Autobarn wrote:so, robbery aside, was it a really good battle?
Was a good fight in terms of it being give and take, great atmosphere.
Rather low quality for supposed 'world' level.
on boxrec news someone called it a stunner, or a war, or something like that?
pretty good saturday night thriller, worth a look kind of fight?
one thing that pisses me off with closely scored fights, is that the robbery debate always rages on when ppl should be pleased with good, competitive action.
I think Gavin Rees would give McCloskey nightmares too and he's a lightweight.
Rees could barely get through 12 rounds with immobile, straight forward, non punching Andy Murray.
Fair enough if you dont rate McCloskey but saying Theophane is a 50/50 and Rees would give him nightmare is bordering on laughable in my opinion.
McCloskey would comfortably beat Theophane and Rees, I think. He will always struggle against a tall boxer with a good jab because he will struggle with the range.
I think Gavin Rees would give McCloskey nightmares too and he's a lightweight.
Rees could barely get through 12 rounds with immobile, straight forward, non punching Andy Murray.
Fair enough if you dont rate McCloskey but saying Theophane is a 50/50 and Rees would give him nightmare is bordering on laughable in my opinion.
McCloskey would comfortably beat Theophane and Rees, I think. He will always struggle against a tall boxer with a good jab because he will struggle with the range.
One thing is for sure he will never have enough to beat khan
GLOBALBOX wrote:I had Prescott by 1 pt but the first was not a kd and therefore in reality I would have scored the fight a draw
It doesn't work like this, mate. If a KD is given, score it!
A judge is not compelled to score a knockdown round 10-8, even if the knockdown was clear. If it was competitive enough, it could still be 10-9. The idea is the knockdown takes a point away, it doesn't mean it must be a two-point round. Thus if it would otherwise have been a very even round, the knockdown would make it 10-9.
slapbangwhallop wrote:
Rees could barely get through 12 rounds with immobile, straight forward, non punching Andy Murray.
Fair enough if you dont rate McCloskey but saying Theophane is a 50/50 and Rees would give him nightmare is bordering on laughable in my opinion.
McCloskey would comfortably beat Theophane and Rees, I think. He will always struggle against a tall boxer with a good jab because he will struggle with the range.
One thing is for sure he will never have enough to beat khan
GLOBALBOX wrote:I had Prescott by 1 pt but the first was not a kd and therefore in reality I would have scored the fight a draw
It doesn't work like this, mate. If a KD is given, score it!
A judge is not compelled to score a knockdown round 10-8, even if the knockdown was clear. If it was competitive enough, it could still be 10-9. The idea is the knockdown takes a point away, it doesn't mean it must be a two-point round. Thus if it would otherwise have been a very even round, the knockdown would make it 10-9.
Exactly. A judge can not ignore a kd called by a ref even if he doesn't agree with it is my point. The Board confirmed this.
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
It doesn't work like this, mate. If a KD is given, score it!
A judge is not compelled to score a knockdown round 10-8, even if the knockdown was clear. If it was competitive enough, it could still be 10-9. The idea is the knockdown takes a point away, it doesn't mean it must be a two-point round. Thus if it would otherwise have been a very even round, the knockdown would make it 10-9.
Exactly. A judge can not ignore a kd called by a ref even if he doesn't agree with it is my point. The Board confirmed this.
oliverfennell wrote:
A judge is not compelled to score a knockdown round 10-8, even if the knockdown was clear. If it was competitive enough, it could still be 10-9. The idea is the knockdown takes a point away, it doesn't mean it must be a two-point round. Thus if it would otherwise have been a very even round, the knockdown would make it 10-9.
Exactly. A judge can not ignore a kd called by a ref even if he doesn't agree with it is my point. The Board confirmed this.
Has this been clarified yet?
Yes, I must have posted it on the other thread.
I put the scenario to the Board of a judge being able to ignore a knock down called by the referee if he (the judge) didn't like it.
The Board's statement: "The referee is in charge of the contest and if the referee calls a knock down then it is a knock down."
Refs rarely go on the record about anything, but Howard Foster said I could quote him on this: "If a referee calls a knockdown then a judge has to call it. It doesn't mean it's a 10-8 round but you have to call it."
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
Exactly. A judge can not ignore a kd called by a ref even if he doesn't agree with it is my point. The Board confirmed this.
Has this been clarified yet?
Yes, I must have posted it on the other thread.
I put the scenario to the Board of a judge being able to ignore a knock down called by the referee if he (the judge) didn't like it.
The Board's statement: "The referee is in charge of the contest and if the referee calls a knock down then it is a knock down."
Refs rarely go on the record about anything, but Howard Foster said I could quote him on this: "If a referee calls a knockdown then a judge has to call it. It doesn't mean it's a 10-8 round but you have to call it."
Exactly you have to call it but if it was at the beginning of the round and the fighter who went down thrashes the other for the rest of the round it could be a 10-9 or 10-10
