Who scored it for Eubank Jr?

[TheLeprechaun]

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 .

Nowhere near a schooling for me.

I didn't score the fight but I'm pretty sure I have Groves winning but not by a whole lot.

[Yes We Can]

Also worth noting that Eubanks cut was caused by him throwing an uppercut from the darkest corners of Brighton, and landing it somewhere near Leeds (Groves was in Manchester ffs)... His whole body and momentum followed the punch (which just about missed as stated previously) and bang went the eye on the side of Georges Manchester based head.

[Tugger28]

I had Groves 4 rounds up and a couple of them were 10-8, after the touch downs....,the judge who scored 115-113 must’ve had shit in his eyes.

[coneye]

I do give Eubank a A plus for effort,, not much else though unfortunatly, .

[Deleted_Scenes]

I had Groves 4 rounds up and a couple of them were 10-8, after the touch downs....,the judge who scored 115-113 must’ve had poo in his eyes.

The closest I can see it, is 116-112.

Clear Groves rounds: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11
Clear Eubank rounds: 12
Close rounds: 5, 7, 9

Unless you were scoring Eubank landing punches on Groves' arms, or charging in like an enraged rhino and pressing him against the ropes, there's no way in hell you can arrive at 115-113. Even when it looked like Jr was doing well, he was smothering his own punches/hitting arms, or just missing 90% of what he threw. Groves looked slightly stressed at times just due to the volume coming at him, not because anything was landing. Even on the inside, Groves often did the cleaner work and landed equally as many, despite throwing a lot less.

Had it 118-111 myself.
Would have been 118-109 if the 2 knockdowns had been ruled legit.

[Coco]

Eubanks seems to be getting a lot of hate here, for me he was clearly beaten in a competitive fight, he can improve and come again.
People seem to think he was exposed as someone who can't fight
Maybe he won't improve and this is his level but that still makes him a damn good fighter, a hard man too.

[fizzjambo]

Eubanks seems to be getting a lot of hate here, for me he was clearly beaten in a competitive fight, he can improve and come again.
People seem to think he was exposed as someone who can't fight
Maybe he won't improve and this is his level but that still makes him a damn good fighter, a hard man too.

Agree with all this, however the issue is how much his team have been blowing him up. Aye he’s a good solid fighter who is fringe world class and that’s a level a tiny amount of us get to. However at that level above I firmly believe that he falls well short

[jamamb]

it was a 118-110 to 116-112 kinda fight imo

[Deleted_Scenes]

Eubanks seems to be getting a lot of hate here, for me he was clearly beaten in a competitive fight, he can improve and come again.
People seem to think he was exposed as someone who can't fight
Maybe he won't improve and this is his level but that still makes him a damn good fighter, a hard man too.

As wide as I had it, I'm not outright hating on Jr.

There is a route back for him, but he/Sr need to recognise the technical improvements needed. The current setup isn't really working.

He is still a good fighter, and I'll admit I did pick him to win (based on a lack of faith in Groves' stamina, and Jr coming on strong after the 6th).

Give him a proper trainer (McCracken or Floyd Sr), and/or a few more technical challenges in the ring at a slightly lower level, and he might learn how to put a game plan together, or the importance of having a plan b.

[ClivePatrickLyons]

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 ?

NO You cannot add knockdowns when the Ref didn't put a count on Eubank I was surprised the 2 Commentators didn't though

[jamamb]

candyslim over in the current scene thinks eubank won. theres a mini 'it was biased commentary influencing ppl, wah!!' army starting there. thomasstearns over there seems to maybe think eubank won too and is blaming commentary.

I watched the fight with family members and I was struggling to give it my full attention all of the time.

Bear that in mind when I say I was quite shocked when the compubox stats showed Groves throwing and landing the majority of punches. I had the fight very close but I thought Eubank had done enough to win it.

I wouldn't argue the result but I would be happy if they postpone it until Groves is fit or if Eubank is allowed to progress. Either is fine but definitely not a stand-in who has not participated in the tourney so far.

I agree. I felt that it was a close thing at the time but suspect a lot of the initial reaction was influenced by which commentary you were subjected to. As far as Richie Woodhall was concerned, Groves had seemingly won the fight by the end of the second round!

Sometimes I really wish there was a way to keep the crowd noise but shut out the commentators.

[jamamb]

btw mitchell says he rewatched the fight and had it for groves

[bruthead]

Can see how you can score 4, 5, 7, 9, and 12 for Eubank.

Round 1 basically nothing happened as well.

[boxing_rocks]

Adelaide Byrd had him winning 118-110.

[ajwesty13]

Wow this is a topic? Even CJ Ross might have even got this one right

[fizzjambo]

Eubank got exposed on Saturday night, in no way was it a close fight.
Just as you should not score knockdowns that the ref has not awarded, neither should you score for ‘coming forward’ when it involves the wild lunging and missing that Eubank showed round after round.
I know scoring is subjective but at best Eubank won 2/3 rounds, it was not a close fight.
The issue for him is that in reality he has stepped up twice to proper world level and lost - and the same failings have been exposed each time with no noticeable improvement. His best wins are in reality at fringe European level. The hype surrounding him far exceeds the ability he possesses

[Sindbad]

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.

Look, mr jamesmcdonnell, you have a lot of people here thinking the same way like you, so you can really feel like real boxing expert (looking at most people opinions), so why are you so nervous, and you are using this type of language? I`m not afraid to present my point of view, even if I am in minority, and believe me that opinions of people like you, pathetic boor (or your b.tch - Jackson 328) don`t engage me too much. So, this is my last post in this topic - regards to all here (don`t matter what they think about this fight, and scoring) who can discuss without "morons" or "idiots" adjectives

PS. I could give it 115:113 for Groves too (round 3 or 11) but I`m not changing previos scoring :-)

[jamamb]

ah, yes, more of 'it was dem dang commentators!'

[Boxerbeetle]

Eubank Sr said Groves deserved the decision.

[jamamb]

Eubank Sr said Groves deserved the decision.

yep, said groves had jr figured out.

but the commentary!!!

[Deleted_Scenes]

Eubank Sr said Groves deserved the decision.

yep, said groves had jr figured out.

but the commentary!!!

Sr must have been sat too close to Richie Woodhall...

[candyslim]

candyslim over in the current scene thinks eubank won. theres a mini 'it was biased commentary influencing ppl, wah!!' army starting there. thomasstearns over there seems to maybe think eubank won too and is blaming commentary.

I watched the fight with family members and I was struggling to give it my full attention all of the time.

Bear that in mind when I say I was quite shocked when the compubox stats showed Groves throwing and landing the majority of punches. I had the fight very close but I thought Eubank had done enough to win it.

I wouldn't argue the result but I would be happy if they postpone it until Groves is fit or if Eubank is allowed to progress. Either is fine but definitely not a stand-in who has not participated in the tourney so far.

I agree. I felt that it was a close thing at the time but suspect a lot of the initial reaction was influenced by which commentary you were subjected to. As far as Richie Woodhall was concerned, Groves had seemingly won the fight by the end of the second round!

Sometimes I really wish there was a way to keep the crowd noise but shut out the commentators.

Like I said Jamamb, it can be difficult when you're trying to watch a fight while still trying to be an amenable host among guests who have little or no interest in boxing. As you say I need to watch it again and I will.

Having said that I think Thomas has a point about how commentators can influence the viewer's opinion of how a fight is going. I'm not specifically talking about this fight as I couldn't hear the commentary, but we are all human and it would be foolish to think we are always immune.

I'm prepared to accept my impression that Eubank won could be wide of the mark, but I really don't believe it was a huge margin in it. Some are talking like it was like watching Saunders v Lemieux and it was nothing like as one-sided as that. I think the Eubanks are paying the price for their big-talk. If you promise great things and fail to deliver then this is going to attract a lot of scorn from the fans and | believe this is borne out by the comments on this forum.

[jamamb]

why exactly did eubank deserve it slim? educate us.

did the commentators influence eubank sr, ringside writers, fans in the stands, and the judges too?

[MarkMcBurney]

candyslim over in the current scene thinks eubank won. theres a mini 'it was biased commentary influencing ppl, wah!!' army starting there. thomasstearns over there seems to maybe think eubank won too and is blaming commentary.

I watched the fight with family members and I was struggling to give it my full attention all of the time.

Bear that in mind when I say I was quite shocked when the compubox stats showed Groves throwing and landing the majority of punches. I had the fight very close but I thought Eubank had done enough to win it.

I wouldn't argue the result but I would be happy if they postpone it until Groves is fit or if Eubank is allowed to progress. Either is fine but definitely not a stand-in who has not participated in the tourney so far.

I agree. I felt that it was a close thing at the time but suspect a lot of the initial reaction was influenced by which commentary you were subjected to. As far as Richie Woodhall was concerned, Groves had seemingly won the fight by the end of the second round!

Sometimes I really wish there was a way to keep the crowd noise but shut out the commentators.

Like I said Jamamb, it can be difficult when you're trying to watch a fight while still trying to be an amenable host among guests who have little or no interest in boxing. As you say I need to watch it again and I will.

Having said that I think Thomas has a point about how commentators can influence the viewer's opinion of how a fight is going. I'm not specifically talking about this fight as I couldn't hear the commentary, but we are all human and it would be foolish to think we are always immune.

I'm prepared to accept my impression that Eubank won could be wide of the mark, but I really don't believe it was a huge margin in it. Some are talking like it was like watching Saunders v Lemieux and it was nothing like as one-sided as that. I think the Eubanks are paying the price for their big-talk. If you promise great things and fail to deliver then this is going to attract a lot of scorn from the fans and | believe this is borne out by the comments on this forum.

See, I watched it largely without commentary as I can't stand Ronald MacIntosh; and I thought it was exactly like Saunders v Lemieux. Genuinely gave Junior only the 12th round; thought he had no idea and was just wildly lunging all night.

[jamamb]

i watched it on mute too and had it 10-2 groves

ya, and even sr had his son losing because of commentary too, right