was Estrada-Cuadras really that close?

Was shocked to see Cuadras "win" it first by that mistake. Even though I actually had money on him :D But bet bias aside, I saw Estrada winning that fight.

I dont think it was close. I think Estrada won pretty clearly to be honest lthough Cuadras had his moments and took a good few rounds.

I had 114-113 for Estrada. The was very close and I wouldn't have been angry to s You can tell Estrada was bothered by Cuadras' unorthodox style, movement, and speed. He was able to clip Estrada coming in and get out the way. Threw some nice flurries that stole rounds were Estrada really didn't let his hands go enough. And most of his flurries landed on scoring points, unlike the ones Jacobs threw that hit nothing by arm and elbow for example. But as it got to the mid rounds, Cuadras was starting to tire and his movement was mostly used to get out of the way of Estrada But Cuadras is a warrior and in my opinion came back to take the 12th round. Estrada is going to need to start letting his hands go earlier, he really gives away a lot of rounds trying to warm up. My ScoreCard 1. Estrada 2.Cuadras 3.Cuadras 4.Cuadras 5.Cuadras 6.Estrada 7.Estrada 8.Estrada 9.Cuadras 10.Estrada (+KD) 11.Estrada 12.Cuadras thats how i scored ,Estrada was simply not there in first round ,even when he landed it was not enough to get this round ,Cuadras won 5 of first 6 IMO ,he was landing some ppl here ignore it.

Well... apparently Michael Buffer thought so.

I thought Estrada put on a sensational display of skill on Saturday night. https://thumbs.gfycat.com/IllegalImmediateGermanshepherd-max-14mb.gif i just finished watching it. being honest with myself i gave cuadras 3 rounds, i could give him 4. but that's about it.I had it this wide for Estrada as well. At the beginning of the fight Lampley said "Cuadras is perceived as being the more marketable fighter" (paraphrasing) and their scoring/commentary definitely indicated that they took this to heart.

I thought it was close early on. Not so much by the end. I had it something like 116-11 Estrada.

Estrada won almost every round + knockdown so no it wasn't close. The ref's scoring was disgraceful, they were planning to rob him.

Most of the so called boxing fans on here just repeat what the commentators tell them. HBO had Cuadras winning the first 5 so they did too. :lol1: It's also arguable that estrada did lose all those rounds...he started slow. In any case, it was a tale of 2 halves, with estrada's hard punching over the 2nd half being the difference for me. Even tho cuadras was winning rounds early, he was mostly edging them on activity...estrada was the man with the plan.

Very close......

i dont take any of them seriously or give them any credibility. i just point out how their way of scoring fights seems completely different in some fights. i always score fights the same way. thats why kovalev, ggg, estrada, etc..won. they all landed the much cleaner punches. doesnt really matter if they were going forward, backwards, sideways, were clinching, were being clinched. the punches are the punches. ward has won fights where he was the dirty fighter like against kessler and lost them like against kovalev. difference was the punches not what he was doing. some people simply score fights to a guy because it appears hes doing what he always does. doenst make much sense to me. every fight is different and the punches should determine who wins not made up criteria like "whos fighting his fight" etc...I mean I look for the same thing when I watch fights, so I'm sure they do the same. For example look at the Porter-Brook fight. They (sky) had Porter winning that fight, I had Brook winning it. What was the narrative in that fight based on how you just said you judge fights? I'm just speaking about what I see from some on here, the patterns I notice. It's my perspective on the situation. For the record, Kovalev (imo) did land the better more effective shots in the entire first fight, but most of it was done in the early rounds. The way those shots were spread out between rounds, I simply had Ward winning more rounds then Kovalev did. Thus, winning him the fight. That is something that judges also take into consideration.

Watching the fight again...FUK NO it wasn't close! HBO Influenced the fuk out of that fight after watching it again without listening to them especially Lampley! HBO had me believing it was 5-0 at one point in this fight, watching it again I had it 3-2 Estrada after the 5th. What I noticed is how Lampley was ignoring a lot of what Estrada was doing while Praising and having a Orgasm over what Cuadras hitting mostly Gloves and arms. But they was ignoring Estrada Counters, he was catching and timing Cuadras with some excellent left shorts/check hooks and when he landed them HBO didn't acknowledge them they just talked about Cuadras wild combos hitting Gloves. Look at Cuadras Face and Estrada Face. Estrada was the fresher guy down the stretch of that fight for a reason https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/izKu4uh1eL00CRPxJKC1ATP_PNI=/0x0:3000x2017/1200x800/filters:focal(1276x630:1756x1110)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/56601299/845095480.1505013907.jpg HBO is PATHETIC and Embarrassing at this point

Great fight, very competitive but the correct guy won the fight.

Juan Francisco Estrada vs Carlos Cuadras (09-09... por boxingfightsvideos did you guys make a scorecard for this one? i don't wanna go through all the official thread for the card. watching it live i thought cuadras was in control in the first half but it doesn't look like it on a second watch. i got Estrada winning though. I had 114-113 for Estrada. The was very close and I wouldn't have been angry to s You can tell Estrada was bothered by Cuadras' unorthodox style, movement, and speed. He was able to clip Estrada coming in and get out the way. Threw some nice flurries that stole rounds were Estrada really didn't let his hands go enough. And most of his flurries landed on scoring points, unlike the ones Jacobs threw that hit nothing by arm and elbow for example. But as it got to the mid rounds, Cuadras was starting to tire and his movement was mostly used to get out of the way of Estrada But Cuadras is a warrior and in my opinion came back to take the 12th round. Estrada is going to need to start letting his hands go earlier, he really gives away a lot of rounds trying to warm up. My ScoreCard 1. Estrada 2.Cuadras 3.Cuadras 4.Cuadras 5.Cuadras 6.Estrada 7.Estrada 8.Estrada 9.Cuadras 10.Estrada (+KD) 11.Estrada 12.Cuadras

The thing is people on here will selectively agree with whatever scorecard their preferred fighter was winning on. It's a subconscious bias. They will say "Skysports scorecard was dumb in the Pacquiao/Horn and Golovkin/Jacobs fight, because I love Pacquiao and Golovkin there is no way they lost!" But at the same time they don't necessarily have a preferred fighter when it comes to Cuadras vs. Estrada so they will see the fight more objectively and are more likely to side with the Skysport scorecard which is usually way more accurate than the HBO one. "We hate Andre Ward, theres no way he beat Kovalev! How could skysports have him winning!" Now they flip-flop and hop on skysports d*ck because when there is more objectivity in their own perception, the skysports scorecards make more sense to them. i dont take any of them seriously or give them any credibility. i just point out how their way of scoring fights seems completely different in some fights. i always score fights the same way. thats why kovalev, ggg, estrada, etc..won. they all landed the much cleaner punches. doesnt really matter if they were going forward, backwards, sideways, were clinching, were being clinched. the punches are the punches. ward has won fights where he was the dirty fighter like against kessler and lost them like against kovalev. difference was the punches not what he was doing. some people simply score fights to a guy because it appears hes doing what he always does. doenst make much sense to me. every fight is different and the punches should determine who wins not made up criteria like "whos fighting his fight" etc...

The thing is people on here will selectively agree with whatever scorecard their preferred fighter was winning on. It's a subconscious bias. They will say "Skysports scorecard was dumb in the Pacquiao/Horn and Golovkin/Jacobs fight, because I love Pacquiao and Golovkin there is no way they lost!" But at the same time they don't necessarily have a preferred fighter when it comes to Cuadras vs. Estrada so they will see the fight more objectively and are more likely to side with the Skysport scorecard which is usually way more accurate than the HBO one. "We hate Andre Ward, theres no way he beat Kovalev! How could skysports have him winning!" Now they flip-flop and hop on skysports d*ck because when there is more objectivity in their own perception, the skysports scorecards make more sense to them.

cuadras with the khan's flurries was doing nothing the entire night. can't understand what was people watching honestly. not close at all and without that KD it would've been a draw. you know how they say some people are more visual and some more auditory. im thinking the more auditory people are missing whats actually happening? im def visual and can see which punches are landing clean and which arent for the most part. ever since calzaghe hopkins where calzaghe kept hitting air and hopkins was landing flush i have been puzzled by boxing and its scorecards. its easy to say corruption but it has to be more since cards make no sense in almost every fight

didnt they also have jacobs winning so honestly i dont know how to explain that. jacobs and cuadras were the guys throwing a lot but not really landing clean. just kind of stay away from me punches as the great max kellogman would say. ggg and estrada were finding the target with the cleaner harder punches yet they had 2 different views on these fights. its possible alcohol could be to blame cuadras with the khan's flurries was doing nothing the entire night. can't understand what was people watching honestly. not close at all and without that KD it would've been a draw.

i just finished watching it. being honest with myself i gave cuadras 3 rounds, i could give him 4. but that's about it. that's the same video i put on the OP. skysports had estrada winning easily and laughing at HBO's unofficial scorecard lol didnt they also have jacobs winning so honestly i dont know how to explain that. jacobs and cuadras were the guys throwing a lot but not really landing clean. just kind of stay away from me punches as the great max kellogman would say. ggg and estrada were finding the target with the cleaner harder punches yet they had 2 different views on these fights. its possible alcohol could be to blame

i cant even remember what i had im not even sure i was scoring, was on my 2nd coffee and blunt and it was 4am in the morning. but that sounds about right. El gallo won with alot to spare. Insane that if he didnt score the KD it would of been a draw FFS. Buffer on the booze /Alzheimers. didnt he announce the winner as 'Carlos estrada' or something ? :lol1: i just finished watching it. being honest with myself i gave cuadras 3 rounds, i could give him 4. but that's about it. Well, I had it 114-113 Cuadras watching the fight live. I was watching a stream (HBO version) though. On said stream, it looked like Cuadras easily won 4-5 of the first 6 rounds. I saw a nice HD version (UK) on dailymotion this morning and it wasn't really that close. I'm not sure if the camera angles between the 2 versions were the same or not. that's the same video i put on the OP. skysports had estrada winning easily and laughing at HBO's unofficial scorecard lol

Most of the so called boxing fans on here just repeat what the commentators tell them. HBO had Cuadras winning the first 5 so they did too. :lol1: Its Pacquiao/Horn all over again, Boxnation viewers saying it was close, round either way, ESPN viewers saying it was a massive robbery