Mayweather-Castillo I: Your Scorecard

[Humean]

Humean, glad to hear your thoughts. You are correct that scoring rounds even has fallen quite out of vogue in recent years, but 1) I personally disagree very much w/this trend, and 2) a 10-10 round is technically still a permissible scoring option for a judge (cf. round 10 of Hopkins-Pascal I on one card). I only opt for "even" if I truly am unable in good conscience to give one competitor even a very thin margin over their opponent. I feel this is the only fair ruling, rather than manufacturing an artificial round-winner. However, I feel confident that if I did force myself to choose one winner for each round that ultimately it wouldn't change my card's outcome in terms of the winner. (I don't think they would both go JLC's way.)

I think that the problem with scoring even rounds is that you can get into a habit of scoring even rounds everytime there is a very close round, you can be unfair to fighters this way the same way as you can when you feel you are almost tossing a coin in terms of who to give the round to.

Personally I think this fight was so close that scoring it 1 or 2 points either way is pretty accurate. When people say that Mayweather lost to Castillo they are being ridiculous and i'd believe that even if I thought Castillo won by 1 or 2 rounds, we must all have our own margin of error! Mayweather got the nod because he was the bigger name American fighter fighting in America, that is just the reality of things, it is extremely hard to get rid of unconscious bias.

[Hop]

I think that the problem with scoring even rounds is that you can get into a habit of scoring even rounds everytime there is a very close round, you can be unfair to fighters this way the same way as you can when you feel you are almost tossing a coin in terms of who to give the round to.

I completely agree with you here, and I'm sure that's exactly why scoring even rounds is so strongly discouraged these days. All I can say is that in my own personal case I do not use even rounds as a wimpy sort of cop-out. For me, I believe that option makes me a better boxing judge.


Personally I think this fight was so close that scoring it 1 or 2 points either way is pretty accurate. When people say that Mayweather lost to Castillo they are being ridiculous and i'd believe that even if I thought Castillo won by 1 or 2 rounds, we must all have our own margin of error! Mayweather got the nod because he was the bigger name American fighter fighting in America, that is just the reality of things, it is extremely hard to get rid of unconscious bias.

I understand, but I guess I wouldn't automatically say that when someone opines that Mayweather lost this fight that they are "being ridiculous". It could be an honest opinion (with which I disagree). I'm also not sure that I accept as fact the reasons you give for FM getting the nod (i.e. bias). I think it was just respectable scoring, personally.

Thanks for the good dialogue!

[Mr Gruber]

1 Mayweather 10-9
2 Mayweather 10-9
3 Mayweather 10-9
4 Mayweather 10-9
5 Castillo 10-9
6 Castillo 10-9
7 Castillo 10-9
*8 Castillo 9-9 (Castillo loses a point)
9 Mayweather 10-9
*10 Castillo 10-8 (Floyd loses a point)
11 Castillo 10-9
12 Castillo 10-9

Castillo 6-5, 1 even 114-112

You need to be keen on body punching to appreciate Castillo's offense. That more than anything won him this fight imo. And I had him taking both the rds where penalties were issued, which played a big part in scoring of a close fight.

[Humean]

I understand, but I guess I wouldn't automatically say that when someone opines that Mayweather lost this fight that they are "being ridiculous". It could be an honest opinion (with which I disagree). I'm also not sure that I accept as fact the reasons you give for FM getting the nod (i.e. bias). I think it was just respectable scoring, personally.

I think the fight was far too close to show the sort of confidence people sometimes show in asserting that Mayweather lost.

I don't hold that unconscious bias indicates that the scoring is not respectable. I simply think it is endemic, including in my own scoring. It is too easy to focus just that little bit too much on one fighter during the course of a fight. The judges had the fight 116-111, 115-111, 115-111, all those scores were within the realm of respectable but do you doubt that unconscious bias tilted them in Mayweather's direction? They were on the outer reaches of respectable in respect to Mayweather. Do you not think the scores would have been narrower if Mayweather wasn't so much more a big deal than Castillo and/or the fight took place in Mexico? Again i'm not suggesting that this implies that the result was somehow not respectable because it works both ways.

[RespekonMyName]

I had it 7-4-1 Mayweather. Castillo gave away too many early rounds. People act like fights aren't scored over 12 rounds.

[cupocity303]

My scorecard is on video:

[Hop]

I think the fight was far too close to show the sort of confidence people sometimes show in asserting that Mayweather lost. Well, if they're all brash and big talkin' about it, yes, I quite agree. And by the way I've seen that stuff from both sides on this one -- as if it was a one-sided fight. (eye-roll)

I don't hold that unconscious bias indicates that the scoring is not respectable. I simply think it is endemic, including in my own scoring. It is too easy to focus just that little bit too much on one fighter during the course of a fight. Very difficult not to be tinged by it, I suppose. Call me naive, but I would say difficult, but not impossible. The judges had the fight 116-111, 115-111, 115-111, all those scores were within the realm of respectable but do you doubt that unconscious bias tilted them in Mayweather's direction? Could well be, but I'm agnostic here. They were on the outer reaches of respectable in respect to Mayweather. I very much agree, "outer reaches". Do you not think the scores would have been narrower if Mayweather wasn't so much more a big deal than Castillo and/or the fight took place in Mexico? Well, IMO this is a bit tricky. IOW, I think it's probably true that when the reputation of greatness precedes a fighter a judge is more apt to notice little skillful touches he exhibits -- but I'm not sure that's a bad thing! If the fight had been in Mexico I think the pressure to score more favorably for Castillo would have been greater (though that crowd was pretty vocal on his behalf!) and that would be wrong, but I'm not sure that makes the case that what did happen (in Vegas) was influenced unjustly in the opposite direction. Again i'm not suggesting that this implies that the result was somehow not respectable because it works both ways.

Again, want to say it is nice to just talk boxing with a knowledgeable fellow enthusiast as we have. So often this is thwarted by childish clowns who feel smart when they insult you and show they can use profanity. All the best, sincerely.

[Hop]

Cupo303, unfortunately I've been unable to get your YT vid to play for me. I even went over YouTube directly -- still no dice. I'll keep trying.

BTW is the "303" in your handle b/c you are from metro-Denver? If so, we are neighbors! Going to the Alvarado-Provodnikov fight? I just got my tickets.

[bose]

Castillo won this fight. A fight that Larry was saying Castillo sold his title but Castillo gives Floyd his toughest fight up to that point. Even their second fight was a close fight but Floyd decided to stay away more aggressively. I don't see how people think Castillo lost all of the first 5 rounds. Too bad Castillo didn't get the decision he deserved and as for close rounds that usally goes to the Champion not the contender, you have to take the title from the Champion (which is why pac has decision wins over marquez, judges look for aggresiveness).

[The Big Dunn]

Don't recall my exact scorecard but I had Mayweather edging it.

same as me.....