I scored Fox vs. Maestre. And...

[Combat Talk Radio]

As I wrote elsewhere, I have seen worse robberies.

Forgetting about the obviously biased 117-110 card, Fox won perhaps by one or even two points considering the knockdown.

This is a classic case of frequently ineffective pressure (Maestre) vs "I-am-winning-so-who-cares-about-committing-more" (Fox). The latter's attitude doesn't sit well with attack-oriented judges.

Having Fox winning by one round or even two I'm perfectly fine with.

I'm just talking about this "robbery" narrative. It was not a robbery. Fox didn't do enough to decisively convince judges who like constant power action.

[Combat Talk Radio]

So, 91 power shots landed isn't a damned thing? It's 12 less than Maestre landed. Who took more damage between the two? Maestre. If you can't see that, I can't help you.

Listen to what you're saying.

This guy Fox couldn't manage more than 12 power shots over a guy who was throwing way less shots.

Fox's accuracy was trash. He was tossing jabs and missing more than he was landing. The power shots here are just counter straights and uppercuts.

Those numbers tell you clearly - even despite Fox's activity he still couldn't outland Maestre.

I'm sorry bro, you don't get the pony when you look flashy but work basic.

[Combat Talk Radio]

Now do Williams-Lara

Williams/Lara WAS a robbery because regardless, Williams was actually eating shots, constantly. Which is why Sergio was able to sleep him off those same shots. Lara just did half ass as he always does.

[Combat Talk Radio]

What's the consensus scorecard that most have? Really 11-1 for Fox like what the unofficial scorecard guy had on the broadcast?

If anyone has some time on hand, I would like to know how they scored round 1,6,10,11,12 (preferable with a note whether it was a clear or close round).

again, before someone says otherwise, I had Fox winning but he definitely slowed down in the last 3 rounds and maestre pushed the pace hard enough to win r6. It wasnt a 11-1 wash to me.

not trolling or something. But I am closer to the 6-6 plus knockdown card than the 11-1 from the fox team. I feel like after he outboxed maestre through most of the fight and then hurt him in r9, the broadcast team didnt pay attention anymore when maestre fought with more urgency from r10 onwards.

6-6 with a knockdown gets you to 114-113 which is one of the cards.

The only reason I didn't come up with that is that the version of the video I watched didn't have 2 minutes of the first round, which is the main clincher. You score that straight up, you will end up with either 114-113 for Fox (that's fine) or a draw (which is fine).

Nobody supports 11-1 unless they're straight biased. Hell no.

People are just overreacting to the 117 card. I don't care about individual cards. My card is very close to two of the judges, and their cards had it close. That means I'm not wrong.

[Combat Talk Radio]

And another thing.

Per Compubox, Fox landed 157 of 712 punches (22 percent), while Maestre connected with 131 of 524 shots (25 percent).

That's called a close fight, ladies and gentlemen. NOT a robbery.

And oh by the way, the guy looking flashy missed almost as many punches as Maestre threw in total.

Dude, Fox is smoke and mirrors, just like Whitaker against De La Hoya. Maestre puts that dude to sleep if they rematch that.

[SUBZER0ED]

Listen to what you're saying.

This guy Fox couldn't manage more than 12 power shots over a guy who was throwing way less shots.

Fox's accuracy was trash. He was tossing jabs and missing more than he was landing. The power shots here are just counter straights and uppercuts.

Those numbers tell you clearly - even despite Fox's activity he still couldn't outland Maestre.

I'm sorry bro, you don't get the pony when you look flashy but work basic.

Again, who took the greater damage?

[Tatabanya]

Having Fox winning by one round or even two I'm perfectly fine with.

I'm just talking about this "robbery" narrative. It was not a robbery. Fox didn't do enough to decisively convince judges who like constant power action.

In fact, when I wrote about having seen "worse robberies", I meant to say exactly that: the wrong man won, but genuine robbery is another level of debate. This is just a decision that went the wrong way, but that idiot who scored 117-110 shifted the balance of perception in most observers.

On a side note, I scored De La Hoya vs Whitaker for the latter. Whitaker was flashy, but Oscar - as it often happened in many of his fights - scored "points" with air-catching flurries emphasized by the audience going "Oooh! Aaah!" as soon as he moved a finger.

[Combat Talk Radio]

Again, who took the greater damage?

"Damage"? Fox. Because Fox didn't land anything of note on Maestre while Maestre was beating the hell out of that body.

I promise you Fox was pissing blood back at the hotel.

[SUBZER0ED]

"Damage"? Fox. Because Fox didn't land anything of note on Maestre while Maestre was beating the hell out of that body.

I promise you Fox was pissing blood back at the hotel.

So, the knockdown in round 2 and the staggering in round 9 amounted to nothing? If Maestre damaged Fox so much to the body, why didn't he go down or even take a knee? Oh wait, you must be talking about the numerous illegal shots Maestre landed on Fox's back

[Combat Talk Radio]

So, the knockdown in round 2 and the staggering in round 9 amounted to nothing? If Maestre damaged Fox so much to the body, why didn't he go down or even take a knee? Oh wait, you must be talking about the numerous illegal shots Maestre landed on Fox's back

I see.

So to you, winning two rounds = you won the fight.

You don't actually score round by round, each round as a separate fight , like you're supposed to and like I did.

Now it makes sense why you're so biased.