BoxRec

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 13:45

ValMar wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 13:34

SenorPipino wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 11:27

tigermoth87 wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 02:55

SenorPipino wrote: ↑14 Feb 2019, 16:41 I expect fair judging. I always do.

These "the judges are bought" conspiracy theories aren't my thing.

The judges will favor the fighter who appears to win the round. No more. No less.

Disagree. For Canelo to get so many bad calls in his favour, there's something afoot.

One judge scored him vs Mayweather a tie. Get to eff . As if.

Boxing scoring is subjective. You can go over nearly ever bout and find a scorecard you disagree with.

It's just magnified when a high profile fighter is involved.

Canelo has earned every win. If you think something unkosher is afoot, then you probably also believe that 10,000 mysterious shooters were in Dealy Plaza too.

Is Canelo an excellent fighter ? Yes, absolutely !

Have the judges protected him several times ? Yes, absolutely !

The only egregious decision canelo got was ggg 1. The draw card with Floyd was as bad as it gets, I don't think he won a round but the outcome was just. I thought Lara and trout edged him and the GGG rematch was close but none of them were bad decisions. There is obviously home cooking but the bigger problem is the judges aren't watching the same fight and they're not using the best view to watch it. I don't know if you've ever sat ringside but it's a garbage view compared to your TV. If the ref is in your view and a home crowd goes wild what do you do?

If we can imagine absolutely objective judges, I think Canelo would have at least 2 L, and 2 D.
Yes, I sat near the ring many times (amateur boxing only, unfortunately), but it has been so long ago, honestly I can not remember the kind of view.

Well, you saw a different fight than the exact same seat on the other side of the ring. One thing I will say now is there is a smaller percentage of PAC/Bradley bad decisions than there used to be

"Who will be favoured by the judges, Joshua or MIller ?"


Whichever side greases their palm more. As they say in the boxing judge business, money talks bulls--t walks.

SenorPipino wrote: ↑14 Feb 2019, 16:41 I expect fair judging. I always do.

These "the judges are bought" conspiracy theories aren't my thing.

The judges will favor the fighter who appears to win the round. No more. No less.

Hmmmm you're a big Canelo fan right

Joshua

Because he'll be winning the rounds

gilgamesh wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 16:46 Joshua

Because he'll be winning the rounds

Haha nailed it

ValMar wrote: ↑14 Feb 2019, 16:36 What do you expect ?
Mighty Hearn against American crowd ?

It wont matter amigo. AJ will need NO help from the judges against a crude brawler like Miller. One-sided beatdown...

SenorPipino wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 11:27

tigermoth87 wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 02:55

SenorPipino wrote: ↑14 Feb 2019, 16:41 I expect fair judging. I always do.

These "the judges are bought" conspiracy theories aren't my thing.

The judges will favor the fighter who appears to win the round. No more. No less.

Disagree. For Canelo to get so many bad calls in his favour, there's something afoot.

One judge scored him vs Mayweather a tie. Get to eff . As if.

Boxing scoring is subjective. You can go over nearly ever bout and find a scorecard you disagree with.

It's just magnified when a high profile fighter is involved.

Canelo has earned every win. If you think something unkosher is afoot, then you probably also believe that 10,000 mysterious shooters were in Dealy Plaza too.

Boxing scoring certainly is subjective, but there can only be a swing of a few rounds to not raise some suspicion. If you're talking a 2-3 round swing, who cares? Easy for a few tight rounds to go either way. 8-10 round swing? Come on now.

One thing I will say, I have never watched ringside, and if the view is as terrible as people say, they that could certainly have a significant effect on scorecards. If that is the case (which I'm not entirely convinced), they probably should move scoring away from the ring on monitors under supervision. Might be time to move with the times.

Rob3_142 wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 19:08

SenorPipino wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 11:27

tigermoth87 wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 02:55

SenorPipino wrote: ↑14 Feb 2019, 16:41 I expect fair judging. I always do.

These "the judges are bought" conspiracy theories aren't my thing.

The judges will favor the fighter who appears to win the round. No more. No less.

Disagree. For Canelo to get so many bad calls in his favour, there's something afoot.

One judge scored him vs Mayweather a tie. Get to eff . As if.

Boxing scoring is subjective. You can go over nearly ever bout and find a scorecard you disagree with.

It's just magnified when a high profile fighter is involved.

Canelo has earned every win. If you think something unkosher is afoot, then you probably also believe that 10,000 mysterious shooters were in Dealy Plaza too.

Boxing scoring certainly is subjective, but there can only be a swing of a few rounds to not raise some suspicion. If you're talking a 2-3 round swing, who cares? Easy for a few tight rounds to go either way. 8-10 round swing? Come on now.

One thing I will say, I have never watched ringside, and if the view is as terrible as people say, they that could certainly have a significant effect on scorecards. If that is the case (which I'm not entirely convinced), they probably should move scoring away from the ring on monitors under supervision. Might be time to move with the times.

Insofar as it's true, as some here seem to be arguing, that it's only natural for fights to have enough close rounds to justify final scores going either way, one thing that pretty obviously follows from that is that professional scoring is essentially meaningless.

Rob3_142 wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 19:08

SenorPipino wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 11:27

tigermoth87 wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 02:55

SenorPipino wrote: ↑14 Feb 2019, 16:41 I expect fair judging. I always do.

These "the judges are bought" conspiracy theories aren't my thing.

The judges will favor the fighter who appears to win the round. No more. No less.

Disagree. For Canelo to get so many bad calls in his favour, there's something afoot.

One judge scored him vs Mayweather a tie. Get to eff . As if.

Boxing scoring is subjective. You can go over nearly ever bout and find a scorecard you disagree with.

It's just magnified when a high profile fighter is involved.

Canelo has earned every win. If you think something unkosher is afoot, then you probably also believe that 10,000 mysterious shooters were in Dealy Plaza too.

Boxing scoring certainly is subjective, but there can only be a swing of a few rounds to not raise some suspicion. If you're talking a 2-3 round swing, who cares? Easy for a few tight rounds to go either way. 8-10 round swing? Come on now.

One thing I will say, I have never watched ringside, and if the view is as terrible as people say, they that could certainly have a significant effect on scorecards. If that is the case (which I'm not entirely convinced), they probably should move scoring away from the ring on monitors under supervision. Might be time to move with the times.

Just think about it. Is there any view for anything that would be better looking up 10 ft or so with obstructions in the way as compared to directly in front of your eyes?

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑17 Feb 2019, 15:50

Rob3_142 wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 19:08

SenorPipino wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 11:27

tigermoth87 wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 02:55

SenorPipino wrote: ↑14 Feb 2019, 16:41 I expect fair judging. I always do.

These "the judges are bought" conspiracy theories aren't my thing.

The judges will favor the fighter who appears to win the round. No more. No less.

Disagree. For Canelo to get so many bad calls in his favour, there's something afoot.

One judge scored him vs Mayweather a tie. Get to eff . As if.

Boxing scoring is subjective. You can go over nearly ever bout and find a scorecard you disagree with.

It's just magnified when a high profile fighter is involved.

Canelo has earned every win. If you think something unkosher is afoot, then you probably also believe that 10,000 mysterious shooters were in Dealy Plaza too.

Boxing scoring certainly is subjective, but there can only be a swing of a few rounds to not raise some suspicion. If you're talking a 2-3 round swing, who cares? Easy for a few tight rounds to go either way. 8-10 round swing? Come on now.

One thing I will say, I have never watched ringside, and if the view is as terrible as people say, they that could certainly have a significant effect on scorecards. If that is the case (which I'm not entirely convinced), they probably should move scoring away from the ring on monitors under supervision. Might be time to move with the times.

Just think about it. Is there any view for anything that would be better looking up 10 ft or so with obstructions in the way as compared to directly in front of your eyes?

Oh yeah, I'm not saying its a good view, or that it doesn't impact scoring, but I'm still entirely convinced that is can account for a 10 round swing between two judges.

Rob3_142 wrote: ↑17 Feb 2019, 17:58

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑17 Feb 2019, 15:50

Rob3_142 wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 19:08

SenorPipino wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 11:27

tigermoth87 wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019, 02:55

SenorPipino wrote: ↑14 Feb 2019, 16:41 I expect fair judging. I always do.

These "the judges are bought" conspiracy theories aren't my thing.

The judges will favor the fighter who appears to win the round. No more. No less.

Disagree. For Canelo to get so many bad calls in his favour, there's something afoot.

One judge scored him vs Mayweather a tie. Get to eff . As if.

Boxing scoring is subjective. You can go over nearly ever bout and find a scorecard you disagree with.

It's just magnified when a high profile fighter is involved.

Canelo has earned every win. If you think something unkosher is afoot, then you probably also believe that 10,000 mysterious shooters were in Dealy Plaza too.

Boxing scoring certainly is subjective, but there can only be a swing of a few rounds to not raise some suspicion. If you're talking a 2-3 round swing, who cares? Easy for a few tight rounds to go either way. 8-10 round swing? Come on now.

One thing I will say, I have never watched ringside, and if the view is as terrible as people say, they that could certainly have a significant effect on scorecards. If that is the case (which I'm not entirely convinced), they probably should move scoring away from the ring on monitors under supervision. Might be time to move with the times.

Just think about it. Is there any view for anything that would be better looking up 10 ft or so with obstructions in the way as compared to directly in front of your eyes?

Oh yeah, I'm not saying its a good view, or that it doesn't impact scoring, but I'm still entirely convinced that is can account for a 10 round swing between two judges.

I'm not disagreeing with that, but if we have all of them watching the best view away from crowd and fight noise it would be easier to eliminate incompetence or attempt to find corruption.

Rob3_142 wrote: ↑14 Feb 2019, 17:22

littlepug wrote: ↑14 Feb 2019, 16:59

SenorPipino wrote: ↑14 Feb 2019, 16:41 I expect fair judging. I always do.

These "the judges are bought" conspiracy theories aren't my thing.

The judges will favor the fighter who appears to win the round. No more. No less.

Same here, it amazes me that people constantly call foul play over scoring when all it takes is a few swing rounds to be scored for one side to give a wider or closer scorecard than expected

bo
I don't think conspiracy theory per se, but the GGG-Canelo judging (especially in the first fight) and Wilder-Fury outcome was very confusing.

I understand that judge scoring is subjective, but it should be to a certain extent objective. It is of course then very confusing how two judges judging the same fight can have almost polar opposite scorecards.

Not if you have ever sat ringside looking up through or under the ropes, with a less than stellar ref frequently blocking your view a little or maybe even completely. If the two fighters are spending a lot of time near the ropes on one side of the ring at least one of the judges sees nothing but the back of one fighter.
They are watching the same fight as the tv audience but they have nothing close to the same view as the tv audience.
They also do not have the same view as most of the audience in attendance at the arena as most of them are watching from an elevated position and can simply look up at the screen if the ref is in the way.

It's the same thing as watching replay from all the angles in sports that use replay. Some views will give you indisputable video evidence that the ref was right(or wrong) some views are inconclusive. They are all showing the same play but what you see depends on where you are watching from.
When we are talking about other sports people remember and accept that but as soon as we're talking about boxing it has to be a conspiracy.

Well......when boxing fans don't like the result it has to be conspiracy anyway.

When your favorite doesn't win or you lose a bet, it's always a conspiracy.

There was a conspiracy last night just because Figueroa won a lopsided decision.

And he clearly deserved to win. But fans are always looking for deception and corruption.

Even the title of this thread casually assumes that the judges won't be honest.

SenorPipino wrote: ↑17 Feb 2019, 21:00 When your favorite doesn't win or you lose a bet, it's always a conspiracy.

There was a conspiracy last night just because Figueroa won a lopsided decision.

And he clearly deserved to win. But fans are always looking for deception and corruption.

Even the title of this thread casually assumes that the judges won't be honest.

Yeah that's nuts. If you can't trust a boxing judge who can you trust?

small chance judges are needed imo

Ilya Muromets wrote: ↑18 Feb 2019, 01:50

SenorPipino wrote: ↑17 Feb 2019, 21:00 When your favorite doesn't win or you lose a bet, it's always a conspiracy.

There was a conspiracy last night just because Figueroa won a lopsided decision.

And he clearly deserved to win. But fans are always looking for deception and corruption.

Even the title of this thread casually assumes that the judges won't be honest.

Yeah that's nuts. If you can't trust a boxing judge who can you trust?

Well done, my "Slavic cousin".

ValMar wrote: ↑18 Feb 2019, 12:31

Ilya Muromets wrote: ↑18 Feb 2019, 01:50

SenorPipino wrote: ↑17 Feb 2019, 21:00 When your favorite doesn't win or you lose a bet, it's always a conspiracy.

There was a conspiracy last night just because Figueroa won a lopsided decision.

And he clearly deserved to win. But fans are always looking for deception and corruption.

Even the title of this thread casually assumes that the judges won't be honest.

Yeah that's nuts. If you can't trust a boxing judge who can you trust?

Well done, my "Slavic cousin".

not always a conspracy no sir ...but who here beleves the questonable scores are evenly dstributed between house fighter a-side and the other guys?

jamamb wrote: ↑19 Feb 2019, 01:44 not always a conspracy no sir ...but who here beleves the questonable scores are evenly dstributed between house fighter a-side and the other guys?

They might be too idealistic or too naive....
Or simply - fools................

thats the thing for me, certanly some ppl go way overboard with some of the judging stuff, saying this and that is a conspiracy etc and looking to create some injustice where there isnt, but there is most certanly a big bias for questionable judging to go more toward the house fighter better supported fighter then the other fighter.

the only thing we could say there is that if the judges are intentionally being generous to the house fighter, it could be stuff like greater crowd noise for the more popular fighter, etc that sway them. then again a lot of the time the crowd goes quieter when the home guys not doing so well!

LOL Joshua KO 3 or sooner

marvelous marv wrote: ↑19 Feb 2019, 14:17 LOL Joshua KO 3 or sooner

Surprise surprise.

You (and Joshua) will discover that the Big Baby is a tough guy to put away.

Besides, Joshua is starting to morph into a more cautious boxer. Quick KO's are going to become rare.

ValMar wrote: ↑19 Feb 2019, 13:46

jamamb wrote: ↑19 Feb 2019, 01:44 not always a conspracy no sir ...but who here beleves the questonable scores are evenly dstributed between house fighter a-side and the other guys?

They might be too idealistic or too naive....
Or simply - fools................

19th century American humorist George Ade:

"He had been kicked in the head by a mule when young and believed everything he read in the Sunday papers."