodgy decisions is endless disappearing down the decades.

However, we must remember that the judges are human. They are prone to countless biases which cloud the decision making process. Sometimes the effect of all these biases working together leads to such gross distortions in their judging of a fight that a casual observer has no choice but to call 'foul'. Of course, we could avoid all this by hiring the very best judges we can. But in the real world...

Sometimes though, they are not merely biased, they are just corrupt.

We should also remember that there have been many good decisions too. After what Fury said about fighting Klitschko in his back yard he should have been more than surprised to get the decision in a fight nobody deserved to win.

With large amounts of money at stake plus the sum effort of years of toil and hard work, the fighters deserve something better. Their health and careers are at stake.
If computers can fly planes, win chess matches etc they can judge boxing matches too. I know which I would trust.

boxing_rocks wrote:

man wrote:

Thomastearns wrote:Boxing appears to be the most corrupt sport as far as judging goes. The list of dodgy decisions is endless disappearing down the decades.

i rewatched two of the most discussed
"robberies" of recent years. pac-bradley1
and DLH-trinidad. i agree with the critics
that both decisions were wrong, but i
vehemently disagree that they were
robberies. both were tight fights and if
you watch closely you can see how a judge
could end up with the from my perspective
wrong decision. which means there was no
robbery, because that would imply a judge
seeing it one way, but deciding to nevertheless
score in the other.

there are sneaky things happening in boxing,
no doubt about it, but they don't happen in
plain sight with cameras running. these days
the corruption takes place with rankings, drugs
and promotion.

You can disagree, but can you use lines of normal length and capitalization?