BoxRec

I'm stuck at work.
Did Burns win?

crusader wrote:

rossij8 wrote:I thought the first 6 were closely shared, but maybe that's me pissed up (no drugs or brown envelope)

Indongo clearly won the second half of fight, a decent world contender now

It looks like Burns is finished now a similar thing might happen to Nathan Cleverly with a World belt

There were a couple rounds in the first half that didn't have a whole lot in them, but even if I'm reaching to make a case for Burns I can only give him 2 rounds out of 12.

That's fair enough as the general feeling on here, even my Mum texted me 'completely outclassed'

I'm thinking of becoming being a Television Pundit

Taansend wrote:I'm stuck at work.
Did Burns win?

No, he got outclassed and lost a wide UD.

120-108
118-110
116-112 (VERY generous)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSkbnwGi954
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHxMhcoFvA0

Got a lovely 6 to 1 on indongo to win by decision. Don't know why bookies had burns favourite

watsupdoc87 wrote:Got a lovely 6 to 1 on indongo to win by decision. Don't know why bookies had burns favourite

The only reason I could imagine him being the favorite is because it was in Scotland, but yeah I felt very confident that Indongo would probably beat him.

It was definitely stupid to make him 6 to 1 underdog.

Nightmare Roy wrote:

Naandrew wrote:116-112 hahahahahah what an idiot.

That's who was given the brown envelope then

House judges eh? We is the new Germanz.

No way are we worse than germany,the right man won the fight,i remember robin reid fightin sven ottke and the ref warned reid for punching ottke pluse reid won but ottke got the decision.

I'm not saying that the UK is worse than Germany, but Reid-Ottke happened about 15 years ago.

Ottke sure seems to have done wonders for how German boxing is viewed in the West; did the country have such an infamous judging reputation before him?

By the way, 34 tried, 34 failed.

thechump wrote:

Nightmare Roy wrote:

Naandrew wrote:116-112 hahahahahah what an idiot.

That's who was given the brown envelope then

House judges eh? We is the new Germanz.

No way are we worse than germany,the right man won the fight,i remember robin reid fightin sven ottke and the ref warned reid for punching ottke pluse reid won but ottke got the decision.

crusader wrote:I'm not saying that the UK is worse than Germany, but Reid-Ottke happened about 15 years ago.

Ottke sure seems to have done wonders for how German boxing is viewed in the West; did the country have such an infamous judging reputation before him?

By the way, 34 tried, 34 failed.

Reid Ottke is as bad as I have ever seen along Chavez v Whitaker Manny v Bradley bad. I had that 117-110 to Reid including the clear knock down that was not given.

It's just these dire scorecards are worrying, it's going to out fighters off coming here.

Last night was a shut out, even big Burns fans on here gave Burns two rounds max and admitted they were sympathy rounds.

IJL had McDonnell v Vargas a draw wasn't even competitive


Some one had Burns 118-110 v Relikh and regardless of how people thought that fight went there is no argument what so ever that Relihk won the first two and the last three. So that's 5 rounds he has to have.

crusader wrote:I'm not saying that the UK is worse than Germany, but Reid-Ottke happened about 15 years ago.

Ottke sure seems to have done wonders for how German boxing is viewed in the West; did the country have such an infamous judging reputation before him?

By the way, 34 tried, 34 failed.

Not sure about before Ottke as that was before my time. But certainly during his 'reign', Germany as a whole was notorious for giving decisions to home fighters. In fairness, that reputation is no longer deserved, and Britain seems far worse these days.

I had Burns 7-5 against Relikh. The result itself wasn't controversial as it was a close fight but I don't think Relikh did enough to get a decision. Maybe an argument for a draw at the very best. Some of the individual scoring was way off though.

Last night was the right result too, though one of the individual cards was off.

ewenhay wrote:I had Burns 7-5 against Relikh. The result itself wasn't controversial as it was a close fight but I don't think Relikh did enough to get a decision. Maybe an argument for a draw at the very best. Some of the individual scoring was way off though.

Last night was the right result too, though one of the individual cards was off.

Hatton let Relikh down after the fight. He should have been going mental at the cards given.

Look at the origin of the disputed scorecards. They are rarely UK officials. Corruption theories are weak. Surely if you were open to corruption the score would be in favour of the home fighter no matter what....

maninthemiddle wrote:Look at the origin of the disputed scorecards. They are rarely UK officials. Corruption theories are weak. Surely if you were open to corruption the score would be in favour of the home fighter no matter what....

Who scored the 116 - 112.

Naandrew wrote:

thechump wrote:

Nightmare Roy wrote: House judges eh? We is the new Germanz.

No way are we worse than germany,the right man won the fight,i remember robin reid fightin sven ottke and the ref warned reid for punching ottke pluse reid won but ottke got the decision.

crusader wrote:I'm not saying that the UK is worse than Germany, but Reid-Ottke happened about 15 years ago.

Ottke sure seems to have done wonders for how German boxing is viewed in the West; did the country have such an infamous judging reputation before him?

By the way, 34 tried, 34 failed.

Reid Ottke is as bad as I have ever seen along Chavez v Whitaker Manny v Bradley bad. I had that 117-110 to Reid including the clear knock down that was not given.

It's just these dire scorecards are worrying, it's going to out fighters off coming here.

Last night was a shut out, even big Burns fans on here gave Burns two rounds max and admitted they were sympathy rounds.

IJL had McDonnell v Vargas a draw wasn't even competitive


Some one had Burns 118-110 v Relikh and regardless of how people thought that fight went there is no argument what so ever that Relihk won the first two and the last three. So that's 5 rounds he has to have.

the worst i ever saw was a south american against a german, can't remember the names. it was on eurosport not long after it started being shown in the uk. the south american won every round and had to stop hitting the german a few times to avoid stopping him,basically carried him to the end.bloke had obviously been told the score before the fight. he even looked at least a weight below the german.

even the home crowd booed the decision and i have never seen a boxer so embarrassed to get a decision in my life. i don't think he landed more than half a dozen punches the entire fight.

jonny wrote:

maninthemiddle wrote:Look at the origin of the disputed scorecards. They are rarely UK officials. Corruption theories are weak. Surely if you were open to corruption the score would be in favour of the home fighter no matter what....

Who scored the 116 - 112.

Judge from Puerto Rico......

So Burns was the defending WBA champion. Puerto Rican organisation. The Puerto Rican judge is responsible for the most unrealistic card. Why we all love boxing organisations.........

straali wrote:So Burns was the defending WBA champion. Puerto Rican organisation. The Puerto Rican judge is responsible for the most unrealistic card. Why we all love boxing organisations.........

He got it right isn't that all that matters

world ranked wrote:

straali wrote:So Burns was the defending WBA champion. Puerto Rican organisation. The Puerto Rican judge is responsible for the most unrealistic card. Why we all love boxing organisations.........

He got it right isn't that all that matters

Not in to conspiracy theories. More incompetence I would say.

straali wrote:So Burns was the defending WBA champion. Puerto Rican organisation. The Puerto Rican judge is responsible for the most unrealistic card. Why we all love boxing organisations.........

On checking their website...WBA based in Panama. Starts with a P so I guess thats close enough.

maninthemiddle wrote:

straali wrote:So Burns was the defending WBA champion. Puerto Rican organisation. The Puerto Rican judge is responsible for the most unrealistic card. Why we all love boxing organisations.........

On checking their website...WBA based in Panama. Starts with a P so I guess thats close enough.

Yeah its the WBO who are based in Puerto Rico