BoxRec

Taansend wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 09:46

keirw wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 09:31

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 05:35

A bit generous to Groves there, mate

Perhaps, but I did only gave Eubank 2 rounds with maybe a share of 1.
The knokdowns weren't counted so my score was more like 118-111.
116-112 is a bit of a stretch, but not a terrible card. 120-108 would be just as accurate in my eyes.

Have another look

You've given Groves EIGHTEEN rounds

Yeah, but that's how clear a decision it was.

Twinkle Toes wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 05:44 I think Eubank Jr scored it for himself. No one else did other than this guy.

It's the Guardian, no surprise. Groves would be 6 down before the fight even started.

They have published a lot of very positive stuff on George over the years.

He should not be paid to write about boxing.

Taansend wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 09:46

keirw wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 09:31

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 05:35

A bit generous to Groves there, mate

Perhaps, but I did only gave Eubank 2 rounds with maybe a share of 1.
The knokdowns weren't counted so my score was more like 118-111.
116-112 is a bit of a stretch, but not a terrible card. 120-108 would be just as accurate in my eyes.

Have another look

You've given Groves EIGHTEEN rounds

my bad.

Still a better score than 115-113

118-111 for me. The commentary was favouring GG but it was also only showing stats for power punches which is drastically misleading to suggest a closer fight. Groves controlled the ring, had a more effective offence and defence and landed for the most part more effective shots.

ClivePatrickLyons wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 01:15 I had it about the same as the judge who had it 115/113 for Grove the commentators ruined the viewing they had the fight over by rounds 6/7 they need to call the fight not predict what the outcome while the fights on i had to turn the volume down by round 9 there were some close rounds especially early round 5 i thought Eubank won that round clearly but one of the commentators had Grove winning it Eubank tactics were dumb but still George did enough to get the nod.

I agree. I though George didn't get enough credit for his evasive tactics when they were in close, lots of eubanks haymakers were wild and poor, but groves movement up close was good.

First try to use your own mind (not the commentators one) and then start scoring. Giving rounds for holding and spoiling it`s not a good idea for me. The one who was trying to fight more wasn`t Groves for sure. And what`s most important: clean and really heavy punches landed - I think it was Eubank`s here a better one (power punches in statistics are also a lot of different punches looking at "power"). Had it 115:113 for Eubank. Try to watch this fight without ITV commentary and forgetting about this that you don`t like Eubank (I like them both).
Rounds: G, G, E, E, E, G, E, G, E, G, E, E - 7:5 Eubank
Thank You for Your attention.

From the back row of the upper tier last night I had Groves winning by 4.

Sindbad wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 11:39 First try to use your own mind (not the commentators one) and then start scoring. Giving rounds for holding and spoiling it`s not a good idea for me. The one who was trying to fight more wasn`t Groves for sure. And what`s most important: clean and really heavy punches landed - I think it was Eubank`s here a better one (power punches in statistics are also a lot of different punches looking at "power"). Had it 115:113 for Eubank. Try to watch this fight without ITV commentary and forgetting about this that you don`t like Eubank (I like them both).
Rounds: G, G, E, E, E, G, E, G, E, G, E, E - 7:5 Eubank
Thank You for Your attention.

You haven't a fornicating clue what you are on about. You don't score rounds for 'trying' to fight when you're being countered. Moron.

Taansend wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 09:46

keirw wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 09:31

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 05:35

A bit generous to Groves there, mate

Perhaps, but I did only gave Eubank 2 rounds with maybe a share of 1.
The knokdowns weren't counted so my score was more like 118-111.
116-112 is a bit of a stretch, but not a terrible card. 120-108 would be just as accurate in my eyes.

Have another look

You've given Groves EIGHTEEN rounds

Still better than the official cards.

afcpaul wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 11:19

ClivePatrickLyons wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 01:15 I had it about the same as the judge who had it 115/113 for Grove the commentators ruined the viewing they had the fight over by rounds 6/7 they need to call the fight not predict what the outcome while the fights on i had to turn the volume down by round 9 there were some close rounds especially early round 5 i thought Eubank won that round clearly but one of the commentators had Grove winning it Eubank tactics were dumb but still George did enough to get the nod.

I agree. I though George didn't get enough credit for his evasive tactics when they were in close, lots of eubanks haymakers were wild and poor, but groves movement up close was good.

Very few of Eubanks shots landed clean. You've got to take that into consideration.

ClivePatrickLyons wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 01:15 I had it about the same as the judge who had it 115/113 for Grove the commentators ruined the viewing they had the fight over by rounds 6/7 they need to call the fight not predict what the outcome while the fights on i had to turn the volume down by round 9 there were some close rounds especially early round 5 i thought Eubank won that round clearly but one of the commentators had Grove winning it Eubank tactics were dumb but still George did enough to get the nod.

Did you take into consideration the 2 knock-downs that should have been counted , or did you not see those either ?

Sindbad wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 11:39 First try to use your own mind (not the commentators one) and then start scoring. Giving rounds for holding and spoiling it`s not a good idea for me. The one who was trying to fight more wasn`t Groves for sure. And what`s most important: clean and really heavy punches landed - I think it was Eubank`s here a better one (power punches in statistics are also a lot of different punches looking at "power"). Had it 115:113 for Eubank. Try to watch this fight without ITV commentary and forgetting about this that you don`t like Eubank (I like them both).
Rounds: G, G, E, E, E, G, E, G, E, G, E, E - 7:5 Eubank
Thank You for Your attention.

,
Taxi for Sinbad

Sindbad wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 11:39 First try to use your own mind (not the commentators one) and then start scoring. Giving rounds for holding and spoiling it`s not a good idea for me. The one who was trying to fight more wasn`t Groves for sure. And what`s most important: clean and really heavy punches landed - I think it was Eubank`s here a better one (power punches in statistics are also a lot of different punches looking at "power"). Had it 115:113 for Eubank. Try to watch this fight without ITV commentary and forgetting about this that you don`t like Eubank (I like them both).
Rounds: G, G, E, E, E, G, E, G, E, G, E, E - 7:5 Eubank
Thank You for Your attention.

Haha what a clueless idiot, Groves schooled him all night long you utter biff.

Sindbad wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 11:39 First try to use your own mind (not the commentators one) and then start scoring. Giving rounds for holding and spoiling it`s not a good idea for me. The one who was trying to fight more wasn`t Groves for sure. And what`s most important: clean and really heavy punches landed - I think it was Eubank`s here a better one (power punches in statistics are also a lot of different punches looking at "power"). Had it 115:113 for Eubank. Try to watch this fight without ITV commentary and forgetting about this that you don`t like Eubank (I like them both).
Rounds: G, G, E, E, E, G, E, G, E, G, E, E - 7:5 Eubank
Thank You for Your attention.

Hi Junior

I find it really hard to see how anyone could have given Eubank more than 2-3 rounds, and I thought he would give Groves a much stiffer test. He seemed to lack the guile to challenge Grove's plan A. No rolling under the jab, no jabbing with the other fighter, no body work, no timing the right hand over the jab, just that single looping left hook and rushing Groves against the ropes which only smothered his own work.

I've seen a few performances in my time that have been a let down, but this was one of the poorest. What worried me the most was that after the fight he seemed unrepentant. I'm afraid this kid could be a good fighter, but they need a serious reality check as he was completely out thought. At times it was man and boy in there.

I personally had it 118-110 to Groves, I could see it as far as 116-112, maybe, but thought the 115-113 on the cards was a disgrace.

Sindbad wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 11:39 First try to use your own mind (not the commentators one) and then start scoring. Giving rounds for holding and spoiling it`s not a good idea for me. The one who was trying to fight more wasn`t Groves for sure. And what`s most important: clean and really heavy punches landed - I think it was Eubank`s here a better one (power punches in statistics are also a lot of different punches looking at "power"). Had it 115:113 for Eubank. Try to watch this fight without ITV commentary and forgetting about this that you don`t like Eubank (I like them both).
Rounds: G, G, E, E, E, G, E, G, E, G, E, E - 7:5 Eubank
Thank You for Your attention.

There are people you can talk to.

jamesmcdonnell wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 11:48

Sindbad wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 11:39 First try to use your own mind (not the commentators one) and then start scoring. Giving rounds for holding and spoiling it`s not a good idea for me. The one who was trying to fight more wasn`t Groves for sure. And what`s most important: clean and really heavy punches landed - I think it was Eubank`s here a better one (power punches in statistics are also a lot of different punches looking at "power"). Had it 115:113 for Eubank. Try to watch this fight without ITV commentary and forgetting about this that you don`t like Eubank (I like them both).
Rounds: G, G, E, E, E, G, E, G, E, G, E, E - 7:5 Eubank
Thank You for Your attention.

You haven't a effing clue what you are on about. You don't score rounds for 'trying' to fight when you're being countered. Moron.

Come on James. The guy may be totally wrong but that's a bit unfair.

punchers chance wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 13:38

jamesmcdonnell wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 11:48

Sindbad wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 11:39 First try to use your own mind (not the commentators one) and then start scoring. Giving rounds for holding and spoiling it`s not a good idea for me. The one who was trying to fight more wasn`t Groves for sure. And what`s most important: clean and really heavy punches landed - I think it was Eubank`s here a better one (power punches in statistics are also a lot of different punches looking at "power"). Had it 115:113 for Eubank. Try to watch this fight without ITV commentary and forgetting about this that you don`t like Eubank (I like them both).
Rounds: G, G, E, E, E, G, E, G, E, G, E, E - 7:5 Eubank
Thank You for Your attention.

You haven't a effing clue what you are on about. You don't score rounds for 'trying' to fight when you're being countered. Moron.

Come on James. The guy may be totally wrong but that's a bit unfair.

Is it? In what way? He's talking utter bollocks.

Sindbad wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 11:39 First try to use your own mind (not the commentators one) and then start scoring. Giving rounds for holding and spoiling it`s not a good idea for me. The one who was trying to fight more wasn`t Groves for sure. And what`s most important: clean and really heavy punches landed - I think it was Eubank`s here a better one (power punches in statistics are also a lot of different punches looking at "power"). Had it 115:113 for Eubank. Try to watch this fight without ITV commentary and forgetting about this that you don`t like Eubank (I like them both).
Rounds: G, G, E, E, E, G, E, G, E, G, E, E - 7:5 Eubank
Thank You for Your attention.

Watch it again. Eubank very rarely hit anything like cleanly. Atleast a couple of the times he was down should have been counted as a knock downs. Eubank got counteres a lot, eat jabs, missed tons and even when he hit he almost always hit arms and gloves. If nothing else even his dad knew he lost and he was holding ice on his face for a reason.

I thought the 3rd time Junior went down (rd 10?) was a definite knockdown but the ref wasn't interested, the only thing he seemed interested in all night was warning Groves for this, that and everything whilst Eubank just kept on boring in with his head like a crazed young bull. Groves was like a matador, majestic at times, one of his best performances ever in my opinion given the hype towards Jr. I only watched the fight this afternoon with Russian comms and didn't score it round by round but Groves looked a clear winner to me, something round the 116-112 region or maybe wider with the knockdown, I struggled to give Eubank 4 rounds tbh.

jamesmcdonnell wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 13:42

punchers chance wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 13:38

jamesmcdonnell wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 11:48


You haven't a effing clue what you are on about. You don't score rounds for 'trying' to fight when you're being countered. Moron.

Come on James. The guy may be totally wrong but that's a bit unfair.

Is it? In what way? He's talking utter bollocks.

You're a bully McDonnell

I think it was a similar kind of fight to GGG vs Canelo in terms of one guy coming forward and not really landing but putting on pressure and the other guy fighting on the outside, spoiling and negating the opponent.

The way boxing is judged, you have to reward that kind of spoling and negating because it looks like the defensive fighter is "outboxing" the guy coming forward.

TheLeprechaun wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 16:00 I think it was a similar kind of fight to GGG vs Canelo in terms of one guy coming forward and not really landing but putting on pressure and the other guy fighting on the outside, spoiling and negating the opponent.

The way boxing is judged, you have to reward that kind of spoling and negating because it looks like the defensive fighter is "outboxing" the guy coming forward.

Just not similar in the result , whereas that was a reasonably close fight and could have been scored either way , and this was an embarrassing schooling .

Taansend wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 14:47

jamesmcdonnell wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 13:42

punchers chance wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 13:38
Come on James. The guy may be totally wrong but that's a bit unfair.

Is it? In what way? He's talking utter bollocks.

You're a bully McDonnell

Who say So? Ill batter them!