Andre Ward wants Kovalev to admit that he lost

[Ilya Muromets]

It is what it is. Ward got the decision from the judges, that's the important thing ultimately. Fact is a lot of people don't think he won so that's always gonna be hanging over him without a rematch.

The most important thing is what the fans think.

Kovalev won the fight.

Not only the fans but also the sportswriters who they polled - and keep in mind we are only talking about US and UK western fans and sportswriters - and even they, as do I, all overwhelmingly believe that Kovalev won, and also believe that the Las Vegas boxing judges were, like everything else in Las Vegas, crooked.

[Keko]

Honest request.

[crusader]

Absolutely nothing wrong with Kovalev still thinking he deserved to win

[crusader]

Ward won the fair and square. Ya'll don't know how to score a fight.

i guess 75% of boxing experts don't either

For 11 of the 12 rounds he landed a higher percentage of punches, which means he was also the best defensive fighter for 11 rounds.

What an utterly stupid method of judging; does a grown man really come up with such childish reasoning?

May as well give a guy a round if he goes 2 for 2, while his opponent goes 15 for 20. In fact, might as well have Ward winning 11-1 if you're just going by connect percentage (which totally ignores that a fighter doesn't land what he doesn't throw). How about this, going by CompuBox, Kovalev landed more than Ward in 6 rounds, and scored a knockdown, meaning that he should've won the fight by a point. It's apparently that simple!

Did you sit there waiting to score rounds until you saw who CompuBox had landing at a higher percentage? I notice that you only had Ward winning by one point though, so surely even you can't reasonably take issue with Kovalev thinking he deserved to win.

[Give up]

Ward won the fair and square. Ya'll don't know how to score a fight.

I agree

[keithmoonhangover]

i guess 75% of boxing experts don't either

For 11 of the 12 rounds he landed a higher percentage of punches, which means he was also the best defensive fighter for 11 rounds.

What an utterly stupid method of judging; does a grown man really come up with such childish reasoning?

May as well give a guy a round if he goes 2 for 2, while his opponent goes 15 for 20. In fact, might as well have Ward winning 11-1 if you're just going by connect percentage (which totally ignores that a fighter doesn't land what he doesn't throw). How about this, going by CompuBox, Kovalev landed more than Ward in 6 rounds, and scored a knockdown, meaning that he should've won the fight by a point. It's apparently that simple!

Did you sit there waiting to score rounds until you saw who CompuBox had landing at a higher percentage? I notice that you only had Ward winning by one point though, so surely even you can't reasonably take issue with Kovalev thinking he deserved to win.

I never said that was my only method of scoring. I score a fight based on offence and defence. Ward had far superior defensive skills on the night. Yes, I had Ward by a point, what's your problem? I had Ward winning, so did the judges. If you didn't, then, with all due respect and in the nicest possible way.... tough sh1t.

[Freedom2013]

What an egotistical asswipe. It takes time to get over when you get fucked in business, life too for that matter. Even for the minority that defend the decision, it's pretty telling that every ward card is 114-113, he literally needs every possible break to attempt to justify thar bullshit. Sure even wards rabid fans on here cant blame kovalev for thinking he won.

Very true.

[crusader]

Going significantly by connect percentage at all is stupid. If one fighter's offense has another fighter weary of throwing, and thus contributes to the latter fighter throwing few punches, then the first fighter is protecting themself from being hit by preventing their opponent from throwing certain shots in the first place. 'The best defense is a good offense' isn't without value as a proverb, and it's hard for me to give a fighter a round based on their ability not to get hit when they actually got hit more.

If you had Ward winning just by one point (certainly not by stoppage as you predicted!), it seems a bit strange that you'd take issue with people thinking Kovalev deserved to win (I'm not certain if you do take issue with it, though you certainly post with that type of tone).

[keithmoonhangover]

Going significantly by connect percentage at all is stupid. If one fighter's offense has another fighter weary of throwing, and thus contributes to the latter fighter throwing few punches, then the first fighter is protecting themself from being hit by preventing their opponent from throwing certain shots in the first place. 'The best defense is a good offense' isn't without value as a proverb, and it's hard for me to give a fighter a round based on their defense when they actually got hit more.

If you had Ward winning just by one point (certainly not by stoppage as you predicted!), it seems a bit strange that you'd take issue with people thinking Kovalev deserved to win (I'm not certain if you do take issue with it, though you certainly post with that type of tone).

I didn't go significantly by percentage.

The best defence is not offence, it's good defence. Who had a better defence, Marciano or Pep?

I took issue because of your tone.

I thought it was a close fight with Ward winning by one or two points. Ward won, Kovalev didn't. it's as simple as that.

[crusader]

Of course Ward officially won, but that's a different matter from whether a fair case can be made for Kovalev, which I think it clearly can, and which you're certainly not far off from when you only had Ward up by 1. You've adopted the 'Ward deserved to win, no arguments about it' tone in several threads, including this one prior to me even posting, so I don't think your tone has much to do with me.

If Floyd and Marciano had the same punches thrown at them, I'm sure Floyd could evade more and thus be hit less, and by that measure we can say he'd have better defense. But if they were in a fight and Floyd landed 3 of 3 in a round, while Marciano landed 7 of 20, I certainly wouldn't give Floyd the round in large part because he landed at a higher percentage; a great method of protection is to prevent the opponent from throwing in the first place, and going just by connect rates ignores that as a method of defending oneself.

Hey, let's give the guy the round for his ability to avoid punches, even though he actually got hit with more punches! That just seems stupid to me, and the 11 out of 12 crap strikes me as you searching the punch stats after the fact to help you obstinately claim that Ward was the only fair winner (by a grand 1 point according to your card!).

[littlepug]

Don't think anyone gonna change their mind on who they thought won the fight, on my first watch I thought ward won it closely, I then watched it again with my brother ( casual fan ) and we both had ward winning, for me the knockdown shifted kovs focus off his game plan and as a result he got outsmarted over the stretch, but that's just my opinion based on my love of ring smarts, another fan that maybe prefers a pressure fighter could see it a completely different way which doesn't make it right or wrong because you subconsciously score a fight on your own preferences or experience, so for me brains triumphed over brawn and calls of a robbery are unjustified.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I thought kovalev was the winner under any criteria. He was the smarter, more skilled fighter.

[Counter-puncher]

Ward won the fair and square. Ya'll don't know how to score a fight.

I'm embarrassed for you, saying that. Its excruciating.

[littlepug]

I thought kovalev was the winner under any criteria. He was the smarter, more skilled fighter.

I saw it the other way round but if we all thought the same way these forums would be a lot quieter

[keithmoonhangover]

Ward won the fair and square. Ya'll don't know how to score a fight.

I'm embarrassed for you, saying that. Its excruciating.

I'll admit, my attempt at an American accent is pretty bad.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I thought kovalev was the winner under any criteria. He was the smarter, more skilled fighter.

I saw it the other way round but if we all thought the same way these forums would be a lot quieter

True enough, to be fair I never watched it again

[lazboy]

F I'm sick of Wards Shiit. He's not a genuine person. This is how it will play out.

First scenario
Ward: kovalev I want you to tell the world that I won or I won't rematch you.
Kovalev: no
Ward retires

Second scenario
Ward: kovalev I want you to tell the world that I won or I won't rematch you.
Kovalev after consulting with publicist: yes you won.
Ward retires

[SenorPipino]

Kovalev, outboxed and totally befuddled from the 3rd round on, will admit that he lost whenever Hillary Clinton suddenly stops whining and concedes she lost the presidential election fair and square.

In other words, it will never happen.

[Ruthless-RKO]

Absolutely nothing wrong with Kovalev still thinking he deserved to win

Of course he is entitled to think that he deserved it, like every other boxer who loses a close decision or draw. But he hasn't accepted the fact that he lost the fight.

[crusader]

What is that even supposed to mean?

I'm sure he realises that the judges scored against him and he officially lost the fight, but that is very different from thinking that he deserved to lose.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

What? Lol

[SaadOffTheDeck]

What is that even supposed to mean?

I'm sure he realises that the judges scored against him and he officially lost the fight, but that is very different from thinking that he deserved to lose.

, that was a real brain teaser. Of course he can think he didn't lose as long as he publicly admits that he did.

[Ruthless-RKO]

What is that even supposed to mean?

I'm sure he realises that the judges scored against him and he officially lost the fight, but that is very different from thinking that he deserved to lose.

Not saying he will say he deserved to lose, which boxer will ever say that?

He knows he could have done more to deserve to win more decisively.

[crusader]

So where is he going wrong in this again? I'm confused by your posts.

He thinks he should've gotten the decision, and it seems like a majority of observors agree with him; do you think it's unreasonable for him to hold that opinion?

[Ruthless-RKO]

So where is he going wrong in this again? I'm confused by your posts.

He thinks he should've gotten the decision, and it seems like a majority of observors agree with him; do you think it's unreasonable for him to hold that opinion?

He believes he deserved to win. That is fair. But he hasn't accepted that he actually lost, his 0 is gone.