BoxRec

99-91, 100-90, 100-90 = farkin joke

AntonS wrote:99-91, 100-90, 100-90 = farkin joke

What happened? Was it not as one sided as the scores indicate?

He was penalized 1pt for holding, but even so IMO he deserved better than that. Was constantly on the attack & had Mitchell backpedaling fair bit of time.
It was hardly a walk in the park.

AntonS wrote:He was penalized 1pt for holding, but even so IMO he deserved better than that. Was constantly on the attack & had Mitchell backpedaling fair bit of time.
It was hardly a walk in the park.

Who were the Judges?

judge: Paul Le 100-90 | judge: Lynne Kennedy 100-90 | judge: Andrew Campbell 99-91

Maybe, main events should go on midway, while judges care still awake & not way past 10.30pm

Why was an OPBF title fight only over 10 rounds?

Boxing Prospect wrote:Why was an OPBF title fight only over 10 rounds?

10 or 12 is allowed these days, because most other regional titles are contested over 10

I know it's allowed, just feels wrong, it's supposed to be a stepping stone to a world title fight, not a freaking third tier belt

Boxing Prospect wrote:I know it's allowed, just feels wrong, it's supposed to be a stepping stone to a world title fight, not a freaking third tier belt

OPBF is no longer what it was once upon a time - road to possible WBC world title...as was Commonwealth title, which unfortunately has also fallen into less important bracket.

AntonS wrote:judge: Paul Le 100-90 | judge: Lynne Kennedy 100-90 | judge: Andrew Campbell 99-91

Maybe, main events should go on midway, while judges care still awake & not way past 10.30pm

Least they were all close. I seen a split draw in Toowoomba and one judge had it 40-36 and one had it 40-36 the other way. Probably ended up the right decision but 2 judges shouldn't be that far out.

fox wrote:

AntonS wrote:judge: Paul Le 100-90 | judge: Lynne Kennedy 100-90 | judge: Andrew Campbell 99-91

Maybe, main events should go on midway, while judges care still awake & not way past 10.30pm

Least they were all close. I seen a split draw in Toowoomba and one judge had it 40-36 and one had it 40-36 the other way. Probably ended up the right decision but 2 judges shouldn't be that far out.

Possibly yet another case, where judges didn't focus on what they considerd underdog. If they did, I'm sure their score would be somewhat different

" one judge had it 40-36 and one had it 40-36 the other way "
I recall same happening in Adelaide. One judge was totally different to other 2. After 2 rounds, I (recorder on the night) promptly approached him I asked him to name boxers........He had them mixed up - both were making their debut & was unfamiliar with them.

Its not as if this bias judging just begun