BoxRec

again a highway robbery in such a great fight, such a bad ending.

and again kovalev boxing a tomato can and no serious talks about him against stevenson. now all of the sudden talks about ward, like ward would love to leave his beloved sm division

I have no problem with the decision last night. Pascal had the most effective blows and the better defense. Just because you throw a lot of punches, doesn't mean that you automatically win.

Harold Letterman should just retire. Last night he said that no matter what happens, he give the round to the guy coming forward and that's CLEARLY not the way they've been scoring these fights lately. Manny got zero credit for pushing the action vs Floyd. There were others recently but i'm too happy about this GGG/Lemieux fight to try to remember.

Chepppaaa wrote:again a highway robbery in such a great fight, such a bad ending.

and again kovalev boxing a tomato can and no serious talks about him against stevenson. now all of the sudden talks about ward, like ward would love to leave his beloved sm division

Not even close to a robbery. Watch it again, without eyes wide shut.

It was a robbery. Pascal spent most of the fight with his head below his waist sniffing Gonzalez's balls. Yes, he threw a few good punches, but he was outlanded while his punches were no better.

Ring generalship and effective aggressiveness also go to Gonzalez. Pascal didn't even deserve a draw.

ikorolev wrote:It was a robbery. Pascal spent most of the fight with his head below his waist sniffing Gonzalez's balls. Yes, he threw a few good punches, but he was outlanded while his punches were no better.

Ring generalship and effective aggressiveness also go to Gonzalez. Pascal didn't even deserve a draw.

Pascal did what he had to do. It was a draw in my opinion. More than 96-94 either way is folly. If pushed to choose, I would have voted for Pascal 96-94 based on his finish but it was a perfect scenario for a draw.

Gonzalez number 1 attribute is his jab. His punches are far too clubbing and he is too slow.

ikorolev wrote:It was a robbery. Pascal spent most of the fight with his head below his waist sniffing Gonzalez's balls. Yes, he threw a few good punches, but he was outlanded while his punches were no better.

Ring generalship and effective aggressiveness also go to Gonzalez. Pascal didn't even deserve a draw.

Well described! I've seen worse robberies, but Pascal's head was down a lot when he wasn't punching. That's as bad as excessive holding or putting your torso on the other side of the ropes.

ikorolev wrote:It was a robbery. Pascal spent most of the fight with his head below his waist sniffing Gonzalez's balls. Yes, he threw a few good punches, but he was outlanded while his punches were no better.

Ring generalship and effective aggressiveness also go to Gonzalez. Pascal didn't even deserve a draw.

hbo had it like 7 rounds to 3 rounds for gonzales. ledermanns scoring is good.

gonzales was bigger, stronger, hurt pascal more, than pascal hurt gonzales. gonzales made the fight, he was the boss. pascal was good too and gave everything, but down the line gonzales was the thougher boxer, imposing his will.

also, i do not believe punch stats. gonzales landed more and was the aggressor, he won it. highway robbery.

Effective aggression is the one category Gonzalez failed at. He was aggressive but landed at a terrible %.

I thought Gonzalez won 96-94.

Some of the rounds were close. I'll watch it again, this time in HD.

Odd. I decided to do a little research on this three criteria that Harold Letterman states is assumed to how a Boxing Fight is scored. I can't seem to find any rules based on the big three other than a 10-9 must system. There is no mention anywhere in a rule book about the big three scoring criteria. Of course I could be wrong and didn't research hard enough.

In hindsight I never believed in the three criteria B.S. I think each and every fight is judged on it's own merit.By three separate judges.

For one thing Lederman is a score keeper not a Boxing Judge. Could be one reason why there are so many so called robberies on HBO

diddy wrote:Effective aggression is the one category Gonzalez failed at. He was aggressive but landed at a terrible %.

nonsense. he was the aggressor and landed way more. sometimes pascal landed some clear punches, but overall it was gon pushing the action, pascal running or with his head to gons balls.

MachoTime wrote:Odd. I decided to do a little research on this three criteria that Harold Letterman states is assumed to how a Boxing Fight is scored. I can't seem to find any rules based on the big three other than a 10-9 must system. There is no mention anywhere in a rule book about the big three scoring criteria. Of course I could be wrong and didn't research hard enough.

In hindsight I never believed in the three criteria B.S. I think each and every fight is judged on it's own merit.By three separate judges.

For one thing Lederman is a score keeper not a Boxing Judge. Could be one reason why there are so many so called robberies on HBO

you dont get it newbie

Chepppaaa wrote:

MachoTime wrote:Odd. I decided to do a little research on this three criteria that Harold Letterman states is assumed to how a Boxing Fight is scored. I can't seem to find any rules based on the big three other than a 10-9 must system. There is no mention anywhere in a rule book about the big three scoring criteria. Of course I could be wrong and didn't research hard enough.

In hindsight I never believed in the three criteria B.S. I think each and every fight is judged on it's own merit.By three separate judges.

For one thing Lederman is a score keeper not a Boxing Judge. Could be one reason why there are so many so called robberies on HBO

you dont get it newbie

A decision going against your opinion does not (necessarily) constitute a "robbery."

Lederman has his head up his ass. He even explained clearly exactly how he chooses to place it there.

Chepppaaa wrote:

MachoTime wrote:Odd. I decided to do a little research on this three criteria that Harold Letterman states is assumed to how a Boxing Fight is scored. I can't seem to find any rules based on the big three other than a 10-9 must system. There is no mention anywhere in a rule book about the big three scoring criteria. Of course I could be wrong and didn't research hard enough.

In hindsight I never believed in the three criteria B.S. I think each and every fight is judged on it's own merit.By three separate judges.

For one thing Lederman is a score keeper not a Boxing Judge. Could be one reason why there are so many so called robberies on HBO

you dont get it newbie

Don't get what? You being brainwashed by Lederman's three scoring criteria. I get that part..Show us where it states these three criteria in a rule book.

Pascal is one of those guys who get the benefit for some reason.
Some people just score for him.

I scored it a draw. No robbery, although I do feel like if anyone won it was Gonzalez because there were two close rounds I could have given to him.

Gonzalez won, clearly.

Real issue in boxing right now with judges penalising fighters for coming forward, it's insane.

Ricky_ wrote:Gonzalez won, clearly.

Real issue in boxing right now with judges penalising fighters for coming forward, it's insane.

i think it has more to do with nations and politics. if gonzales would have been from us or canada, than he probably would have won close to every round on judges scorecard, but an unknown not english talking cuban, he dont get the win, regardless of how much superior he looked to pascal, which he did. he trumbled him, he made him duck and run all the way to the end.

BAD INTENTIONS wrote:Pascal is one of those guys who get the benefit for some reason.
Some people just score for him.

Because he is a cash cow.