Why do posters continue this myth Castillo was robbed with Mayweather?

[therealpugilist]

1) True, boxing is scored round by round.
2) The aggressor wins the round if he is not getting outboxed clearly, hence the expression 'effective aggression'.
And if the two guys are throwing approximately same amount of punches, the one hitting harder wins the round. Thats how GGG's powerful jabs won him rounds over Jacob's arm punches or empty punches.
Why? Because it's a fight in the end and aim is to hurt, this is not a teasing play even though I favour technicians more. Sad for me as a technician not a puncher but these are facts. I think your also a technical boxer that's why you favour it.

ive seen some horrid cards on hbo because the "aggressor" chugged forward but didnt land much...thats not effective aggression bro.

i score rounds based off the criteria and "who id rather have been in the round"

untrained eyes give credit for shots that dont even land...example...big right hand by kovalev...noticed ward slipped that punch live as my buddies went nuts, i corrected them just like roy did lampley

seen it a million times and often times casuals let crowd reaction affect their perception of a fight

you have to really focus and score fights for every second, every minute

i dont have a style preference when scoring fights, i jut know when to recognize when the boxer is ineffective and when the aggressor is not effective...i try my best to score multiple cards for fights...distribute swing rounds differently to get a different perspective

[danceswithfire]

shhh111t... there are people who keep saying jacobs was robbed vs GGG too..

let's not play the victim all the damn time people, **** is so pathetic

[DinoCop]

i score rounds based off the criteria and "who id rather have been in the round"

That's!
However the judges don't see the round by round stats or replays of landed or missed rallies, and it's hard to tell from just one angle whether the punches are landing or not during an unload.
Even referees from that close distance have tough time noticing low blows when they are on the right side of the soutpaw guy.
So, being the aggressor is always favoured. Throw 200, miss 190 and they'll believe you landed some 50

[MDPopescu]

... There ain't no "myth" about the first Castillo fight... FMJr got injured and might have been lost a close fight... Then Floyd gave Castillo an immediate rematch and won... Floyd did the right thing... It doesn't matter if Floyd lost the first one, he settled the score like a true champ...

... But it was somehow strange that the first fight was scored wider than the second...

[therealpugilist]

That's!
However the judges don't see the round by round stats or replays of landed or missed rallies, and it's hard to tell from just one angle whether the punches are landing or not during an unload.
Even referees from that close distance have tough time noticing low blows when they are on the right side of the soutpaw guy.
So, being the aggressor is always favoured. Throw 200, miss 190 and they'll believe you landed some 50

That's true, more so in the ams...kids get robbed a lot for being outworked not out punched

[NUCLEAR]

Because he is black and they hate seeing a brutha being successful.

Is that the answer you want larry?

[Johnny2x2x]

shhh111t... there are people who keep saying jacobs was robbed vs GGG too..

let's not play the victim all the damn time people, **** is so pathetic

Not very many people have called that a robbery, it was a close fight, I had Jacobs winning barely, but I can't argue with the decision because it was close.

And Castillo simply did not win enough rounds. There are simply not 6 clear rounds he won.

[koolkc107]

The problem with revisionists who'd like to go back and re-gift this as a Castillo victory is very simple.

If you go back and score things how they "should have" been scored, you get a wider margin for Floyd, not a closer one or victory for JLC.

That's because:
1) There aren't more than 4 or 5 rounds you can say were won by JLC and,
2) there was a legit KD in rd 2.

Floyd connected with a punch and JLC went down right after.

That's a KD and 10-8 round no matter if you feel JLC was actually "hurt" or not.

You can also debate the point deductions, one of which came a little too late IMO and one that probably shouldn't have been called at all given the roughhouse tactics it was a response to.

So no, JLC didn't deserve the nod and no it wasn't as close as some believe.

[lead right]

Because they're racists...jk. Who cares? It was a good fight

[Tony Trick-Pony]