Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why is Kovalev getting rounds 3, 4, and 5 by default? Because of the KD?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by soul_survivor View Post
    Ward won round 3 or 4, can't remember which won but you can't give him any other round (on the basis you have claimed) inside the first 6 and then still refuse to give Kovalev any rounds in the last 6.
    I gave Kovalev round 10, and rounds 8 and 12 were very close just like some of those early rounds were very close.

    Comment


    • #12
      I had Ward clearly winning round 3, had round 4 even and gave Kovalev 5

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by sunny31 View Post
        I gave Kovalev round 10, and rounds 8 and 12 were very close just like some of those early rounds were very close.
        so you gave Kovalev 4 rounds? lol

        Comment


        • #14
          Why is Ward getting rounds he doesn't get knocked down or buckled in by default?

          Comment


          • #15
            Thank you! You have people *****ing about round 10 and 12 but don't acknowledge rounds 3 to 5 were also close competitive rounds

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by soul_survivor View Post
              so you gave Kovalev 4 rounds? lol
              Nope.

              Ward - 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12

              Kovalev - 1, 2, 4, 6, 10

              Round 3 is my big swing round. But even then the only clear rounds are 1, 2, for Kovalev and round 7, and 9 for Ward, every other round could be scored either way. So it really was a ***** to score.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by mlac View Post
                agreed, including professional judges.
                It is not that easy, and the judges still to me don't have a great angle. Which can normally explain seeing a different round or fight from the others.

                10 point must is a flawed system also.

                How many people can watch a fight onetime through like they are taking a test without previously seeing it. Judging fights is not a fun exercise.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by sunny31 View Post
                  I'm starting to get that impression. People are so emotional and extreme. There is a middle ground here guys, it was a close fight. This fight reminds me a little bit of Mosley-Cotto, everyone was going ape **** here for the scoring of that fight, arguing, name calling.

                  I thought Cotto won - but I could see how people thought Mosley did.

                  This fight was extremely hard to score, probably even more difficult than that fight.
                  Most fights are hard to score there are always like 3 rounds that a fight really hinges on, if it is more than that the fight is almost impossible to score "correctly".

                  I gave up a long time ago because scoring fights in a proper manner requires real effort, and to put that effort in give those thoughts only be to told wrong by some dude who was drinking paying 1/3 the amount of attention who is essentially just agreeing with others who did the same thing.

                  If you want to enjoy fights don't score, best thing I ever did was stop.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by The Gambler1981 View Post
                    It is not that easy, and the judges still to me don't have a great angle. Which can normally explain seeing a different round or fight from the others.

                    10 point must is a flawed system also.

                    How many people can watch a fight onetime through like they are taking a test without previously seeing it. Judging fights is not a fun exercise.
                    i tend to have that kind of wishy washy middle of the road opinion on most things but when you have such clear incompetence, the only logical conclusion is corruption, we all know hooker lost, he lost every single round. And they gave it a draw. We all know what that is, you can't beat around the bush.

                    So you got corruption on the undercard, now take the main event, with 100X more money and stake involved.
                    Surely logic dictates that if corruption is involved on a low money fight involving a prospect and perez a guy who's on his way out. There must be corruption on the main card too...

                    I watch alot of boxing and i try to wash over all the robberies i have seen, but its happening week in, week out, year in year out.
                    All incompetent judges with a bad view? i'd like to think so, but i think we all know deep down boxing is rotten to the core. But we tend to gloss over it because we love the sport and give the benefit of the doubt.

                    I didnt score the Curtis steven's fight but looks like he got a gift there too.

                    So you can make the argument that 3/3 fights on the card all had corruption involved.
                    Now that is a slight stretch as the main event was a closeish fight. But to me a closeish fight can still be a robbery/corrupt if the wrong man one.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      i gave kovalev 1,2,4,6,10
                      i gave ward 3,5,7,8,9,11,12

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP