Page 1 of 1

GLENCOFFEE JOHNSON: DID HE WIN OR NOT? VERDICT...

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 07:22
by overhand_right
Watch this fight closely with the live excitement removed-- Johnson takes soo many of Dawsons shots on his arms & gloves. He rocks Dawson badly 3 times.

Dawson must of out-thrown Johnson by staggering numbers, but didn't land all that much and Johnson was doing the damage and landing with his shots.

I scored this 115-113

And i never, EVER score frickin even rds by the way! What a frickin cop out.

Anyone else think the aged baldhead Jamaican fella got mugged?

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 07:53
by Autobarn
I don't know. Johnson has been in so many close ones. And he should've got more in his favour out of his 14 blemishes (12 losses, 2 draws). I will watch this again soon as it's an excellent fight. I just thought Johnson needed to put his man away to make sure and he couldn't quite do it.

I think Glen can say he's definitely as good as whoever wins between Dawson and Tarver.

Setanta boys had it even, 1 point to Glen and 1 point to Dawson so it was one of those ones, IMO, that depends on what you like. Steve Kim had it Johnson by 8-4 or 7-5 while Doug Fischer at Maxboxing had it 6-5-1 Dawson.

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 07:59
by jamesmcdonnell
No. Very close fight, but I had it for Dawson. Crucially, two of the rounds where Johnson had Dawson in big trouble, I still scored for Dawson, as Johnson lost the other two minutes of the round.

Just because you hurt someone, doesn't mean you automatically win that round.

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 09:18
by Autobarn
I gave Johnson the rds where he hurt Dawson. If only he'd got a couple of knockdowns, he'd have the extra PTS AND hurt Dawson's momentum, slowing Dawson down enough for more damage.

If Johnson was the touted champ with his promoting staging the event, Glen would have won in all likeliness.

The great thing is that this doesn't seem to halt Johnson! He just comes back by spanking a decent fringe contender and then giving a world champion enough hell to have many ppl crying robbery. The guy is a marvel, considering that he's almost 40 and is always in aggressive fights.

Johnson would've given Calzaghe the test that Lacy didn't.

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 09:26
by Chambers2
It was a close fight and couldn't be argued to be too much of a robbery either way, I had it to Glen, but as is the norm the house fighter (or the fighter they're trying to build) got the decision.

I think I'd pick Tarver to beat Dawson

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 09:57
by Floyd
jamesmcdonnell wrote:No. Very close fight, but I had it for Dawson. Crucially, two of the rounds where Johnson had Dawson in big trouble, I still scored for Dawson, as Johnson lost the other two minutes of the round.

Just because you hurt someone, doesn't mean you automatically win that round.
But James isn't scoring also alot of who did the most damage? Johnson did way more damage in his 1 minute burst in those rounds then Dawson did in 2.

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 10:02
by overhand_right
I agree with you Floyd, you score for the guy who does the serious damage, not the guy who swatted at the other with jabs for most the round.

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 10:09
by Floyd
Also I scored it the same as you overhand 115-113. While Dawson's combination punching was flashy. I thought Glen took alot of them on his arms and gloves.

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 10:20
by The_Don1
jamesmcdonnell wrote:Crucially, two of the rounds where Johnson had Dawson in big trouble, I still scored for Dawson, as Johnson lost the other two minutes of the round.
That sounds like the same theory Richie Woodhall used to give Gavin Rees rounds over Kotelnik, in which case Rees would have been level or a round up going into the 12th, when everyone else though he was down 8-10 rounds by that point.

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 10:22
by Max Molyneux
Only bad thing was the wide scorecards really.

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 12:16
by overhand_right
Floyd wrote:Also I scored it the same as you overhand 115-113. While Dawson's combination punching was flashy. I thought Glen took alot of them on his arms and gloves.
When i watched it live, i thought Johnson was taking punces just to land some. When i watched it again yes, i was amazed how much Johnson just caught on his arms & gloves.

Real good old fashioned clever pro is Johnson.

If he slowed down his work rate to suit his age like Hopkins did, he might linger round for another decade!

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 12:21
by stujones
I thought Dawson won by two rounds.

I didn't think the decision was terrible at all... a little wide, but 7-5 can easily be 8-4.

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 12:29
by Autobarn
overhand_right wrote:
Floyd wrote:Also I scored it the same as you overhand 115-113. While Dawson's combination punching was flashy. I thought Glen took alot of them on his arms and gloves.
When i watched it live, i thought Johnson was taking punces just to land some. When i watched it again yes, i was amazed how much Johnson just caught on his arms & gloves.

Real good old fashioned clever pro is Johnson.

If he slowed down his work rate to suit his age like Hopkins did, he might linger round for another decade!
Every bit the aged marvel that Hopkins is. Johnson is in an interesting position. I think he's a bit too crafty for younger guys, and I think he can outlast the oldies like Tarver if they ever fight again.

Johnson vs Adrian Diaconu for the WBC mandatory position would effing rock.

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 12:45
by overhand_right
I think Johnson would take Tarver to the cleaners at this point.

Think the pace he sets for himself must be a bit draining though.

Johnson needs to fight for the newly vacant WBA strap Danny Green has left behind. Hugo Garay? Roy Jones??

(like Jones ever wants to share a ring with Johnson again...)

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 13:17
by Spud
This is a good thread - and I actually think whilst I think Johnson won easy enough.

Time and time again I have been at a close fight and come back to read the forums and those watching on the box see it completely different.

I think Johnson by 2 points.

Really do not understand the judges decision.

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 13:29
by Autobarn
I just re-watched. Johnson by 1 or 2. Not enough authority in Dawson. Great performance by GJ. Perhaps should've been his crowning performance. Judges have only 1 chance to score it. Though it seemed VERY lop sided 8-4 x3.

He still has options. Appeal against decision and hope WBC mandate rematch. Fight Diaconu in what could be a WBC elim.

Johnson must be highly rated by the IBF too. All he's had to do the last 2 yrs is beat a Richard Hall or Montell Griffin in an elim to get a title shot. (ok, plus a bit of the old waiting around...)

Or how about challenging the Hopkins-Calzaghe winner? Provided Joe wins, a Joe win over Johnson would make him look extra good...Johnson being as good as Dawson and Tarver who are set to unify their belts. Don't think Hopkins-GJ 2 ever happens however - this could've happened if Johnson was a light heavy champ when Hopkins was moving up from middle...extra confidence of beating someone you already beat (in fact, Hopkins was eyeing up Glengoffe until GJ lost to tarver in their rematch).

Posted: 17 Apr 2008, 13:40
by Floyd
overhand_right wrote:I think Johnson would take Tarver to the cleaners at this point.

Think the pace he sets for himself must be a bit draining though.

Johnson needs to fight for the newly vacant WBA strap Danny Green has left behind. Hugo Garay? Roy Jones??

(like Jones ever wants to share a ring with Johnson again...)
If Johnson fought Tarver on that night he defintely would have taken him to the cleaners.

Based on Johnsons performance I think he would stop Roy again.

I actually think a fight between Calzaghe and Johnson would be good for Joe's finally. If Johnson could perfrom like he did against Dawson I would actually think it would be a toughter fight for Joe then Bernard.

Posted: 18 Apr 2008, 04:56
by overhand_right
Bump!

Lets keep voting guys, voice your opinion.

Posted: 18 Apr 2008, 05:56
by Dioufy
I had it 115-113 to Dawson. I thought it was a clear one as well. Johnson lost too many rounds in the middle of the fight, he also come on a bit strong too late and had his chance to take Dawson out of there - one clean shot he needed. Anyway, I'm happy with the decision - thought the judges got the result right, although their cards were a tad bit wide.

Posted: 18 Apr 2008, 06:47
by Eraserhead
Had it by one point to Dawson. Thought he just sneaked it through the middle rounds. Johnson came on strong late, but it was just too little. Johnson is probably the toughest mofo in boxing right now. He's built like a brick wall and has underrated defence. Dawson threw hard and fast combinations over and over again and nothing even made Johnson so much as flinch.

GJ would still beat all the other light-heavies, save for maybe Tarver and Hopkins/Calzaghe. He's beaten Woods three times out of three, in my eyes.

Posted: 18 Apr 2008, 07:18
by jamesmcdonnell
Trouble was Johnson would often come on late in rounds, by which time Dawson has already landed lots of punches.

Landing a couple of humdingers doesn't and shouldn't mean you automatically win the round, that's why we score 10-8 for knockdowns, it's a chance to win a round emphatically against the run of play.

'damage' is not a criteria for scoring I've ever seen, it's more about who is in control of the majority of the round, and who lands the more and effective punches. Just because Johnson is hard as fekk and very hard to hurt, does that mean that you automatically disregard Dawson's punches as 'ineffective?' It shouldn't.

Dawson landed lots of nice crisp combinations which halted Glen in his tracks. A lot of the rounds were close because as Dawson slowed towards the rounds end, Johnson would keep piling on the pressure and have some success.

With a knockdown in the 9th, or was it 8th, Glen would have won it on my card, and believe me, I was willing him to do so, I was hollering at the TV.

I love Johnson, he's great to watch, and a terrific advert for the sport, and he just seems to keep rolling on.

I thought that he looked to be slowing a bit against Dawson, he was very tired towards the end and was pushing his punches, if he'd had a bit more juice, he would have stopped Dawson, but critically, he just couldn't summon the energy to put him away.

I'd love to see Johnson get another crack at the title, but you do wonder how much longer the old warhorse can compete at elite level. He gave it absolutely everything against Dawson, but couldn't quite crack him.

For what it's worth, I don't think Dawson is anything special, though maybe this fight will stand him in good stead. I thought he was pretty easy to hit in there, and didn't look to hit particularly hard.

Posted: 18 Apr 2008, 07:20
by jamesmcdonnell
What about Johnson v Hopkins rematch?

I reckon Johnson would win against Hopkins now. How Johnson ever made 160 is beyond me, he's absolutely bone-dry and chiselled at 175!

Posted: 18 Apr 2008, 15:26
by Autobarn
Johnson's going to Romania to do the colour commentating on the Adrian Diaconu fight. Diaconu - the sawn off slugger who made mincemeat out of Rico Hoye - is the WBC mandatory. I think Johnson is targeting a fight with Diaconu to earn the right to meet the Dawson-Tarver winner.

Showtime and HBO have their own "Best Light Heavy in the World." Showtime will have the WBC/IBF champ - whoever wins between Dawson & Tarver. HBO have the Ring Mag belt, which will be the property of either Calzaghe or Hopkins next weekend.

I think Johnson could possibly target the Hopkins-Calzaghe winner. After all he has a history with both. Losing to Hopkins and losing out on a fight with Calzaghe.

Johnson did look very thin at 160-lbs. I remember when Ring Mag did a New Faces article on Johnson, way back in the mid '90s. When I heard Hopkin outclassed him in 1997 I figured that'd be the end of Johnson. Amazing how he not only gets to win world titles, but trouble young fighters like Dawson, as Glen approaches 40!

Good fighters were barely landing a glove on Dawson until last weekend (Adamek, Harding).