question about Harold Letterman....

Kinda hard to be accurate w/ opinion... Most of the time Lederman and my card are almost identical...He has one or two fights where I question his scoring, but for the most part he's one of the best in the sport at calling it as it is... and I love Merchant...He calls it how he sees it...nothing better then a prick of an analyst that actually tells it how it is...He says a lot of the shit we think...

I usually agree with his scoring.But there are times where he be trippin'

for the most part, lederman usually on point - i remember a couple of times being really upset with his card, barrera/hamed being one, and the other being jirov/toney - toney was EASILY winning that fight, thank God he knocked him down at the end of the fight. there was another one, but i forgot, but all-in-all - for the 14 years i've watched the fights, hes the most consistent w/ good scoring, in my eyes. i hate merchant - seems he always lets lederman read off his card and JUST to be the contrarian, he almost ALWAYS says something stupid. kinda like the guy this saturday who had paulie up after the 4th round :confused: I couldn't agree more on that one. He had Jirov winning it going into the 12th I'm pretty sure, which is fucked up. Imagine his surprise when all three judges, like myself, had Toney winning by 4 or 5 points. He was a dumbass that night.

I used to always agree with him (not on Barrera-Hamed though), but lately not at all. It seems like he's always making shutouts closer than they should be really. I remember he had Rahman-Tua II very close. The worst thing Lederman does is when he realizes he screwed up one round by giving it to one guy, fighter A, that definitely lost it and gives a round fighter A won to fighter B to make up for it.

for the most part, lederman usually on point - i remember a couple of times being really upset with his card, barrera/hamed being one, and the other being jirov/toney - toney was EASILY winning that fight, thank God he knocked him down at the end of the fight. there was another one, but i forgot, but all-in-all - for the 14 years i've watched the fights, hes the most consistent w/ good scoring, in my eyes. i hate merchant - seems he always lets lederman read off his card and JUST to be the contrarian, he almost ALWAYS says something stupid. kinda like the guy this saturday who had paulie up after the 4th round :confused:

"huh, huh AhOKAY JIM!" I disagree more than I should with his scoring, off the top of my head, the Barrera/Hamed fight. Letterman had it a relativly close fight when it was a one sided lesson being given by Barrera. Anyone else question his scoring sometimes? Anyone know how lederman had Hops/Tarver scored?

sometimes there is reason not to score a knockdown 10-8 No I dont question his credability

I agree with Merchant's scoring a whole lot more than I do Lederman's, but I'd say Foreman is the worst at scoring fights.

Eh, Lederman is pretty accurate scoring for the most part. I trust his scoring usually. It's usually what I have or when I wonder and then go back and rewatch a fight, I can see the points he'd make. Now, Larry Merchant, let's not begin to talk about him :D "I scored that round 10 to 9 for Barrera because he got credit for a knockdown, not the 10 to 8 like a knockdown really is." Haha, when you start using the word, really, your in trouble. Merchant is a senile crazy man, but my friends and I like to wait for him to say something crazy so we can laugh at him.

Eh, Lederman is pretty accurate scoring for the most part. I trust his scoring usually. It's usually what I have or when I wonder and then go back and rewatch a fight, I can see the points he'd make. Now, Larry Merchant, let's not begin to talk about him :D "I scored that round 10 to 9 for Barrera because he got credit for a knockdown, not the 10 to 8 like a knockdown really is." Haha, when you start using the word, really, your in trouble.

Hopkins was on his way to winning the Tito fight easy on the scorecards but it is good to see that he did go for the knockout instead of sitting back knowing he won the fight. I wish alot more fighters would do that. Lederman has his good and bad days when judging the fights. i agree. have some karma.

Hopkins was on his way to winning the Tito fight easy on the scorecards but it is good to see that he did go for the knockout instead of sitting back knowing he won the fight. I wish alot more fighters would do that. Lederman has his good and bad days when judging the fights.

yeah, like when Hop and Tito fought, Lampley said that as was the case in the Tito/DLH fight, judges sometimes struggle to find a reason to give a round to a fighter, he said that was especially the case with Tito, judges would often give him a round when he didnt earn it, good thing Hop KO'd him, he may have gotten what Oscar got when he fought Tito. yea u got that damn right...its kinda weird once u think about it tho, wat if there were many fights that were badly judged due to inconfident judges...

but i kinda agreed with his scoring on the hammed-barrera fight, altho barrera was dishing out punches to hammed, hammed was from time to time punching bak, but yeah, still sometimes i too question his scoring...i guess its a psychological thing, u cant really give every round to one fighter...i dont know which fight i herd that quote from... yeah, like when Hop and Tito fought, Lampley said that as was the case in the Tito/DLH fight, judges sometimes struggle to find a reason to give a round to a fighter, he said that was especially the case with Tito, judges would often give him a round when he didnt earn it, good thing Hop KO'd him, he may have gotten what Oscar got when he fought Tito.

but i kinda agreed with his scoring on the hammed-barrera fight, altho barrera was dishing out punches to hammed, hammed was from time to time punching bak, but yeah, still sometimes i too question his scoring...i guess its a psychological thing, u cant really give every round to one fighter...i dont know which fight i herd that quote from...

He usually sides with the name fighter..