Comments Thread For: Crawford's Canelo Talk Prompts Big "Money" Comparison

[Roadblock]

I say this respectfully, you judge fights like Julie Lederman and her dad. You see things way differently than most. Some fights are easy to score and some are hard. If you feel that Floyd won that first match against Castillo hands down, without any of the rounds being swing rounds, you're super biased. I'm sorry. Some fights are just not easy to score. Examples of tough fights to score are: Floyd VS Castillo l, Pacquiao VS Marquez lI, Morales VS Barrera I and II, Ward VS Kovalev, Holyfield VS Bowe I, and more. While I had Mayweather winning their first matchup, in consequencing viewings, I watched with a biased eye, leaning towards Castillo, and I can see how a few judges/scorers scoring fights could give enough rounds to Castillo to be declared a winner (or at least worthy of a draw). Whether we'd like to admit it or not, all judgers have tendencies to score fights from a biased perspective. Try doing it sometime. Try using humility. With all do respect, I feel that you struggle in this area. I never even heard of Castillo before the fight, and out of being a Mayweather fan, I scored it for Floyd without really scrutinizing my scoring. It was because of the noise after the decision that made me give this fight a closer look.

And if you score fights, there's no way that you had Hagler beating Leonard. I go through this argument with a lot of biased Hagler fans. From a mathematical standpoint, it's arguably conceivable to say that the first 5 out of six rounds were won by Leonard. It's almost impossible to not give at least two of the last six rounds to Leonard - that's enough for a Leonard victory right there. I've tried to score in biased fashion in favor of Hagler a few times. On my best Haglar Generosity Day, Leonard wins. While it's obvious that Hagler appeared to openly hurt Leonard once or twice, that doesn't win someone a fight. Boxing is scored on a 10 point must system. Leonard won more rounds 10 to 9 than Hagler did.

Just put your score down then we can isolate rounds and dissect the scoring, the numbers are debatable because there is 12 of them and only 3 min each of video so a more accurate picture can be seen way more so than a story.

[elfag]

Castillo and Maidana gave floyd his hardest fights, crawford doesnt fight like them. Mayweather has too good control of distance and space, too good of legs and quick hands for crawford to beat him. I think someone like Chavez Sr would give him a harder fight than Crawford.

A lot of pressure can make floyd have to work hard. Augustus and Hatton even though they lost most rounds made floyd work very hard and if floyd tried to take a breather he would have lost those round to them.

Hearns and maybe SRL are the only fighters I would outright pick against floyd.

[War Room]

The thruth always prevail. Come on Always in Vegas with his Side kick Kenny Payless. Fights at a distance, once the other fighter gets inside clinch him to death and have sidekick Payless break up the clinch, rinse and repeat.

Refs are suppossed to break up a clinch.

aha. Now this explains why roadbloack is stalking me on every one of my posts trying to get me to say spence wasn't 100 percent. Bubahahahahahahah

When you're wrong, you got to take it on the chin. I exposed him and he just won't do it. Moving forward, his credibility should be completely scrutinized and at the end of the day he's only brought it on himself. When I'm wrong I admit it, which is why I'm the best poster on this site. Fuck up, own it, win/win.

I say this respectfully, you judge fights like Julie Lederman and her dad. You see things way differently than most. Some fights are easy to score and some are hard. If you feel that Floyd won that first match against Castillo hands down, without any of the rounds being swing rounds, you're super biased. I'm sorry. Some fights are just not easy to score. Examples of tough fights to score are: Floyd VS Castillo l, Pacquiao VS Marquez lI, Morales VS Barrera I and II, Ward VS Kovalev, Holyfield VS Bowe I, and more. While I had Mayweather winning their first matchup, in consequencing viewings, I watched with a biased eye, leaning towards Castillo, and I can see how a few judges/scorers scoring fights could give enough rounds to Castillo to be declared a winner (or at least worthy of a draw). Whether we'd like to admit it or not, all judgers have tendencies to score fights from a biased perspective. Try doing it sometime. Try using humility. With all do respect, I feel that you struggle in this area. I never even heard of Castillo before the fight, and out of being a Mayweather fan, I scored it for Floyd without really scrutinizing my scoring. It was because of the noise after the decision that made me give this fight a closer look.

And if you score fights, there's no way that you had Hagler beating Leonard. I go through this argument with a lot of biased Hagler fans. From a mathematical standpoint, it's arguably conceivable to say that the first 5 out of six rounds were won by Leonard. It's almost impossible to not give at least two of the last six rounds to Leonard - that's enough for a Leonard victory right there. I've tried to score in biased fashion in favor of Hagler a few times. On my best Haglar Generosity Day, Leonard wins. While it's obvious that Hagler appeared to openly hurt Leonard once or twice, that doesn't win someone a fight. Boxing is scored on a 10 point must system. Leonard won more rounds 10 to 9 than Hagler did.

Wrong, I judge fights like Jerry Roth who is the best judge in modern history, maybe all time. I judge objectively, facts. There is only one way to score a fight just like Malignaggi says.

There is very few opportunities for a round to go either way. You either know how to score or you don't and the conecpt of swing rounds is perfect artillery for corrupt judges.

When I was a kid and a teenager, I had Hagler beating Leonard. Like I said, I didn't know what I was doing at the time, now I do. The point wasn't the fight itself, it was that you need to get better and I used it as a point of reference for myself in a fight that a lot of people contend.

[djtmal]

Refs are suppossed to break up a clinch.
d.

They also supposed to warn and take points for excessive holding, clinching, etc.

The better refs will tell both guys to punch and get out.

The Floyd appointed refs. allowed him to hold excessively without so much as a warning.

Floyd will clinch, and the ref will always be facing Floyds opponent so the opponent can't throw anything in the clinch. Not supposed to be like that.

You can tell Bayless was under specific instructions.

[Lefty0616]

Refs are suppossed to break up a clinch.



When you're wrong, you got to take it on the chin. I exposed him and he just won't do it. Moving forward, his credibility should be completely scrutinized and at the end of the day he's only brought it on himself. When I'm wrong I admit it, which is why I'm the best poster on this site. Fuck up, own it, win/win.



Wrong, I judge fights like Jerry Roth who is the best judge in modern history, maybe all time. I judge objectively, facts. There is only one way to score a fight just like Malignaggi says.

There is very few opportunities for a round to go either way. You either know how to score or you don't and the conecpt of swing rounds is perfect artillery for corrupt judges.

When I was a kid and a teenager, I had Hagler beating Leonard. Like I said, I didn't know what I was doing at the time, now I do. The point wasn't the fight itself, it was that you need to get better and I used it as a point of reference for myself in a fight that a lot of people contend.

I disagree. There are potential swing rounds. That's why folks like Larry Merchant give 10-10 rounds. I don't. I don't believe in them. Someone has to win a round. Someone has to lose. Sometimes rounds are that close, thus the term "swing round".

In a perfect world, fights should be judged one way, but every judge has their own system of values. The same can be said about fans. That's why scores differ...and I'm talking non corrupt judging.

You're in the minority as it applies to Hagler beating Leonard.

[boxingitis]

Refs are suppossed to break up a clinch.



When you're wrong, you got to take it on the chin. I exposed him and he just won't do it. Moving forward, his credibility should be completely scrutinized and at the end of the day he's only brought it on himself. When I'm wrong I admit it, which is why I'm the best poster on this site. Fuck up, own it, win/win.



Wrong, I judge fights like Jerry Roth who is the best judge in modern history, maybe all time. I judge objectively, facts. There is only one way to score a fight just like Malignaggi says.

There is very few opportunities for a round to go either way. You either know how to score or you don't and the conecpt of swing rounds is perfect artillery for corrupt judges.

When I was a kid and a teenager, I had Hagler beating Leonard. Like I said, I didn't know what I was doing at the time, now I do. The point wasn't the fight itself, it was that you need to get better and I used it as a point of reference for myself in a fight that a lot of people contend.

That's the point, that some boxers use the CLINCH as strategy and NEVER get points deducted. I understand clinches happen by accident, but being used as tactic is banned. Why do you think they take points OFF from SOME boxers, not named Floyd?

[boxingitis]

So after fact bombing your Baylis comment you have another side step lol.

Corrales HOF, Hatton was another undefeated guy,, now you tell me when was Floyds prime, make me laugh when fans start singing prime when they have no idea what it is or how long its there in elite fighters.

Fact, you didn't prove ****, you said it. I can say Floyd got more gift fights than Manny. No evidence shown, just like you did.

How many times was Floyd deducted point for clinching multiple times and using his elbows?

[Roadblock]

Fact, you didn't prove ****, you said it. I can say Floyd got more gift fights than Manny. No evidence shown, just like you did.

How many times was Floyd deducted point for clinching multiple times and using his elbows?

What are whining about kid you make no sense from one to the next, youre jumping around like a cat on a tin roof with nothing but fan narrative, if you want a logical debate no problems if you want to cry like a little girl Im out, I asked you one question and you couldn't answer it lol just a typical hater crying about BS.

[War Room]

That's the point, that some boxers use the CLINCH as strategy and NEVER get points deducted. I understand clinches happen by accident, but being used as tactic is banned. Why do you think they take points OFF from SOME boxers, not named Floyd?

You don't get points taken for clinching, you get them for holding, big difference.

I disagree. There are potential swing rounds. That's why folks like Larry Merchant give 10-10 rounds. I don't. I don't believe in them. Someone has to win a round. Someone has to lose. Sometimes rounds are that close, thus the term "swing round".

In a perfect world, fights should be judged one way, but every judge has their own system of values. The same can be said about fans. That's why scores differ...and I'm talking non corrupt judging.

There is one way to score a boxing match, to dispute this means YDKSAB, facts.

So like if a judge likes defense or ring generalship, he can score it above clean punching or knockdowns? No lmao, it's lower on the totem poll for a reason. You get a knockdown, you get a point, they even forced it recently that it's an auto 10-8. That means what a judge can not do that if he wants?

IDGAF if you disagree, I don't need you to validate me. I'm a master at the craft, like I said before =---> at the end of the day of you think Castillo beat Floyd YDKSAB.

You're in the minority as it applies to Hagler beating Leonard.

Can you even read?

Dude, like if you can't read what I'm typing, don't reply to me. As a matter of fact, don't reply to me at all. Arguing with someone who DKSAB is completely pointless.

[Lefty0616]

You don't get points taken for clinching, you get them for holding, big difference.



There is one way to score a boxing match, to dispute this means YDKSAB, facts.

So like if a judge likes defense or ring generalship, he can score it above clean punching or knockdowns? No lmao, it's lower on the totem poll for a reason. You get a knockdown, you get a point, they even forced it recently that it's an auto 10-8. That means what a judge can not do that if he wants?

IDGAF if you disagree, I don't need you to validate me. I'm a master at the craft, like I said before =---> at the end of the day of you think Castillo beat Floyd YDKSAB.





Can you even read?

Dude, like if you can't read what I'm typing, don't reply to me. As a matter of fact, don't reply to me at all. Arguing with someone who DKSAB is completely pointless.

Master of the craft? You sound like you beat women. You're slow. Can't debate respectfully....like real men do. ✌✌