BoxRec

i missed the first 4 rounds...but from then on i thought at most witter only won 2 rounds....duke mckenzie had the fight even - 2 rounds each after 4 rounds so i think bradley won this fight clearly...maybe by 4-5 points

i had bradley winning by one point, i was ringside and tried to score with a non biased perspective.

I had it even after 4 rounds too, but for me Witter did virtually nothing after that.
I had it 117-111 Bradley.
I couldn't believe that 115-112 card to Witter.

My round by round.

1 -Witter
2 - Bradley
3 - Bradley
4 - Bradley
5 - Bradley
6 - Bradley (10-8)
7 - Witter
8 - Witter
9 - Witter
10- Bradley
11 - Bradley
12 - Bradley.

I thought 7, 8, 9 were very close to score.

116-111 (and I thought that was a tad kind on Witter).

rhino222 wrote:i had bradley winning by one point, i was ringside and tried to score with a non biased perspective.

Same here.

116-111 for bradley.

deffo some debateable rds in the fight though.

Think it's a bit early to jump on the Bradley bandwagon, don't think he looked overly special - pretty straightforward.

I had Witter 1, maybe 2, Bradley 3,4,5,6 (10-8), then although he was running a bit Witter did better in the 7th, so even, then Witter 8,9, Bradley 10,11,12.

116-112 Bradley. Amazed anyone could have scored it for Witter.

rhino222 wrote:i had bradley winning by one point, i was ringside and tried to score with a non biased perspective.

Maybe things looked different on Ringside - cause I don't think that the KD was a crucial factor in the scoring of this fight. Although yes, had it not been for the KD Witter - bizarrely and disgracefully - would have retained his title via a draw.

And that would have been worst than ANY of Svenny's dubious decisions.

stujones wrote: had it not been for the KD Witter - bizarrely and disgracefully - would have retained his title via a draw.

And that would have been worst than ANY of Svenny's dubious decisions.

You're not kidding Stu.
Imagine the Americans post fight response if Witter had been gifted a draw.

I had it the same as Stu's card, only I gave the 7th to Bradley.

Rawling was way off with his commentary during the 7th - surviving the round doesnt mean he wins it lol

remember that at ringside we do not have multi views and slow motions to influenceour perspective of it,we see it once and from one angle.

interestinglyenough, that is the same as the judges at ringside. a head snapping back does not mean a scoring shot, if the fighter has his back to you you cant see the punch landing, therefore you cant score it.

on tv however, you see them land as the camera is generally pointing in the appropriate direction.
boxing scoring,is and always will be, verysubjective.

iam in favour of the scores being known during the fight, i cant think of another sport where you dont know if you arewinning or not during the event !!!!

rhino222 wrote:
iam in favour of the scores being known during the fight, i cant think of another sport where you dont know if you arewinning or not during the event !!!!

I disagree, can you imagine the carnage if a drunken crowd knows in advance if a judge has scored a round, possibly unjustly, to the away fighter.

Asking for trouble if you ask me.

It would help maybe with the saftey side of the sport, e.g. more pull outs of a non-puncher who cannot win on points, but I think it will spoil the action no end.

You'd possibly have a fighting fiddling and surviving from the 8th round on.

stujones wrote:

rhino222 wrote:
iam in favour of the scores being known during the fight, i cant think of another sport where you dont know if you arewinning or not during the event !!!!

I disagree, can you imagine the carnage if a drunken crowd knows in advance if a judge has scored a round, possibly unjustly, to the away fighter.

Asking for trouble if you ask me.

It would help maybe with the saftey side of the sport, e.g. more pull outs of a non-puncher who cannot win on points, but I think it will spoil the action no end.

You'd possibly have a fighting fiddling and surviving from the 8th round on.

Didn't it already happen with Mormeck in the Bell rematch?

Judges would also start levelling their scores out to match their contemporaries.

DavidPayne wrote:Judges would also start levelling their scores out to match their contemporaries.

is your glass half empty today mr payne ?

I'm still revelling in the headline

"Hatton v Witter, goes down the....."

But yes, I have to drive to Shrewsbury this afternoon - hardily likely to cheer anyone up!

I just watched the fight over on that Japanese YouKu website, i found it hard to score a round for Witter. I've been a converted fan for a few years now, but that performance nobody could seriously defend with a straight face.

Witter was piss poor from start to finish. I dont know what bullshit his corner was feeding him during the breaks but if he thought he won that fight i suspect perhaps magic mushrooms. He did sweet F.A. from the first bell to the last, he hardly landed a single clean punch all night. He should be hanging his head in shame, thats no way for a champion to try and defend his title!

DavidPayne wrote:
"Hatton v Witter, goes down the....."

...drain"?

Bradley looked a clear winner, no doubt about it - the Italian judge needs to be sent back to school with a slap round the head.

MightyWarrior wrote:Bradley looked a clear winner, no doubt about it - the Italian judge needs to be sent back to school with a slap round the head.

Or join Chuck Giampa in the retired section.

1 - Witter
2 - Witter
3 - Bradley
4 - Bradley
5 - Witter
6 - Bradley (10-8)
7 - Even
8 - Bradley
9 - Witter
10- Bradley
11 - Bradley
12 - Bradley

116-112 Bradley

1. Witter
2. Witter
3. Witter
4 Bradley
5 Witter
6 Bradley 10-8
7 Witter
8 Witter
9 Witter
10 Bradley
11. Bradley
12. Bradley

114-113 Bradley

12th was a close 1 which conceivably could have gone to Witter giving a Witter win. All in all Bradley did a little more, not that much more outside the KD because he missed allot but so did Junior.

Yes I'm a Witter fan so maybe I had tinted glasses, but I try to be objective and think the Witter detractors cards are BS, there wasnt more than 3 points in it. I could see Bradley knicking another 1 of the early rounds and maybe another round but thats about it. Scrappy fight to score but Junior landed more in the scrappy rounds

BTW if Junior got the win it would have been a better decision than Malignaggi getting the decision over Ngoudjo who won 9 rounds in their fight. It also wasnt much more of an exposure than Collazo-Hatton

sharpei_louis wrote:Think it's a bit early to jump on the Bradley bandwagon, don't think he looked overly special - pretty straightforward.

I had Witter 1, maybe 2, Bradley 3,4,5,6 (10-8), then although he was running a bit Witter did better in the 7th, so even, then Witter 8,9, Bradley 10,11,12.

116-112 Bradley. Amazed anyone could have scored it for Witter.

Agree with that last sentiment - it wouldn't take a genius to derive from my screen name the fact that I share a geographic allegiance with Junior, and I was struggling to give him the fight! I gave him the first three (though I have to confess I was only half watching the third), the 7,8,9 stretch and possibly a share of the eleventh. Even then he'd have only gotten a draw...

I had it 115-113 to Bradley but thought I was a tad kind on Junior myself.

I had it 116-112..