BoxRec

Watched this last night, and was absolutely gobsmacked by just how one-sided the fight was. Its just inconceivable that anyone could score the fight for Valuev, so easy and simple are the rounds to score.

To my astonishment, i actually scored the fight 119-109??!

Best case i could make for Valuev would be 118-110, amazed me they gave the fight to the giant.

Must be the worst decision i have ever seen in any fight, ever. I really do mean ever.

Opinions?

115/113 to Valuev. Holyfield did fornicate all, so did Valuev to be fair, but at least he was the aggressor and wanted to fight. Holyfield in some rounds only landed one or two shots, whereas Valuev landed a lot of shit shots, more than Evander though.

I thought Valuev won. Didn't seem like Holyfield even wanted to fight. He was quoted somewhere as saying his main tactics were to avoid getting hit and that's more or less what he did.

i havent watched it yet (luckily) but i cant believe how many times the russian giant has been given generous decisions

Dioufy wrote:115/113 to Valuev. Holyfield did eff all, so did Valuev to be fair, but at least he was the aggressor and wanted to fight. Holyfield in some rounds only landed one or two shots, whereas Valuev landed a lot of shit shots, more than Evander though.

Are you kidding? What 7 rounds did Valuev win? Neither fighter did much but simply plodding forward is not 'being the aggressor' . . Holyfield is the only who threw and landed any meaningful combinations or punches the whole fight, and whenever he got on the inside Valuev grabbed him. Valuev wasn't landing any 'shit shots', Evander blocked, slipped or parried almost every jab Valuev threw . . he basically landed maybe 10 punches the whole fight, whearas Evander over 12 rounds got about 30 in. An awful fight, but Holyfield clearly won.

When I first saw the fight on Dec. 20th, in my heart I scored it 118-112. However, it is possible to give him Valuev the benefit of the doubt on one of the rounds and score it 117-113 in Holyfield's favor. I cannot see how Valuev won and I'm sure the WBA will overturnthe decision. If they don't, I'm done watching any WBA fight unless Klitschko is in it.

115-115.

Good start from Holyfield, implementing about the best plan he could possibly have in this fight. However he couldn't keep it up. It would be a stretch to say Valuev finished strong, as he did pretty much the same thing all night, but Holyfield tired and became less active/accurate.

I can't believe the uproar about the decision. Sure Holyfield moved a lot more, but this sport is about landing punches, and whether you're rooted to the spot or dancing around, that is really all that should count. Holyfield's performance was deceptive - we saw one man moving in and out, using the ring, and generally being faster, while the other was slower than continental drift. However there was no great difference in punches landed.

But other than the 7th and 8th Valuev never landed anything.

Holyfield landed one or two tasty combos per round.

Unreal...

dempseyfire wrote:

Dioufy wrote:115/113 to Valuev. Holyfield did eff all, so did Valuev to be fair, but at least he was the aggressor and wanted to fight. Holyfield in some rounds only landed one or two shots, whereas Valuev landed a lot of shit shots, more than Evander though.

Are you kidding? What 7 rounds did Valuev win? Neither fighter did much but simply plodding forward is not 'being the aggressor' . . Holyfield is the only who threw and landed any meaningful combinations or punches the whole fight, and whenever he got on the inside Valuev grabbed him. Valuev wasn't landing any 'shit shots', Evander blocked, slipped or parried almost every jab Valuev threw . . he basically landed maybe 10 punches the whole fight, whearas Evander over 12 rounds got about 30 in. An awful fight, but Holyfield clearly won.

Hey, what's your problem, dude? A lot of people scored it the same as me, granted, not from this site though. But yeah, I gave the big freak seven rounds. Aggression in this kind of fight has to be applauded a lot more than usual. Evander didn't do much - he sometimes went a minute or two without throwing a shot. Just because Valuev didn't land anything great, doesn't mean that Evander did. He fought in bursts, whereas at least Valuev consistantly come forward trying to fight and lead with his jab. It was a crap fight, one I wouldn't watch again (thus why I can't tell you what rounds the big man won), but I went for Valuev's higher agression over Evander's one-two combo (a lot landed on the arms too) every 90 seconds or so. And like someone said, there was hardly a difference in how many punches where landed between both fighters.

Dempsey is right mate -- how on earth anyone can give 7 rds to Valuev is beyond belief. His aggression was certainly nowhere near effective. You could count on one hands the amount of clean shots he landed on Holyfield all night.

Holyfield landed every rd. He fought the smart fight. You dont mix it up or get physical with a man who outweights you by 100 lbs, unless you want to exhaust yourself and drop.

In reality, away from this site, this is spilt down the down concerning who won the fight. It's a classic case of what you prefer.

Eh?

Folk away from this site are seemingly 50/50 about who won. To be honest, it only seems like the Yanks are calling it a robbery, which I am most certain it's not. You either prefer Evander's dancing skills or Valuev's better aggression/more punches thrown.

overhand_right wrote:But other than the 7th and 8th Valuev never landed anything.

Holyfield landed one or two tasty combos per round.

Unreal...

That's just not true. The strange TV coverage, with constantly swooping cameras doesn't help and it's difficult to tell with a lot of Holyfield's punches if the actually land. Most of them seem to fall short or land on arms/shoulders. Valuev seemed to land some shots and rough up Holyfield in close. Some of the rounds are ridiculously tight because neither lands anything. Those rounds should really be called level, but judges are under pressure to pick a winner even if it's a coin toss.
I find it difficult to make a case for Holyfield winning around after the fifth, apart from maybe the 9th.

I have a straight US feed with no swooping camera angles.

Round after round Holyfield outboxes him with total ease.

Seems unbelievable that anyone could watch it and fight Valuev being anything other than outboxed.

I agree with the majority yank scorecards, 10-2.

Valuevs own promoter didn't even think he won and said as much!!!!

Actually, Valuev's promotor said that he thought it was a draw, and when he rewatched it, he thought Valuev won 115/113 - he said that on Setanta's Bunce's Boxing Hour a few weeks ago.

I had it the same as Oliver for the mag... 115-115

116-113 holyfield

rematch should be in the states

Just because a man staggers forward like a drunk in slowmotion and throws punches that hit nothing but the atoms in the air, doesn't mean he is being aggressive or that his "more punches thrown" stat is worth a toss.

Holyfield won the fight because he did all he could do for being a shot-to-shit 46 year old. What was he supposed to do? Go in there and stand toe-to-toe and try and knockout the guy that outweighed him by the frozen foods section in sainsburys? He counter-punched and did what should have been enough to steal the rounds.

Valuev looked absolutely terrible. Now I'm not saying he's great on his night but he gives you more than what he gave against Holyfield. They say that you have to take a champions belt from him but on that night you must have been blind to not think that Valuev just looked content to give it away. Even in the last round he showed no urgency at all. It all smacked of a man who hadn't trained right and was not concerned about the possibility of losing his title. Is that because he was never in danger of losing it as long as he heard the last bell?

As for a rematch? I wouldn't wish that on anybody

GAV wrote: Holyfield won the fight because he did all he could do for being a shot-to-shit 46 year old. What was he supposed to do? Go in there and stand toe-to-toe and try and knockout the guy that outweighed him by the frozen foods section in sainsburys? He counter-punched and did what should have been enough to steal the rounds.

Exactly!!

Why the frick is this so hard for so many people who have watched or followed boxing for years to figure out? Its so bleeding simple.

Can you tell me why the frick people ask questions if they can't consider and understand other folks' opinions?

Dioufy wrote:Actually, Valuev's promotor said that he thought it was a draw, and when he rewatched it, he thought Valuev won 115/113 - he said that on Setanta's Bunce's Boxing Hour a few weeks ago.

Valuev' promoter??

Well we know he is very neutral don't we

observer1 wrote:

Dioufy wrote:Actually, Valuev's promotor said that he thought it was a draw, and when he rewatched it, he thought Valuev won 115/113 - he said that on Setanta's Bunce's Boxing Hour a few weeks ago.

Valuev' promoter??

Well we know he is very neutral don't we

I didn't bring it up you fool, and of course, he is biased. I was pointing out a fact to 'overhand_right's' comment of "Valuev's own promoter didn't even think he won and said as much!!!!", when he didn't say that, he said the opposite.

No he didn't, before he changed his story he said he thought it was a draw.

Therfore my original statement 'even his own promoter didn't think he'd won' is accurate.

Can you please show me something that corroborates that story. It's not that I doubt you, it's just I want to see.