Tweet
My own opinion about the fight is that it could have gone either way, depending on what was emphasized in the scoring... I want to briefly make a case for Beter... At least to show this was no robbery. I am not going to score the fight! I am doing this from a different perspective. I value those who score fights, but often, just counting shots is little more than glorified punch stat info. My interest is what actually happened, who displayed dominance, more skill, more damage, to the opponent, whom was damaged, etc.
Before the fight started: Lets assume both men were "champions" of the same merit. So neither man was considered the champ going in... Now lets look at the the ebb and flow of the fight, particularly the last two rounds:
1. Lets assume Bivol won the first two rounds
2. Lets assume Beter won the last two rounds...
3.There is a fundamental difference in the importance of these last two rounds versus these first two rounds. Beter dominated the championship rounds... His impact on Bivol was tangible. In a real analysis, if this difference can be scored, it should be. I would give Beter at least another round for dominating these rounds... So lets say at this point Beter is up one round and we have rounds 3 to 10 to look at. 7 rounds in total. minus one "even" round we gave Beter for the last two rounds... So we have rounds 4 to 10 for a total of 6 rounds.
4. In these six rounds, would we give either guy any dominant rounds? Where there any outstanding rounds for either guy? Would we rather give points for effective aggression? counter punching? sharp punching? My point is: it is really these rounds which are in contention. Six rounds, or so, where neither guy managed to do much to the other guy. This left a lot of latitude for scoring.
5. My final point is about modern boxing and "punchers" specifically since the change from 12 to 15 rounds: This change greatly benefitted the boxers. A puncher had less rounds to work, and the puncher, defensive oriented stylists, had 3 less rounds to have to avoid the puncher. Beter had Bivol in trouble... marginally, but, never the less... I think this fact should be important considering the scoring, in some way... How can we expect punchers today to KO opponents with the same regularity as when they had 3 more rounds to do so?
My point here is not to score the fight, but to show it was a fair decision. I eat crow humbly... I thought Beter would KO Bivol, in 10 rounds, or less. I do think he would have in a 15 round fight, but I was wrong. I do however think the decision was fair.
Before the fight started: Lets assume both men were "champions" of the same merit. So neither man was considered the champ going in... Now lets look at the the ebb and flow of the fight, particularly the last two rounds:
1. Lets assume Bivol won the first two rounds
2. Lets assume Beter won the last two rounds...
3.There is a fundamental difference in the importance of these last two rounds versus these first two rounds. Beter dominated the championship rounds... His impact on Bivol was tangible. In a real analysis, if this difference can be scored, it should be. I would give Beter at least another round for dominating these rounds... So lets say at this point Beter is up one round and we have rounds 3 to 10 to look at. 7 rounds in total. minus one "even" round we gave Beter for the last two rounds... So we have rounds 4 to 10 for a total of 6 rounds.
4. In these six rounds, would we give either guy any dominant rounds? Where there any outstanding rounds for either guy? Would we rather give points for effective aggression? counter punching? sharp punching? My point is: it is really these rounds which are in contention. Six rounds, or so, where neither guy managed to do much to the other guy. This left a lot of latitude for scoring.
5. My final point is about modern boxing and "punchers" specifically since the change from 12 to 15 rounds: This change greatly benefitted the boxers. A puncher had less rounds to work, and the puncher, defensive oriented stylists, had 3 less rounds to have to avoid the puncher. Beter had Bivol in trouble... marginally, but, never the less... I think this fact should be important considering the scoring, in some way... How can we expect punchers today to KO opponents with the same regularity as when they had 3 more rounds to do so?
My point here is not to score the fight, but to show it was a fair decision. I eat crow humbly... I thought Beter would KO Bivol, in 10 rounds, or less. I do think he would have in a 15 round fight, but I was wrong. I do however think the decision was fair.
billeau2
Eddie's a good lad! Smells like lemon pledge, helps old ladies across the street...
Comment