Did Joshua really lose the Usyk rematch?

I’ve actually made the argument in how it’s a show and not a sport. it’s an event put on by a promoter who sets the rules in the favor of his own fighter. Other sports don’t give points to the more popular team. I almost expect judges to be like Commodus and give thumbs up/down at the end of a fight

I've read more than a few times how boxing is more than a sport. It's theater !!!! Must allow foibles and follies to take place, even if they can be avoided. I’ve actually made the argument in how it’s a show and not a sport. it’s an event put on by a promoter who sets the rules in the favor of his own fighter. Other sports don’t give points to the more popular team.

AJ was very slightly better than the first fight but still had the wrong approach of trying to box Usyk rather than use his physical advantages. Usyk seemed to have slowed down a little too. It took him longer to get into any kind of rhythm, so it was a slightly closer version of the first fight but Usyk still a clear winner.

Yeah....I don't think there is :lol1: the sport is so ****ing broken, and everyone in charge just throws their hands up Everyone has already forgotten a veteran referee literally saved an A side fighter, gifting him a world championship. Imagine a ****ing football referee blocking a kick in the superbowl. I've read more than a few times how boxing is more than a sport. It's theater !!!! Must allow foibles and follies to take place, even if they can be avoided.

I'd say we both have at least a reasonable level of intelligence There has to be smarter people than us within the boxing rules making community :lol1: And yet...... Yeah....I don't think there is :lol1: the sport is so fucking broken, and everyone in charge just throws their hands up Everyone has already forgotten a veteran referee literally saved an A side fighter, gifting him a world championship. Imagine a fucking football referee blocking a kick in the superbowl.

Even if they just watch the same feed we see in real time (minus the commentary) that would be significantly better, and that would lessen the fan outrage after every fight, since we all saw the same thing. I'd say we both have at least a reasonable level of intelligence There has to be smarter people than us within the boxing rules making community :lol1: And yet......

Implement tools where senior citizens won't be able to muck shlt up....like a time limit to use replay. If after 1 minute a decision can't be made, the initial decision stands. Isolating judges is another idea. Sounds can definitely influence a spectator. Separate room/backstage with enough monitors to give them every possible angle.....how hard is it :dunno: Even if they just watch the same feed we see in real time (minus the commentary) that would be significantly better, and that would lessen the fan outrage after every fight, since we all saw the same thing.

I'm saying yes, you have to use it. But you can't have a senior citizen as the only ****ing person watching. Personally, I'd also have three judges backstage watching so the sounds can't affect their decisions either (although the bubble showed us the crowd noise isn't the big issue people claimed it was) Implement tools where senior citizens won't be able to muck shlt up....like a time limit to use replay. If after 1 minute a decision can't be made, the initial decision stands. Isolating judges is another idea. Sounds can definitely influence a spectator. Separate room/backstage with enough monitors to give them every possible angle.....how hard is it :dunno:

No system is 100% FOOLproof. A definite one of. I'd still rather have tech used than not just because of 1 incident I'm saying yes, you have to use it. But you can't have a senior citizen as the only fucking person watching. Personally, I'd also have three judges backstage watching so the sounds can't affect their decisions either (although the bubble showed us the crowd noise isn't the big issue people claimed it was)

That Robert Byrd replay took over a half hour. Was the second Franco/Moloney fight. No system is 100% FOOLproof. A definite one of. I'd still rather have tech used than not just because of 1 incident

1st step is to actually use it. Next is to fine tune it. I don't know of a sport that has replay that takes longer than a couple of minutes. It is better than just hoping they got it right. That Robert Byrd replay took over a half hour. Was the second Franco/Moloney fight.

Utilize it property though. You can't have Robert Byrd doing instant replay for 40 minutes only to decide he couldn't see what happened. 1st step is to actually use it. Next is to fine tune it. I don't know of a sport that has replay that takes longer than a couple of minutes. It is better than just hoping they got it right.

Not really. What I'm saying is by Boxing Scene standards, a draw would not be a robbery. If I can't name 7 clear rounds for Usyk, and I can't, I wouldn't be able to complain that a draw was a robbery. This recent stuff is absolutely asinine from people who clearly don't understand scoring and have never so much as looked at the rules. Like, FFS, one guy won 6 rounds clear, the other guy won 2, and there were 4 rounds that were closer, and that's not an obvious win for the guy who clearly won half of the fight? Idiots like certain Haney huggers seem to think that a round that was close enough that they don't know who won can just be awarded to whoever they want, and scoring criteria be damned. The judge should be able to pick the winner of the round, based on clean punching, effective aggression, ring generalship, and defense. If that can't be chosen, it's an even round, and is supposed to be scored even. Neither fighter was ever in any danger of being stopped. So effective aggression is likely moot in most rounds. Ring generalship is about who is controlling the fight. That often goes to the fighter who is pressing the action, but if they're just following around the ring and can't cut it off, then the action is likely being controlled by the other guy. Clean punches and percent landed tell most of the story otherwise. Joshua likely won 1,2, 9. Usyk outlanded Joshua in every other round, and had better defense in every round except for 7 & 8. Even if you give Joshua the benefit of the doubt, he still can only get 5 rounds at best.

Boxing needs to join the rest of us in the present century. Tech is out there begging to be used. Utilize it property though. You can't have Robert Byrd doing instant replay for 40 minutes only to decide he couldn't see what happened.

Agreed. I’ve said this for a while, and there’s always ONE bad card it seems that being said, really makes you wonder about three judges scoring Bivol/Canelo 7-5 Boxing needs to join the rest of us in the present century. Tech is out there begging to be used.

He blew his load in the 9th. He had him. He was beating Usyk around the ring and it was all downhill from the 10th on. I don't understand how anyone can say that and make it sound like Joshua was on the brink of winning but somehow let Usyk make a lucky escape. It is widely known that the 9th round was all part of the game plan of Team Usyk. They knew that Joshua sooner or later would come at him like that and they wanted him to do so. They wanted him to punch himself out and Usk was fully prepared to weather the storm. Heck, they even predicted it would happen around round 8 or 9. If you watch the 9th in slow motion, you can see that Joshua barely lands anything clean as Usyk blocks or rolls with the majority of the punches. He was never hurt, he was never in serious trouble. It looked more serious when it happened live because of the heat of the moment and the commentators shouting etc. But when you watch it back, especially in slow motion and knowing how the championship rounds panned out it is clear how it was all calculated from Team Usyk. I have it on good authority that Usyk's corner was heard after the 9th saying "Okay, so it happened as we predicted - now crank the heat up, this is it" in Ukrainian.

Nobody supported AJ like me and there was a moment in the 9th when I thought " Damn Josh take him out son you have done it, just one more uppercut" ...... Then Usyk absolutely battered him in from round 10 to the final bell. AJ became a walking punch bag:Flush: He blew his load in the 9th. He had him. He was beating Usyk around the ring and it was all downhill from the 10th on.

It was a close fight, and Joshua was in the fight until? Rounds 10,11,12. Usyk was not winning rounds super easy or clearly until pretty much the Championship rounds. Joshua fought a solid fight, managed the pace of the fight well. Usyk just entered into another gear after round 9 'In response to Joshua's best round etc'.

Not really. What I'm saying is by Boxing Scene standards, a draw would not be a robbery. If I can't name 7 clear rounds for Usyk, and I can't, I wouldn't be able to complain that a draw was a robbery. That’s just you then. If they gave Joshua every round that Usyk didn’t dominate, it would have been a robbery.

theres your answer then. Not really. What I'm saying is by Boxing Scene standards, a draw would not be a robbery. If I can't name 7 clear rounds for Usyk, and I can't, I wouldn't be able to complain that a draw was a robbery.