BoxRec

rd350lc wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 16:09

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 .

Tugger28 wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 17:50 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.

Coco wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 19:09 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.

Coco wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 19:09 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.

rd350lc wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 12:49

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 ?

candyslim wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 14:48 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.

Thomastearns wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 15:54
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.

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.

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑19 Feb 2018, 04:06 Eubank Sr said Groves deserved the decision.

jamamb wrote: ↑19 Feb 2018, 04:07

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑19 Feb 2018, 04:06 Eubank Sr said Groves deserved the decision.

yep, said groves had jr figured out.

but the commentary!!!

jamamb wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 21:26 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.

candyslim wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 14:48 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.

Thomastearns wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 15:54
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.

candyslim wrote: ↑19 Feb 2018, 04:28

jamamb wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 21:26 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.

candyslim wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 14:48 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.

Thomastearns wrote: ↑18 Feb 2018, 15:54
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.