POLL: Who here thinks Jacobs won? go on the record and tell us why...

[The Big Dunn]

Man I hear what you're saying - but I feel like 95% of the time in a fight there is one winner. The other 5%, 1/20 times, it is a 7-5, 6-6, could go either way type fight.

Not sure how anyone could find 7 rounds for Ward or Canelo (especially fight 1) in those fights. So when you see that almost all the people who did share the same race as those guys, I mean it just makes it clear that people let their personal bias affect their score.

Wilder-Fury, I don't see how anyone saw Fury putting on a boxing clinic in the first 6 rounds. I thought they were pretty even. Last 6 rounds Fury started to relax a little and out-boxed Wilder basically the entire time, but he also got dropped twice. I could see a slight Fury win there or a 6-6 fight as I had it.

That one was legitimately close, especially since the guy getting outboxed had two KD rounds. The other 2 fights you mentioned were straightforward 8-4 wins that it is hard to see how anyone could see differently.

I understand that point. I had kov in kov/ward 1, I had fury over wilder and I had Canelo over Jacobs. But if someone disagrees with me I didn’t suggest they scored the fight with a race or nationality bias.

I will say this- if you scored Bradley/manny 1 for Tim then that criticism might be valid.

[Boxing_1013]

...All of the biggest GGG Fans on this forum basically

Seems like most of the people saying Jacobs won are people who are his same race actually. I've seen a few GGG fans say it but I think they are almost being tongue in cheek with it.

I like GGG and most others who like him on here seem to have scored it pretty clearly for Canelo, as did I.

[Boxing_1013]

I understand that point. I had kov in kov/ward 1, I had fury over wilder and I had Canelo over Jacobs. But if someone disagrees with me I didn’t suggest they scored the fight with a race or nationality bias.

I will say this- if you scored Bradley/manny 1 for Tim then that criticism might be valid.

I actually never watched that one as I was never a big Manny fan (I like him though) but I will have to check it out since almost everyone calls that a robbery.

The Canelo fight I was referencing was GGG-Canelo 1 btw. I had Canelo 7-5 or 8-4 against Danny (had it 7-4 after 11 so 12th round didn't matter to me...I gave it to Danny).

I think GGG-Canelo 1 was pretty straightforward as GGG had quite a few clear rounds in there, and then there were about 7 close rounds. I just don't see Canelo getting to 6 or 7 rounds there. I'd have to give him every close round just to get there.

But even as a GGG fan, I don't really have a huge issue with Canelo getting decisions over GGG because Canelo is the King of boxing, and if you have to kill the King to win, I have no issue with that.

If Canelo had 10 losses no one would want to watch him and boxing would lose a lot of money as a result. Just the way it is, so he will always get close calls in Vegas.

So yeah I don't even really care about robberies by the judges - it is just unfortunate when the supposedly hardcore fans on here try and co-sign obviously horrible cards/results in some fights.

[Blond Beast]

Because he won 7 rounds. Why did canelo win? Cause he moved his head? Lol

Canelos head movement was the most skillful part of the fight in my opinion. I’m not pro Canelo by any means. I also think Mike Tyson’s “famous” head movement was sooo overrated and was mostly seen against cans. It uses up a lot of energy and takes real skill, rarely seen done effectively at the top. Jacobs did enough to make it close I guess. But imagine if he had the same head movement that Canelo has? It’s still defence and it looks flashy like it or not.

[Combat Talk Radio]

I actually never watched that one as I was never a big Manny fan (I like him though) but I will have to check it out since almost everyone calls that a robbery.

Pac/Bradley 1 is a funny one.

The ONLY reason people scored against Bradley was that he was so damn clumsy. Manny's footwork was running Tim ragged and he allegedly jacked his ankle early. He didn't get set until like Round 7, from then on it was a chess match.

Bradley had 5 clear rounds, from my recollection, one early, one mid and three late, and there were two swing rounds, Round 1 and one in the middle. If you gave him both swing rounds that's 7 rounds. I seem to remember one judge having it unacceptably wide which is there was outrage.

Just remember. On here people only score punches. They don't score defense which automatically biases towards aggressive fighters. Manny never once hurt Tim, Tim hurt himself.

It was a VERY close fight. Manny had trouble with the style.

[Boxing_1013]

Pac/Bradley 1 is a funny one.

The ONLY reason people scored against Bradley was that he was so damn clumsy. Manny's footwork was running Tim ragged and he allegedly jacked his ankle early. He didn't get set until like Round 7, from then on it was a chess match.

Bradley had 5 clear rounds, from my recollection, one early, one mid and three late, and there were two swing rounds, Round 1 and one in the middle. If you gave him both swing rounds that's 7 rounds. I seem to remember one judge having it unacceptably wide which is there was outrage.

Just remember. On here people only score punches. They don't score defense which automatically biases towards aggressive fighters. Manny never once hurt Tim, Tim hurt himself.

It was a VERY close fight. Manny had trouble with the style.

Thanks for the post - I remember watching Horn/Pac and had no issue with Horn winning. You could argue he was allowed to get a little too rough with Manny but as far as who was scoring, I thought Horn was definitely in the fight and if I had to pick a winner I think I had him ahead. So I have always been curious about the Bradley/Pac score since a lot of people have Horn/Pac as a robbery, and I don't.

I will say that I don't really care about 'defense' - if I land 100 punches on you but miss 100, and you land 5 out of 6 on me, well I'm winning. It's nice to see a good defensive fighter but the game is hit and not get hit - and you still have to do some landing on your opponent to win.

Lara is probably my 2nd favorite fighter of this era (behind GGG) so I love a guy that can box and move and hit and not get hit. But in general I favor the guy who is bringing the fight and landing more punches. If one guy isn't coming forward you can't even have a fight, ya know.

As I hinted at with Lara though, I can still score a lot of fights and rounds for the 'defensive guy' I just think you still need to be landing on your opponent a lot. For the record I had Lara up 5-3 on Canelo then I felt Lara kept his same level and Canelo raised his and won 7-5. But I had Lara beating Hurd 7-5.

[JimmyValmer]

Because he won 7 rounds. Why did canelo win? Cause he moved his head? Lol

Hahaha you’re a fücking idiot

[Combat Talk Radio]

Thanks for the post - I remember watching Horn/Pac and had no issue with Horn winning. You could argue he was allowed to get a little too rough with Manny but as far as who was scoring, I thought Horn was definitely in the fight and if I had to pick a winner I think I had him ahead. So I have always been curious about the Bradley/Pac score since a lot of people have Horn/Pac as a robbery, and I don't.

I will say that I don't really care about 'defense' - if I land 100 punches on you but miss 100, and you land 5 out of 6 on me, well I'm winning. It's nice to see a good defensive fighter but the game is hit and not get hit - and you still have to do some landing on your opponent to win.

Lara is probably my 2nd favorite fighter of this era (behind GGG) so I love a guy that can box and move and hit and not get hit. But in general I favor the guy who is bringing the fight and landing more punches. If one guy isn't coming forward you can't even have a fight, ya know.

As I hinted at with Lara though, I can still score a lot of fights and rounds for the 'defensive guy' I just think you still need to be landing on your opponent a lot. For the record I had Lara up 5-3 on Canelo then I felt Lara kept his same level and Canelo raised his and won 7-5. But I had Lara beating Hurd 7-5.

On the bold part. You're saying a 50% connect beats an 83% connect simply due to more punches thrown.

Because if that's true, you'll likely see Pac/Bradley as a robbery.

Manny Pacquiao in general always is more active than his opponent, even when his accuracy is garbage. So you'll see him winging and flailing punches, racking up numbers despite hardly landing, vs. Tim's much lower but accurate numbers, and score for Manny. I'm just warning you.

[Boxing_1013]

On the bold part. You're saying a 50% connect beats an 83% connect simply due to more punches thrown.

Because if that's true, you'll likely see Pac/Bradley as a robbery.

Manny Pacquiao in general always is more active than his opponent, even when his accuracy is garbage. So you'll see him winging and flailing punches, racking up numbers despite hardly landing, vs. Tim's much lower but accurate numbers, and score for Manny. I'm just warning you.

I just feel it is about damage and landing scoring punches, and also a general feel for who is winning the round. If you land 5/5 on someone and he lands 6/30 on you I imagine I would give that round to you pretty easily. I'm sure there are a lot of those types of rounds with Lara where I felt it was a clear round for him even if he didn't win the punch count.

I guess I'll have to watch it and if I do I will let you know what I think. I will also say though that the punch stats from Horn/Pac favored Pac pretty heavily, but they did not reflect what I saw. I felt they gave Pac a lot more punches and Horn not enough imo.

In my head I score it and tally punches and a lot/most of the time Compubox backs up the punch numbers...but not always...I'll have to check it out when I get some time. Thanks for your breakdown - from what I can gather from everything I imagine I will have it pretty close but we will see.

[extracurRICular]

Man from reading these posts it is really sad to see a lot of people who claim to be boxing fans, have no idea how to score fights.

Jacobs range of rounds won seems pretty clearly to be in the 4-6 range. Canelo in the 6-8 range. Canelo dictated the fight, Danny was on the back foot the entire fight and did not look comfortable or in control at all. He always looked like he was losing, especially after the first few rounds - every time I looked at him in the later rounds he looked like a man who was surviving. To take rounds as the defensive boxer/mover you have to be a lot more clinical than Danny was.

That being said he fought well at times, and there were quite a few close rounds. But he was not really doing enough to really take those rounds consistently.

There was only one guy who could have won the fight and that was Canelo. To find 6 rounds for Danny you have to really be looking for rounds for him. I think it's possible but as the defensive fighter you have to be clinical to really get rounds. Danny wasn't. To find 9 rounds for Canelo you have to be really reaching. This was a pretty clear Canelo win, 7-5 or 8-4. Danny showed up but he didn't show really close to enough to win.

It's not that they don't know it's that they haters and can't get passed the butthurt.................