BoxRec

Stevieb8006 wrote:Andries may have had something to do with it as well.tough tough man

I was thinking that.

Sibson just not big or strong enough no matter what.

Loynesy wrote:I gave it to Ward narrowly. The judges gave it to Ward narrowly. Boxing News gave it to Ward narrowly. Obviously none of us know how to score a fight.

It was a close fight, certainly no robbery.

I didn't say it was a robbery. I agree it was a close fight. The likes of Larry Merchant, Gareth A Davies, Eric Armit and plenty more had it for Kovalev...

Counter-puncher wrote:

Loynesy wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:
punch stats are FACTS

They are not facts. .

indeed. which is kindof why I had a huge laughing fcking face both before and after the statement. which I'd have thought would be grounds enough to judge me as mocking rather than supporting such a statement.

It's still a pretty useful barometer!

Andries was a real tough operator there's doubt about it. But I've got to say that at his peak Sibson was an extremely strong individual with a really big left hook.
At the time of their fight Andries had still not travelled to train in Detroit and he was a bit crude. Sibson, unless you really studied his fights, was a very skilful boxer. He moved for openings, slipped punches effortlessly, could block punches on the way in and if he was up for it would have taken Andries to the wire.
Only opinion of course, and Sibson himself has too much integrity to suggest he could have beaten Andries.
Good discussion though.

Counter-puncher wrote:

Loynesy wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:
punch stats are FACTS

They are not facts. .

indeed. which is kindof why I had a huge laughing fcking face both before and after the statement. which I'd have thought would be grounds enough to judge me as mocking rather than supporting such a statement.

Apologies CP - emoticons are not my strong point. Sorry

Ha, no worries, ironically I wondered if using two might be overkill

dalcumly wrote:Andries was a real tough operator there's doubt about it. But I've got to say that at his peak Sibson was an extremely strong individual with a really big left hook.
At the time of their fight Andries had still not travelled to train in Detroit and he was a bit crude. Sibson, unless you really studied his fights, was a very skilful boxer. He moved for openings, slipped punches effortlessly, could block punches on the way in and if he was up for it would have taken Andries to the wire.
Only opinion of course, and Sibson himself has too much integrity to suggest he could have beaten Andries.
Good discussion though.

I agree Sibson was a much better 'boxer' than generally recognised. Excellent jab too when he got it going.

Andries may have had something to do with it as well.tough tough man

Agreed....Andries was the sort of guy you needed to be 100 per cent for.
Anything less and you'd be straight in the brown stuff...and he'd give people a bad day at the office even when he did not win!

I remember when sibson went to Atlantic city I think it was and upset the Apple cart by beating John Collins who was being set up with that Irish American angle in the U.S.,and sibson bashed him up in two rounds !

Ian1973 wrote:Kovalev "lost" because of poor scoring by three poor judges no other reason.

Kov lost because the judges knew how to score a fight properly. Ward landed a higher percentage of punches in 11 of the 12 rounds. Ward was more accurate and had a better defence.