BoxRec

Because if you did, you are a grotesquely stupid fucktard who needs punched in the face...hard... repeatedly

Punch away

Only if you are backward

GGG won that fight

I had it that score but for ggg

Why isnt there a rule in place in this professional sport that if 1 judge has scored a fight so way beyond belief that the judge can be over ruled by another official in a stewards enquiry type sitting? If one judge has been paid off by someone to score a fight in a certain way this could be overruled in a enquiry.

We know corruption exsists but there does not seem to anything in place to combat it or at least overrule a corrupt decision.

Unfortunetly the commissions with the power to do something often have very cozy relationships with these judges.

F***ING BULLSHIT

That moronic judge should never work again

Why don't they add up the rounds in the event of a draw? In which case Canelo would have won.

It's unbelievable, boxing's done it again. It just goes round in circles - bad judging - outcry- bad judging etc

King Tubby wrote:Why don't they add up the rounds in the event of a draw? In which case Canelo would have won.

Say what? How does that work? That would not fix anything.

Lets take a fictional fight with an exaggerated situation to prove the flaw.

We will pretend that in seven rounds of a fight, one guy (fighter 1) throws 100 punches and lands 50. Other fighter (fighter 2) throws zero. In the other 5 rounds it is exactly reversed. That is a clear 7-5 in rounds win to one of the guys (fighter 1) right?

Ok, now lets say we have a corrupt judge who gives every single round to Fighter 2 to make it 12-0

We now have two judges doing it right and giving 7 each to fighter 1 so he has 14 in total and the fighter 2 has 10 rounds. But corrupt judge now swings it around with her 12 for totals of 14 still for fighter 1, and 22 for fighter 2.

(that became long winded but hope it makes sense on the point)

I'm not talking about 'fixing', toby. I assume the governing bodies are not bent and have faith in the ability of their judges. This fight would have been 345/ 339 Canelo. Just wondering how to avoid draws.

King Tubby wrote:I'm not talking about 'fixing', toby. I assume the governing bodies are not bent and have faith in the ability of their judges. This fight would have been 345/ 339 Canelo. Just wondering how to avoid draws.

Some fights should be a draw. We do not need to avoid draws but we need to avoid incorrect decisions.

10-2 canelo!?





Big George Foreman tweeted he only cares for knockouts, and that going the distance amounts to a beauty contest. It's times like these i agree with that kind of thinking. A stoppage win is as pure a victory you'll find in any sport. A points result is often as subjective as it gets.

Ricky_ wrote:10-2 canelo!?





Big George Foreman tweeted he only cares for knockouts, and that going the distance amounts to a beauty contest. It's times like these i agree with that kind of thinking. A stoppage win is as pure a victory you'll find in any sport. A points result is often as subjective as it gets.

Results like last night's make me yearn for the days when fights continued until one guy couldn't fight anymore.

Would have made Mayweather's career a lot more interesting too

Nightmare Roy wrote:I had it that score but for ggg

Me too roy

Boxerbeetle wrote:

Ricky_ wrote:10-2 canelo!?





Big George Foreman tweeted he only cares for knockouts, and that going the distance amounts to a beauty contest. It's times like these i agree with that kind of thinking. A stoppage win is as pure a victory you'll find in any sport. A points result is often as subjective as it gets.

Results like last night's make me yearn for the days when fights continued until one guy couldn't fight anymore.

Would have made Mayweather's career a lot more interesting too

Mayweather would still be undefeated,as much as i dont like mayweather,he is the matrix of boxing

Anyone who had canelo winning this fight doesnt know sh!t about boxing,just sayin

tobyh5 wrote:

King Tubby wrote:I'm not talking about 'fixing', toby. I assume the governing bodies are not bent and have faith in the ability of their judges. This fight would have been 345/ 339 Canelo. Just wondering how to avoid draws.

Some fights should be a draw. We do not need to avoid draws but we need to avoid incorrect decisions.

Hell, some rounds are draws. I do think (an opinion I have broached repeatedly, to no avail) that scoring the odd drawn round when you honestly think there is nothing to separate two fighters is fine; but score too many (over a certain monitored percentage, say) & you lose your judge's card.

The stupid, overly-literal "THERE MUST BE A WINNER TO EVERY ROUND" mentality leads to fuckin' weird scorecards, which don't reflect the reality of the fight; I think judges sometimes pick a "random" winner in too-close-to-call rounds as they are terrified to score one a draw, & if one's feelings are leaning a particular way ("Oh he's so handsome/those flashy combos [which might not have landed]/ooh he moved his hands in the last ten seconds/how beautifully spangly his shorts are/what a nice, fat brown envelope the promoter has just dropped in my lap on his way to the toilets" etc etc) & if they are truly concentrating on "judging each round as if it were a totally distinct & discrete fight", then slipping into that kind of bias when you genuinely have no fuckin' idea which way to score a round becomes understandable.

However, Byrd's card last night wasn't really an example of that, 'cos she had that card filled out beforehand.

Funnily enough, the picture above is from a video of Ms. 118-110 talking about how she doesnt think 10-10 rounds should be scored

No....but I did have it 114-114.

Anyone watch the Benevidez v Santana fight last year On the Crawford Postol card ??

Byrd scored it 100-90 Benevidez. Probably the worst scorecard I have ever seen. Santana won that though it was close.

There were three rounds where Benevidez didn't even throw punches.

i had it 116-112 Golovkin, I thought he finished stronger down the stretch and Alvarez looked a bit bullied especially second half of the fight, both guys showed good chins but Golovkin's footwork again put Canelo under pressure constantly, the 118-110 score for Alvarez was a shocker IMO, a mate of mine had the same score for Golovkin

Wasn't a classic fight for the ages but it was still a good fight, just a shame Golovkin never got it

handsofstone wrote:i had it 116-112 Golovkin, I thought he finished stronger down the stretch and Alvarez looked a bit bullied especially second half of the fight, both guys showed good chins but Golovkin's footwork again put Canelo under pressure constantly, the 118-110 score for Alvarez was a shocker IMO, a mate of mine had the same score for Golovkin

Wasn't a classic fight for the ages but it was still a good fight, just a shame Golovkin never got it

I had 118-110.
But I want to watch it back because it never felt like a 118-110 fight.
I suspect a second viewing minus the booze and tiredness might lead me to a card closer to yours.
But I really really struggle to see how one judge even came to the conclusion that fight was tied

handsofstone wrote:but Golovkin's footwork again put Canelo under pressure constantly

A very wise poster on here suggested to you that may be the case

Counter-puncher wrote:

handsofstone wrote:but Golovkin's footwork again put Canelo under pressure constantly

A very wise poster on here suggested to you that may be the case

Yeah you did mate, I fancied Alvarez to win this on points but he was clearly a beaten man and Golovkin walked him down like he did to the vast majority of his opponents, Canelo looked nothing special, shades of Lewis/Holyfield 1