if it wasnt for the cuts pavlik would have won the fight, agreed ??
Agreed. Most of the posts on here make it sound like it was a 120-108 fight for Martinez...but he was very likely on his way to an "L" before he opened the cuts on the right eye. Those cuts (which, to his credit, Martinez made happen) turned the fight and opened the door for his victory. But that's no knock on him....he made those cuts happen, and he is the one who reversed the momentum...gotta' respect that.
Tyson - small heavyweight with great boxingskills, speed and KO power.. The baddest man on the planet.
Just to be clear, Tyson was not a small heavyweight, he was merely a short heavyweight. Until the last few non-contending years of his career, he routinely outweighed opponents (in fact, more often than not- he was equal or greater in weight in ~30 of his first 45 fights), and was rarely significantly outweighed.
first of all hagler is 5'9, not 6'3 lol.
second off he got robbed via a SPLIT DECISION to the greatest boxer in the last 30 years by pro judges scoring by amateur standards.Fixed it for ya'.
Gotta' love stuff like this.....allows the true insanity of NSB to shine! I greatly enjoy and appreciate Pac....and I agree that it is a bit flawed to compare an active fighter to a retired fighter.....but seriously, this shouldn't be close to being close. Should be Hagler by a substantial landslide, with a caveat acknowledging Pac's great and unfinished career. Then again, people on here generally don't do too well with any shades of grey....
I actually think it was a TKO. KO is when you go down for the 10 count and TKO is when the ringside dr or the ref stop the fight out of worry for a boxers safety. Kenny Bayless stopped the fight the moment Hatton hit the canvas because he thought he was in bad shape and probably thought counting to 10 would endanger him more (ie. swallow his tongue). So I think it was a TKO! Might be wrong though!
This is correct. The Pac / Hatton fight end was unquestionably ended via TKO and not by KO in the semantic, official scoring sense. A "KO" only officially occurs when you are given and fail to rise for a full 10-count.
As stated above, neither are really any better than the other. They are equally meaningful.
The referee was protecting the Golden Boy fighter the entire fight. He gave Mendoza constant warnings, but not even one for Lacy, even after he deliberately tackled Mendoza to avoid being KO'd. Lacy also showed no class after the fight trying to act like he dominated. I hope HBO doesn't try to sell us a Taylor-Lacy fight. That would be a really bad mismatch.
I thought the tackle should have warranted a point deduction.
1. Sugar Ray Robinson- Retired at the age of 44 after 25 years of fighting, turning prob at age 19....Look at it this way, in his last proffestional year of 1965, and alot of this had to do with money yes, but desire as well, although fighting with some diminshed skills, he fought 14 time in only 9 months....
In SRR's specific case, it had nothing to do with desire, and everything to do with needing money. He was very explicit about the fact that he did not enjoy boxing, and that he did it for a payday. He had tried his hand at acting, entertaining, etc., and failed badly, so he went back to the well that he knew would pay the bills.
Vitali wasn't even hurt by that uppercut....He was unphased and came right back after that and landed good shots on Lewis.
Eh.....? Come again? He was clearly "affected," and went into clinch mode for a while after that. Didn't kill him, but it clearly hurt him to some extent.
Its called product elasticity. They have very smart people that study this shit.......$49.99 is the maximum profit point.
Exactly....the reality boils down to some simple math;
For them to make the same money that they do for 100,000 buys @ $50, they'd need to sell 166,667 @$30.....and, obviously, if they are going to increase their rake, they need to sell even more. It's hard to imagine that they could increase their sales by 60%+ with that kind of drop.
It was terrible, but then again, it's a tough song to do well- and I've seen it butchered by American's on untold dozens of occasions (see the aforementioned Carl Lewis debacle for exhibit A), so just an amusing, mildly bewildering sidelight. Perhaps it was meant to appropriately compliment the quality of the fight that it proceeded.....?
Yeah. Way too early. Maybe Pavlik'll take Calzaghe before Abraham, but that wouldn't be ducking IMO. That'll be financial sense!
Furthermore, it's hard to say someone is "ducking" if they move up in weight to fight an undefeated multi-level champion.....that's a pretty inventive usage of the intended meaning of ducking. LOL!
Chavez jr said after the fight, that he would seriously give it much thought if he should continue. If he struggles against Vanda, think of what happens when faced with the elite of the division.
The network , Azteca America said that we as fans will no longer have to pay to see PPv fights. I dont know if they mean ppv's like Hbo or just these sarcasms called Chavez jr ppv,s.
It is a bit hard to imagine that people would continue to part with their hard earned money to watch a Chavez Jr. PPV.....
Sigh.
So let me get this straight.
Part of the conspiracy was to have 1 judge score for Vanda?
Is that supposed to make the result less suspicious?
You aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer I take it......I won't waste either of our times trying to further clarify an already explicitly obvious post.....
If every judge scored it 100-90 in favor of Chavez, we'd have a discussion.
As it stands it was a split decision where 1 judge scored it for Vanda.
Go ahead and slow down on the booze, I don't wanna hear conspiracy.I won't dispute the outcome, but I will strongly disagree with your (lack of) logic here. While it's true that "in the final outcome" it does not matter if a judge had it 96-94 or 100-90, the fact that a judge blatantly scored a fight incorrectly IS noteworthy, and certainly worth discussing/investigating. Doesn't necessarily mean that the loser got "robbed," but it could still be an indication of a "fix." Can you decipher the subtle difference there?
A judge can be in the tank for a fighter, and that fighter still might happen to win straight up.
Yeah.....if it continue like this I wouldd really like to see his corner jump in and stop this.....As of right now he's taking a lot of unanswered shots when he gets in on the ropes.....
Thankfully, they finally stepped in and stopped (before the Dr. could)....
It has a disclaimer under it that says "bout subject to commission approval / change." Isn't that enough to let you or anyone else know that it isn't yet written in stone? :dunno:
Rahman is in a different boart. It was third round, he was clear. The cut was no where near deep. Im talking about fighters like Freitas who after 10 rounds of getting pounded on a Chico. Not a fighter who got a minor cut in the 3rd round looking for a way out. He was beat up like Oscar, Popo, Gatti. Even Alphonso Gomez took a beating. But the way that Rock wnet out is not in the same league.
Fair enough. I can agree with that.
I noticed this too. I am surprised someone just posted about his. I think he should have his trainers license revoked for 6-12 months. Now he saw first hand what fucking around can do. I think too many trainers put too much pressure on there fighters. If the fighter feels he cant go on, dont make him feel uncomfortable to tell you that. If he doesnt want anymore dont keep pushing him to go back out there. I see this all too much. And as fans we are a little to hard on fighters when they quit on their stools too, which is also a factor. Fighters like Freitas, Tszyu, and others have boxed all of their lives. They are not pussies, they just know their limitations. I will never talk shit about a boxer that quits on his stool. They know them selves more than we do.
Fuck Rahman. He is a fuckin waist. He could have went on. Fighters like Gatti would laugh at this ecxcuse ridden HW.
Not as a bash in any way, but do you think these two comments could be perceived as being incongruent in some regards? Just curious to see how you would parse the differences as you see them.
I hope it comes off, but I sure wouldn't want to plan my vacation around it.
Amen.....it will be nice if it happens, but I'm not about to invest any time, energy, or money in banking on it coming off......Fool me once, shame on you....fool me twice, shame on me.....