Some posters have taken to citing the press row scoring in the Ward vs Kovalev fight as proof the judges got it wrong.
"Look how many scored it for Kovalev" they say.
What they aren't also mentioning is how close everyone had it.
44 ringside observers (press, experts, etc) saw Kovalev winning. Of those 44:
20 had it 115-112 (meaning they had it 7 rounds to 5 Sergei).
3 had it 115-113 (meaning they gave 6 rounds to Sergei, 5 to Ward and had one even with the KD creating the extra point difference).
14 had it 114-113 (meaning they gave each fighter 6 rounds).
How can anyone interpret this as anything else but as a very close bout?
And, knowing it was THAT close, shouldn't it make sense that the judges might have seen things that escaped viewers with a slightly poorer vantage point?
After all, in another thread it was pointed out how Lampley was seeing missed punches as landed ones. Clearly, others could have made similar mistakes.
Citing the many press row scores is actually proof of exactly how close it was.
Proof that the decision WAS NOT a robbery.
"Look how many scored it for Kovalev" they say.
What they aren't also mentioning is how close everyone had it.
44 ringside observers (press, experts, etc) saw Kovalev winning. Of those 44:
20 had it 115-112 (meaning they had it 7 rounds to 5 Sergei).
3 had it 115-113 (meaning they gave 6 rounds to Sergei, 5 to Ward and had one even with the KD creating the extra point difference).
14 had it 114-113 (meaning they gave each fighter 6 rounds).
How can anyone interpret this as anything else but as a very close bout?
And, knowing it was THAT close, shouldn't it make sense that the judges might have seen things that escaped viewers with a slightly poorer vantage point?
After all, in another thread it was pointed out how Lampley was seeing missed punches as landed ones. Clearly, others could have made similar mistakes.
Citing the many press row scores is actually proof of exactly how close it was.
Proof that the decision WAS NOT a robbery.
Comment