As I said in my initial post, I can see it going either way. Neither guy was doing a whole lot, really, except basically wrestling. It was a far different fight from Kambosos-Lopez, for instance, which I thought was scored a little closer than it should have been. And all of the judges scorecards on this fight were very, very close, which that's the kind of fight it was. So, to call this a robbery, as most everyone is doing, doesn't have merit in my opinion.
Comments Thread For: Josh Taylor Overcomes Knockdown, Edges Jack Catterall With Razor-Close Split Decision
Collapse
-
-
going to rewatch this before I share my real thoughts on the fight as I missed the first 6 rounds.Comment
-
It was a TopRank card. Even the judge who had Jack winning was su****iously close. Don't even dare play dumb with this. You know Bob wanted to put the finishing touches to this fight to make sure his guys got to fight for all the vacant titles. What would they do if Jack had the titles? They'd have to come and get them. But would they fight Jack now? Yeah, we'll see.Comment
-
Oscar was not robbed against Trinidad. Trinidad won 2 of the first 6, and then began putting real pressure on Oscar who gassed, as he ALWAYS did in later rounds. I've watched him since his very first fight, he always gassed. (and, though not relevant to THIS fight Mosely was always better and Oscar kept ducking him until put in a corner).There is no way that Taylor won that fight. His team knows it, and everyone else knows he lost.
Catterall won so clearly. Boxing gives itself another black eye, over and over again. It robs fighters of their hard earned victories after much sacrifice.
The corruption is so deep, how does boxing fix this? You can go back to when a judge gave Canelo a draw against Floyd.
Remember Whitaker robbed against Chavez, Oscar robbed against Trinidad, and Lewis vs Holyfield, to name a few among many shocking decisions.
The last 5 rounds were Trinidad's according to all the judges but one, and he was really running away for those rounds. Look at the fight again, he puts his running shoes on after rd 8. And in the last two was hardly able to keep on his feet. They were EXACTLY like the last two rounds of Hagler-Hearns.Comment
-
I have no control over how you choose to interpret what you read. But I clarified the matter. So I can't really say more than that. Taylor is a winner but he's not impressive to me, in my opinion. But that's subjective. I have nothing against him, just don't see him as anything special.
You said "Typical" as to clearly suggest he was low level. Taylor and the other 3 you mentioned are superior to any American out there. Resumes are beyond what they can achieve. If you're looking at hype without substance and a typical American fighter, look no further than Colbert last night. They're called the goods for no reason what so ever. Taylor, like any fighter in history, is undefeated until they're not. Plus, it took a "UK fighter" to beat him where the others couldn't. It was just a strange comment considering.
There indeed is. Stiff, technical, very olympic-amateur style influenced. You see it in AJ, Brook, Khan, Taylor, Smith et al. It's a common style I have notice among them. Like a base boxer build. Sizes will change, appearances will change, one guy might be more powerful the other guy faster. But the common traits are all there in the same exact way.
Comment
-
I'd counter that with Calzaghe, Naseem Hamed, Froch, Haye, Hatton, Nigel Benn...?There indeed is. Stiff, technical, very olympic-amateur style influenced. You see it in AJ, Brook, Khan, Taylor, Smith et al. It's a common style I have notice among them. Like a base boxer build. Sizes will change, appearances will change, one guy might be more powerful the other guy faster. But the common traits are all there in the same exact way.
Comment
-
Did you really have to make a separate thread for it, cvnt?I've reviewed the bout here: https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/b...jack-catterallComment
-
Comment
Comment