Comments Thread For: Fighting Words - Kovalev-Ward: The Fight is Over, The Fighting Isn't

[Ake-Dawg]

Good posts.

At the end of the day, not everyone will agree about the scores. I won't even say it's incorrect per se to have scored 114-113 or 115-112 for Kovalev, as was the case for the majority of people who scored it in his favor. The nature of scoring close rounds means there will be people who run the full gamut of possible scoring of those rounds and who is to say which of those is correct.

Both fighters demonstrated excellence and a rematch will give both fighters an opportunity to make a more definitive statement.

But your are suggesting that 114-113 Ward is WRONG. The whole point of the article was to discuss how the subjectivity of a judge contributes to different scoring in a close fight and that the closeness can swing who is named the Victor. The decision is debatable...not wrong.

[hitking]

I have a couple friends that I'm close with that watched the fight. We all thought Kovalev won a close decision the night of the fight. Both of them have gone back and rewatched it, and came back with the same 114-113 score the judges had. I haven't had time to rewatch yet.

[MC Hammer]

David you just waxed poetic about the alleged subjectivity of this fight even though it came right after a fight where EVERYONE agrees the judges didn't get it "subjectively" wrong, they were BOUGHT OFF or otherwise corrupt in favor of the other Roc Nation fighter on the card.

So David, honestly, maybe you were told to write this to help cover for the judges, but writing an article about boxing judging in this fight without mentioning the evidence that judges on this night were clearly bought off makes you look like a shill.

Additionally, even Ward fans agree Kovalev won the 10th round, so how did all three judges give it to Ward? There is subjectivity, but then there is "if we give Kovalev one more round, he will win, so we have to give every round to Ward from now in, even ones he clearly loses like round 10."

How gullible do you think people are? Disagreeing is one thing, but clear evidence of corruption in favor of the same promotional company twice on the same night goes beyond any reasonable disagreement. Now you can say corruption wasn't quite as clear, at least not in as many rounds, in the Kovalev-Ward fight as it was in the Hooker-Perez fight, and that's fine, but you can't separate the two.

I mean, if you are trying to figure out who committed two serial robberies in real life where the robber leaves the same signature at each crime scene, and you find a suspect named Jonathan Schlooper whose fingerprints, hair, and car is at the first crime scene, but only his fingerprints are at the second crime scene, that doesn't mean you go "well you can't really say it was him the second robbery, because only his fingerprints were there, there wasn't nearly the overwhelming evidence as the first robbery." No, you connect the dots. The evidence from the first crime scene informs you about what happened at the second crime scene.

So David, I have been a huge fan of your work in the past, but I am very disappointed in this column, and I hope you write another one that actually touches on the high likelihood of corruption, not disagreement, but corruption, on this night. I want you to ask why Hooker got the draw against Perez after losing every round on everyone's scorecard? Why did one judge only have Kovalev up 4-2 after he dominated the first 6, but then give Ward every close round the second half of the fight? Why did all three judges give Ward round 10 when that was an obvious Kovalev round? You really think that's just down to disagreement?

See you looked at it from a macro level. You looked at it in hindsight, how you could find 7 rounds for Ward even if you gave Kovalev round 10. But that's not what happened on the night. The way the judges had it, when round 10 came around, if they had given it to Kovalev, he would have won, period. So they didn't have the benefit of moving around various rounds. If they wanted Ward to win, they had to give him round 10. And they did! Even though Kovalev won it clear. So why don't you focus more on that? THAT screams corruption to me. And I hope you actually write about that because right now it feels like you are covering for the judges big time.

I'm sorry, but do boxing judges really deserve the benefit of the doubt 60 minutes after Hooker-Perez ended? Come on.

Stop crying

[Metho_4u]

So, some people believe that this fight was actually bought off? Are you serious? I mean, like really serious? I've questioned a lot of decisions in this sport as being corrupt, bought, etc...but this was a case of being just a close fight. A rematch? Ward will win much more convincingly imo. Kovalev displayed a lot of heart and skill beyond just a puncher, but he and big mouthed b1tch Kathy Duva are making themselves just look bad with their whining. Kovalev complained about this basically being a hometown decision, which I don't believe was the case, but even if it was, this is something you have to expect going to another country to fight. It would be the same if Ward fought in Russia, Germany, Canada, Puerto Rico (where the Herrera fight with Garcia was 10 times worse and was a robbery), England, etc. Like it or not Sergey, the USA is the boxing capital of the world and this is where the best fight....so either exercise your rematch clause, fight someone else, move up, retire, or stfu.

[twosweethooks]

When a championship fight is close it always goes to the benefit of the champ ! The challenger is to take the champeenship out of the hands of the champ not steal thru judges!!!

Too much corruption in boxing !
Too much favoritism in boxing !
I fear the old standards are lost !
Reprobates like the Mayweathers using the money god have over the past several years Duped the young and deceived !

Ward did NOT beat **** therefore he needs to hand the belts back to the champ and providing both fighters have no physical problems do an immediate rematch with judges from Mexico or some other neutral country.

The best thing To solve the judge issue is somebody needs to be KOd !

[monkeyboy]

I don't think there was corruption but I do think that favouritism was taking place.

It was a great, close fight that could have gone ever way and I respect that and both fighters.

I just can't see how anyone could objectively score round 10 to Ward. If you had other swing rounds going to Ward and despite round 10 you have Ward winning the fight then we differ in opinion but I have no problem with you.

If you scored round 10 for Ward like all 3 judges then I think you have very rose tinted spectacles on. It was amazing that Kovalev turned the momentum around in round 10 and even more amazing that Ward regained it in round 11.

[monkeyboy]

I don't think there was corruption but I do think that favouritism was taking place.

It was a great, close fight that could have gone ever way and I respect that and both fighters.

I just can't see how anyone could objectively score round 10 to Ward. If you had other swing rounds going to Ward and despite round 10 you have Ward winning the fight then we differ in opinion but I have no problem with you.

If you scored round 10 for Ward like all 3 judges then I think you have very rose tinted spectacles on. It was amazing that Kovalev turned the momentum around in round 10 and even more amazing that Ward regained it in round 11.

[r1onnie2]

This article hit the nail on the head. Fans of a fighter such as Kovalev are going to feel it was a robbery and there's no changing that. How you judge fights is subjective because based on what you like will determine how you score rounds. This is one of those fights where there were so many close rounds it could have went either way. Ward won cool, if Kovalev would have won cool but to say it was a robbery is absurd.

It's no different that the Thurman vs Porter fight. Depending on what you like is how you scored the fight. I had it 114-114 but could see either fighter winning that fight. As long as man is involved and making decisions, outcomes are always going to be debatable sometimes.

[NaijaD]

Great read and perfectly summarizes how I feel.

There's no robbery, just a bunch of close rounds. It's easier to give the fight to Kovalev due to the number of the close rounds and his dominance in the beginning of the fight. Ward got almost all of the swing rounds in his favor and thus won. There are many possibly reasons why the judges decided to give Ward those close rounds.

Some people will say it's because they were all Americans. It's possible.
Others will point to the crowd's reaction, which was almost entirely pro-Ward and anti-Kov.
A few will say it's because Ward deserved them.

I have a personal theory of why Kovalev got virtually shut out in 2nd half of the fight. It has everything to do with expectations. We all know that Ward is the technician and Kovalev is the puncher. When Kovalev performed like Kovalev, the judges swung in his favor. As soon as he played Ward's game, no matter how successful he was, judges assumed that Ward won those rounds because that's what they expected. After all, how could Kovalev hope to match Ward on the inside and throwing counters?


You can write 1000 articles arguing for one thing or another. Fact is it was a fight decided by 1 point. I scored the fight a draw, and that's what it was. The rematch will tell us everything we need to know. Either Ward makes the adjustments to make it look easy, or Kovalev will show that he's no longer playing. Rematch will be 5 times better than the original!

My man Jozef is on the money as usual. I stand by having Ward as the narrow winner but I wish a draw had been the official result because I definitely feel less good about the result knowing I was in the minority.

I think Kovalev boxed really well but I was let down by Ward, he didn't dominate the boxing segments or slick & style (lool) on Kovalev....

We just need the immediate rematch, I hope Roc Nation don't try to find any loopholes to avoid it.

[BrometheusBob.]

But your are suggesting that 114-113 Ward is WRONG. The whole point of the article was to discuss how the subjectivity of a judge contributes to different scoring in a close fight and that the closeness can swing who is named the Victor. The decision is debatable...not wrong.

Oh I didn't mean to suggest that the judges were wrong. If anything I was trying to suggest what you said in your last sentence.