So who won tonight? Castano or Charlo? Controversy aplenty?

[Tatabanya]

It has to be EFFECTIVE aggression

This right here. Of the first six rounds, Castano was efficiently aggressive only in the third, when he managed to stun Charlo.

But for most of the exchanges, Charlo was dictating the pace, keeping Castano at the end of his punches and having almost no problem whatsoever in controlling the fight.

From the 7th, Castano stepped on the gas pedal, and did much better... until he was on the verge being knocked out in the 10th, and stunned again in the 11th.

He did not do enough to win a clear decision.

As I posted elsewhere, people were hoping for Castano to win because Charlo rubs most of us the wrong way. When this kind of feeling blinds the observer, there's no way to achieve objective analysis.

[paulf]

I had Castano by like 4 rounds but the fight wasn't a robbery. I was upset he didn't get the W because I'm a sucker for the underdog always, but there were a good number of close rounds and Charlo took control at the end. No question Charlo won the 2nd, 10th, 11th, 12th at least to me. And there were a number of close rounds outside of those.

Yes the judge that scored it wide for Charlo was corrupt and dishonest. But to me, a draw is fair.

It was a great fight!

[Vlad_]

I had Castano by like 4 rounds but the fight wasn't a robbery. I was upset he didn't get the W because I'm a sucker for the underdog always, but there were a good number of close rounds and Charlo took control at the end. No question Charlo won the 2nd, 10th, 11th, 12th at least to me. And there were a number of close rounds outside of those.

Yes the judge that scored it wide for Charlo was corrupt and dishonest. But to me, a draw is fair.

It was a great fight!

So did you have to give Charlo every benefit of the doubt to have it close?

[paulf]

So did you have to give Charlo every benefit of the doubt to have it close?

I gave Castano every benefit of the doubt so I had it 8-4.

In the closer rounds, Charlo was out-landing Castano. Castano was being careful and didn't do a lot of work, but landed a couple eye-catching shots. Were those shots enough to take the round?

If you think that Castano did the better work in one of the closer rounds, you probably think he did the better work in all of the closer rounds.

Same goes if you thought Charlo did the better work.

That's how scoring works and you know this.

[Combat Talk Radio]

I gave Castano every benefit of the doubt so I had it 8-4.

In the closer rounds, Charlo was out-landing Castano. Castano was being careful and didn't do a lot of work, but landed a couple eye-catching shots. Were those shots enough to take the round?

If you think that Castano did the better work in one of the closer rounds, you probably think he did the better work in all of the closer rounds.

Same goes if you thought Charlo did the better work.

That's how scoring works and you know this.

Thank you for stating this obvious truth about how SWING rounds work.

It's just sad seeing so many people react like this. It's nobody scores round by round anymore or they bias the swing rounds. It's sickening.

[Satir]

Tszyu:s left would stop these guys; he beats both by ko

[_Rexy_]

I gave Castano every benefit of the doubt so I had it 8-4.

In the closer rounds, Charlo was out-landing Castano. Castano was being careful and didn't do a lot of work, but landed a couple eye-catching shots. Were those shots enough to take the round?

If you think that Castano did the better work in one of the closer rounds, you probably think he did the better work in all of the closer rounds.

Same goes if you thought Charlo did the better work.

That's how scoring works and you know this.

Charlo landed more punches in four rounds, and more power punches in only one round...

[KingOfGlory]

You only have to look at the reaction of each corner. Charlo's corner was giddy after the decision.

[moochi]

Pointless discussion, when have WE ever seen the non A side get a points decision?

When have we seen the boxing community not award the A side with a "controversial win" ?

When have we seen the community recognise it as it should have been, a LOSS.

If Charlo lost, nobody would have said anything, except for "get a rematch", nobody would have said it was controversial for Castano.

The problem is that the A side know that robbing the B side doesn't matter, as it goes like this...

Narrative, rinse, repeat


- fighters are promoted to nut hugger casuals, remember that, they aren't trying to win over normal fans
- the general community says WTF another robbery
- the boxing pundits say "controversial" , so they water it down from robbery to controversial
- the boxing pundits then says "it could have gone either way"
- the nut hungers don't even know the difference, as long as they don't see their guy get KO'd, they think he won
- the boxing community then have everyone think it was close and ah well, move on.
- the pundits revert back to nut hugging.

Just look at the last 5 years to see this, Canelo getting clearly beaten by GGG, then taking PEDs and then again getting beaten by GGG, but because you did a bit better than last time you get a W.

Happens over and over again.

[Vlad_]

Pointless discussion, when have WE ever seen the non A side get a points decision?

When have we seen the boxing community not award the A side with a "controversial win" ?

When have we seen the community recognise it as it should have been, a LOSS.

If Charlo lost, nobody would have said anything, except for "get a rematch", nobody would have said it was controversial for Castano.

The problem is that the A side know that robbing the B side doesn't matter, as it goes like this...

Narrative, rinse, repeat


- fighters are promoted to nut hugger casuals, remember that, they aren't trying to win over normal fans
- the general community says WTF another robbery
- the boxing pundits say "controversial" , so they water it down from robbery to controversial
- the boxing pundits then says "it could have gone either way"
- the nut hungers don't even know the difference, as long as they don't see their guy get KO'd, they think he won
- the boxing community then have everyone think it was close and ah well, move on.
- the pundits revert back to nut hugging.

Just look at the last 5 years to see this, Canelo getting clearly beaten by GGG, then taking PEDs and then again getting beaten by GGG, but because you did a bit better than last time you get a W.

Happens over and over again.

That's a pretty decent analysis.