how did you score haye vs valuev????

[chesh]

115-113 for Haye.

[dbflex]

115-113 for Haye.

X2, or 7-5 in rounds.

[Carbo]

Well Kevin Mitchell scored the fight 11-1 to Haye.

Showing off his boxing acumen, there, Kevin is.

I didn't score the fight, personally, but there were a great many rounds that were close and could have been scored either way -- probably either way by fairly wide margins. Valuev missed so, so many of his punches. It wouldn't surprise me if he landed with fewer than 80 shots the whole fight.

Which meant that Haye could steal rounds by landing a few clean, flashy power shots and a few jabs.

It was a carbon copy of the Holyfield fight.

For the close rounds, I would often think "there was no clear winner, but who would I rather be at the end of that? Whose plan do I think went right the most", and I have to say that the answer was Haye. He was executing his plan -- which, if his hand was broken, probably became even more cautious -- to perfection, really.

Of course it meant he lost some rounds.

It took a great deal of concentration, and focus, and he didn't miss a beat. On that ring generalmanship tie breaker, it was ultimately Haye making Valuev miss, Haye forcing Valuev to chase him around the ring, and Valuev fighting Haye's fight, missing lots and walking onto the occasional hook.

So I would give it to Haye and say he deserved it, but based on that, and the fact it was one of those fights that wasn't just close, but where just about every minute was close, and where it is hard to score because of the evenness of both mens' activity, I would say that I wouldn't complain with anything from 8-4 Haye, to 7-5 Valuev.

[Datsue]

I saw it the same way I saw the Holyfield fight, 8-4 against the big dude.

Those who are saying Oldyfield was more impressive need their fecking head's checking. He did not "have a go" either. They obviously did not watch that fight, Evander never ever slowed down from his bouncing circuit of the ring.

For the record, the last bloke to "have a go" versus Valuev was Monte Barrett. That got ugly.

[Carbo]

I saw it the same way I saw the Holyfield fight, 8-4 against the big dude.

Those who are saying Oldyfield was more impressive need their fecking head's checking. He did not "have a go" either. They obviously did not watch that fight, Evander never ever slowed down from his bouncing circuit of the ring.

For the record, the last bloke to "have a go" versus Valuev was Monte Barrett. That got ugly.

I think that Haye also landed clearly harder shots to Valuev's head.

[DG.]

120-108 Haye

[Datsue]

I saw it the same way I saw the Holyfield fight, 8-4 against the big dude.

Those who are saying Oldyfield was more impressive need their fecking head's checking. He did not "have a go" either. They obviously did not watch that fight, Evander never ever slowed down from his bouncing circuit of the ring.

For the record, the last bloke to "have a go" versus Valuev was Monte Barrett. That got ugly.

I think that Haye also landed clearly harder shots to Valuev's head.

Quite so, Carbo.

I didn't realise there were that many berks who had it in for David in quite such a fashion, nor how pissed off they'd be that he has proved them wrong again.

I think I'll be off now, because I can see the pattern repeating itself as for every other successful British boxer that's worth a tinker's toss, & I don't want my blood pressure to go up.

[Carbo]

120-108 Haye

You laugh, but that's actually just about how Kevin Mitchell scored it.

[hitman_hatton1]

7-4-1 even or 116-113 for haye.

[Carbo]

Why do so many people score even rounds when they are pretty much forbidden in real scoring?

Force yourselves to choose a winner like the judges must and you'll get a more realistic scenario.

[hitman_hatton1]

Why do so many people score even rounds when they are pretty much forbidden in real scoring?

Force yourselves to choose a winner like the judges must and you'll get a more realistic scenario.

absolutely nothing wrong with even rds.

sometimes a rd is so close and cagey u can't split it.

although i disagree with the judge who scored 10 even rds for leonard-duran 1.

[winkveron]

I had it 115-113 Haye. I gave Haye the opening 3, Valuev 4-6 then I think Haye won the last few. You could even argue the 12th was close to a 10-8 because Haye chased him round the ring and wobbled him. If he had gone in for the kill after Valuev had done the chicken dance he could've closed the show.

[Carbo]

Why do so many people score even rounds when they are pretty much forbidden in real scoring?

Force yourselves to choose a winner like the judges must and you'll get a more realistic scenario.

absolutely nothing wrong with even rds.

sometimes a rd is so close and cagey u can't split it.

although i disagree with the judge who scored 10 even rds for leonard-duran 1.

Yes, but judges are encouraged to do so every time. And you should try, too.

[Adamj1987]

3 rounds to haye. i didnt think he would get the nod in germany though

[stujones]

6-5-1 Valuev.

Never thought Haye would get the decision fighting that way. Haye showed fantastic discipline and if the hand injury is geniune, which I believe it is, then it was a fantastic effort. Holyfield did do a better job though and was alot less negative.

Amazing to think that people are applauding this disciplined performance (which is does deserve to be) but then 3 weeks ago lots (somehow, I'm still stunned) thought Froch deserved the decision against the "runner" Dirrell. Dirrell's negativity was so much less than Haye's. There's effective agression (which neither Valuev and Froch did) and effective counter punching (which Dirrell was on a different level to Haye).

We've certainly had the rub of the green with out star fighters in close fights since the first Lewis vs Holyfield fight. Lewis, Hatton, Calzaghe, Froch and Haye all won fights a fair few thought lost (and four of those away from home).

[Autobarn]

Shut my mouth. All right lets hope he's shown a modicum of business sense then.

Regarding the Klitchkos - if he'd beaten one, then the brother would be the logical next fight...and should he beat the two then who's left but to fight the other again, or a rematch. I'd imagine Haye's a wealthy man, one so ambitious that he's need to earn money and have power pales into insignificance next to his desire to beat the best in the world. Obviously if he had fought and beaten Wlad then by rights he should come to the table with fair amount of clout when negotiating terms for the Vitali fight. But as fans of boxing, from our perspective, it would have been great, we'd have seen the fights we want to see.

Haye only earned proper money for the Enzo Macc fight(1 million purse), he went into Mormacks back yard for about 50k and that is as much as he earned before. He certainly has not earned retirement money.
He is a complete breath of fresh air in terms of chasing the big fights and not caring about the money. Obviously the money will be there if he keeps winning, maybe it's just a sign of his confidence.
The Klits are the obvious fights now, and i'll bet those are the fights he will be pushing for instead of Ruiz if King has his way.

haye is probably the only british fighter at world level, along with froch, who refuses to get stuck, to get stale, at a certain level. obviously haye is the more successful at the moment of the two. these guys challenge themselves. when you look at the FW fighters wallow in the mud of WBO/WBU level it is quite disgusting really, to see ppl sell themselves and their fans so short.

[stujones]

Hatton isn't retired just yet, Autobarn (can't say he kept himself stale after Tszyu -before, yes) and lets give Khan a chance.

If Haye is going to retired at 31 as he once said, I'd like to see him busy.

The world is his oyster... actually that performance (a disciplined but negative display not showcasing his strength) could possibly give even bigger money fights for Haye than the Klitchsko's.

I'd think Hopkins might fancy it. I have the feeling Adamek might stick at Heavyweight also.

[Autobarn]

6-5-1 Valuev.

Never thought Haye would get the decision fighting that way. Haye showed fantastic discipline and if the hand injury is geniune, which I believe it is, then it was a fantastic effort. Holyfield did do a better job though and was alot less negative.

Amazing to think that people are applauding this disciplined performance (which is does deserve to be) but then 3 weeks ago lots (somehow, I'm still stunned) thought Froch deserved the decision against the "runner" Dirrell. Dirrell's negativity was so much less than Haye's. There's effective agression (which neither Valuev and Froch did) and effective counter punching (which Dirrell was on a different level to Haye).

We've certainly had the rub of the green with out star fighters in close fights since the first Lewis vs Holyfield fight. Lewis, Hatton, Calzaghe, Froch and Haye all won fights a fair few thought lost (and four of those away from home).

holyfield did not do better. haye had the reflexes to throw in the odd scoring shot here and there. evander just didn't.

anyway, back to the "haye/dirrell HYPOCRISY"...back in the real world, haye is a heavyweight champ, who seemed to know what he was doing, beating a giant with one hand and winning comfortable on 2 cards...whereas dirrell - for the 2nd time in his career - threw away a big showcase, and this time robbed himself of victory, getting penalised by ref for negative tactics. haye was disciplined and dirrell was hyperventilating. just because 2 performances are negative, doesn't mean they are that similar.

crtics are overlooking that haye v valuev was a mismatch in physical terms, so haye's movement and lack of workrate are understandable. haye and booth - in the corner - were self assured, and knew what they were doing all the way through. some found their tactics unfathomable, but it counted where it mattered i.e.2 judges. dirrell didn't seem to know what he was doing, in all honesty. he was pulling back and robbing his own shots of impact. and his opponent swasn't 100-lbs heavier, nor was he almost a foot taller.

i think it's ludicrous that holyfield did better than haye. holyfield was crap, and valuev seemed to be disinterested. holyfield achieved nothing in 2nd half, whereas haye schooled valuev in the 8th and 9th, did some audacious moves in the 11th, countering and then pivoting around valuev's whole body, before tossing in another counter, then nearly dropping the giant in the 12th! (the only man ever to hurt valuev). haye fought a motivated valuev who wanted to hurt him, in a vastly bigger fight, and basically stole points.

[Autobarn]

adamek. bring on adamek. make it happen. enjoy the title, before the DKP / WBA mandos, and before vitali.

[jamesmcdonnell]

6-5-1 Valuev.

Never thought Haye would get the decision fighting that way. Haye showed fantastic discipline and if the hand injury is geniune, which I believe it is, then it was a fantastic effort. Holyfield did do a better job though and was alot less negative.

Amazing to think that people are applauding this disciplined performance (which is does deserve to be) but then 3 weeks ago lots (somehow, I'm still stunned) thought Froch deserved the decision against the "runner" Dirrell. Dirrell's negativity was so much less than Haye's. There's effective agression (which neither Valuev and Froch did) and effective counter punching (which Dirrell was on a different level to Haye).

We've certainly had the rub of the green with out star fighters in close fights since the first Lewis vs Holyfield fight. Lewis, Hatton, Calzaghe, Froch and Haye all won fights a fair few thought lost (and four of those away from home).

I had Valuev well ahead going into the 10th, and had him two up at the end.

A lot of those rounds should have been even, and there were a lot of rounds where the only scoring punches were jabs.

Pleased for haye, but I just thought the Russian nicked it - not a robbery by any means however.

[jamesmcdonnell]

6-5-1 Valuev.

Never thought Haye would get the decision fighting that way. Haye showed fantastic discipline and if the hand injury is geniune, which I believe it is, then it was a fantastic effort. Holyfield did do a better job though and was alot less negative.

Amazing to think that people are applauding this disciplined performance (which is does deserve to be) but then 3 weeks ago lots (somehow, I'm still stunned) thought Froch deserved the decision against the "runner" Dirrell. Dirrell's negativity was so much less than Haye's. There's effective agression (which neither Valuev and Froch did) and effective counter punching (which Dirrell was on a different level to Haye).

We've certainly had the rub of the green with out star fighters in close fights since the first Lewis vs Holyfield fight. Lewis, Hatton, Calzaghe, Froch and Haye all won fights a fair few thought lost (and four of those away from home).

holyfield did not do better. haye had the reflexes to throw in the odd scoring shot here and there. evander just didn't.

anyway, back to the "haye/dirrell HYPOCRISY"...back in the real world, haye is a heavyweight champ, who seemed to know what he was doing, beating a giant with one hand and winning comfortable on 2 cards...whereas dirrell - for the 2nd time in his career - threw away a big showcase, and this time robbed himself of victory, getting penalised by ref for negative tactics. haye was disciplined and dirrell was hyperventilating. just because 2 performances are negative, doesn't mean they are that similar.

crtics are overlooking that haye v valuev was a mismatch in physical terms, so haye's movement and lack of workrate are understandable. haye and booth - in the corner - were self assured, and knew what they were doing all the way through. some found their tactics unfathomable, but it counted where it mattered i.e.2 judges. dirrell didn't seem to know what he was doing, in all honesty. he was pulling back and robbing his own shots of impact. and his opponent swasn't 100-lbs heavier, nor was he almost a foot taller.

i think it's ludicrous that holyfield did better than haye. holyfield was crap, and valuev seemed to be disinterested. holyfield achieved nothing in 2nd half, whereas haye schooled valuev in the 8th and 9th, did some audacious moves in the 11th, countering and then pivoting around valuev's whole body, before tossing in another counter, then nearly dropping the giant in the 12th! (the only man ever to hurt valuev). haye fought a motivated valuev who wanted to hurt him, in a vastly bigger fight, and basically stole points.

Have to say, thought Valuev looked pretty diinterested in there, thought that could have been frustration.

[Chambers2]

I had Haye winning 8 rounds to 4

[stujones]

Completely agree James. It was a close close fight.

Valuev again showed tremendous character post fight - no complaints or bitterness at all.

Autobarn - you don't score rounds on "the past" and also you don't score rounds feeling sorry cause a fighter is holding an injury. You don't score a fight feeling sorry for the little man either.

Dirrell didn't run away to the degree people are saying, he threw MUCH more shots than Haye did. He threw more power shots than Haye did. He backed up the aggressor more than Haye did. Even in the rounds that Rawling and Thaxton were pretty much masterbating over the prospect of Dirrell "quiting" Dirrell backed up Froch. Watch the 7th round again with the sound down, read how many gave that to Froch (clear) on here (including me) and then tell me if that was a clear Froch round. You can still give it to Froch, but even that round wasn't clear.

Off course it was hyprocracy. Dirrell was countering Froch's wild misses with shots, and for lots rounds quality shots. Haye, for large parts of the fight was just making Valuev miss and not making him pay. Its bias for the Brit, simple as - nothing wrong with it.

Yep, your right in parts in the Holyfield fight. Holyfield was WORST than Haye at the end. He did nothing, but he won the first 7 CLEAR. He counters the big man, made him miss and MADE him pay. Valuev seemed disinterested, Valuev carried the old guy.... yep maybe, who knows... again - we don't score fights with that interpreation. Everyone gets given a clean slate.

[stujones]

Valuev barely landed a shot all night. Why all the even rounds? This is the sport of boxing. If one guy is massively out-weighed, has less of a reach and yet makes his opponent miss for round after round, barely gets trapped on the ropes and lands his own shots, including plenty of balance displacing left jabs to the body, then he wins the fight, surely? No even rounds, no giving points for the ability to walk in a straight line and no extra points just because you're the champ.

Haye: 116-112.

And this was not Froch-Dirrell all over again, that comparison is just lazy.

Yep it is lazy on my behalf. Dirrell was countering Froch far more effectively than Haye was Valuev.

Dirrell should have been condemmed for being "over negative" for about 2 rounds. Haye for about half the fight.

[stujones]

Valuev barely landed a shot all night. Why all the even rounds? This is the sport of boxing. If one guy is massively out-weighed, has less of a reach and yet makes his opponent miss for round after round, barely gets trapped on the ropes and lands his own shots, including plenty of balance displacing left jabs to the body, then he wins the fight, surely? No even rounds, no giving points for the ability to walk in a straight line and no extra points just because you're the champ.

Haye: 116-112.

And this was not Froch-Dirrell all over again, that comparison is just lazy.

Again, since when should a fighters size have something to do with the scoring.

People making a huge deal out of the BIG man missing. Sure, making someone miss and making him pay is how you score a fight - but why the "special" treatment because Valuev was such a big guy.