BoxRec

sammy95 wrote:Haye was injured (but would have gone on to lose anyway in my opinion).

No chance. Haye was probably 4-1 up going into the 6th.
Bellew couldn't stop him even when the achilles went and there were a couple of the late rounds where Haye kept it competitive despite the injury.

Haye would have won that by a fairly comfortable decision or stoppage if it continued. Even if he gassed a bit, I struggle to see Bellew picking up more than 4 rounds

asdfjkl wrote: If his own team wouldn't have given up, Daffy would have probably made it till the end and receive the win anyway, like I predicted?
I basically owned pretty much everybody out there with my predictions, which isn't odd, I watch the heavyweights quite carefully.

Ah I see. So by predicting both the wrong winner and the wrong method of victory you owned everybody.

Thanks for clearing that up.

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

asdfjkl wrote: If his own team wouldn't have given up, Daffy would have probably made it till the end and receive the win anyway, like I predicted?
I basically owned pretty much everybody out there with my predictions, which isn't odd, I watch the heavyweights quite carefully.

Ah I see. So by predicting both the wrong winner and the wrong method of victory you owned everybody.

Thanks for clearing that up.

All three scorecards had it 96-93 in favour of Bellew, which was about right. Are you suggesting that a hobbling Haye would have found a way to have won the last round 10-4 (which would be unique in boxing history) as the 11th was looking like a 10-8 for Bellew.

You really are a moron.

Loynesy wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

asdfjkl wrote: If his own team wouldn't have given up, Daffy would have probably made it till the end and receive the win anyway, like I predicted?
I basically owned pretty much everybody out there with my predictions, which isn't odd, I watch the heavyweights quite carefully.

Ah I see. So by predicting both the wrong winner and the wrong method of victory you owned everybody.

Thanks for clearing that up.

All three scorecards had it 96-93 in favour of Bellew, which was about right. Are you suggesting that a hobbling Haye would have found a way to have won the last round 10-4 (which would be unique in boxing history) as the 11th was looking like a 10-8 for Bellew.

You really are a moron.

Yea, well I gladly like to have seen that, I bet if Kovalev KOed Ward the judges he would magically be ahead on all scorecards as well, but he didn't KO him, just knock him down, so he lost. With Bellew would probably have happened the same thing against Daffy, with Tyson Fury would probably have happened the same thing against Steve Cunningham, with Szpilka and Washington would have probably happened the same thing against Wilder, with Derreck Rossy the same thing happened against Stiverne and so on and on and on.
That's boxing.

asdfjkl wrote:

Loynesy wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:
Ah I see. So by predicting both the wrong winner and the wrong method of victory you owned everybody.

Thanks for clearing that up.

All three scorecards had it 96-93 in favour of Bellew, which was about right. Are you suggesting that a hobbling Haye would have found a way to have won the last round 10-4 (which would be unique in boxing history) as the 11th was looking like a 10-8 for Bellew.

You really are a moron.

Yea, well I gladly like to have seen that, I bet if Kovalev KOed Ward the judges he would magically be ahead on all scorecards as well, but he didn't KO him, just knock him down, so he lost. With Bellew would probably have happened the same thing against Daffy, with Tyson Fury would probably have happened the same thing against Steve Cunningham, with Szpilka and Washington would have probably happened the same thing against Wilder, with Derreck Rossy the same thing happened against Stiverne and so on and on and on.
That's boxing.

I tend not to debate with idiots, but as I am at a loose end, why not.

Are you actually suggesting that judges' scorecards can get retrospectively altered? I've seen plenty of decisions that I didn't agree with, and some that were probably corrupt, but I've never heard of a conspiracy to re-write after the result - they don't write their "10-9" in pencil with a massive eraser in their pocket.

Loynesy wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:

Loynesy wrote:
All three scorecards had it 96-93 in favour of Bellew, which was about right. Are you suggesting that a hobbling Haye would have found a way to have won the last round 10-4 (which would be unique in boxing history) as the 11th was looking like a 10-8 for Bellew.

You really are a moron.

Yea, well I gladly like to have seen that, I bet if Kovalev KOed Ward the judges he would magically be ahead on all scorecards as well, but he didn't KO him, just knock him down, so he lost. With Bellew would probably have happened the same thing against Daffy, with Tyson Fury would probably have happened the same thing against Steve Cunningham, with Szpilka and Washington would have probably happened the same thing against Wilder, with Derreck Rossy the same thing happened against Stiverne and so on and on and on.
That's boxing.

I tend not to debate with idiots, but as I am at a loose end, why not.

Are you actually suggesting that judges' scorecards can get retrospectively altered? I've seen plenty of decisions that I didn't agree with, and some that were probably corrupt, but I've never heard of a conspiracy to re-write after the result - they don't write their "10-9" in pencil with a massive eraser in their pocket.

Then just don't write at all and then write something down at the end of the fight :S

Chisora vs Pulev is another example:
Christophe Hembert said 110-118, Beat Hausammann said 115-113
How is that possible? Simply, write something random after the fight?
Especially if things aren't on TV or anything like that, it's absolutely no problem, nobody will figure out what happened.

It's a bit like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=817DWzfFlLU

The red boxer and his trainers all got banned for life

You really are stupid.

You might be a nice guy, so I will just block you rather than being overtly rude, but you have the debating skills of a banana.