Fury Wilder Poll

[Boxing_1013]

Just saw a couple guys arguing about this, so thought I would ask the question.

Edit - please see the poll question.

Was the Fury/Wilder fight:

1) clear win for Fury
2) draw was fair
3) ref should have waived it off after KD in 12th round

[pillowfists98]

Here you go.

https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=799719

[Earl-Hickey]

Clear Fury win

A few points

Fury was 10 rounds up going into the 12th

Fury was less than 60% of his full fitness

Fury was fighting away from home

Fury had no foots peed like he did vs Wlad and was making Wilder muss through head movement alone

Fury was weakened from losing 100lbs and would have ko'd Wilder those times he buzzed him if he was 100%

Fury won 10-2 in rounds or 116-110 on points

[Mammoth]

Pretty clear Fury win

[Boxing_1013]

Here you go.
https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/s...d.php?t=799719

Thanks - I don't like those options though so I'm not voting in it, so I can't see the totals.

[Eff Pandas]

Was the Fury/Wilder fight:

1) clear win for Fury
2) draw was fair
3) ref should have waived it off after KD in 12th round

Eh. None of the above.

I don't think the fight should have been waived off. I think the NY ref was just following NY protocol with the walking around stuff to make sure Fury was good thats become a thing only recently since the Magomed situation a few years back.

I'm more in agreement with 1 & 2, although obviously that means I don't agree 100% with 1 or 2. I thought Fury won the fight, but I thought it was close enough so with a margin of error one could score it towards Wilder or a draw.

So this is ultimately to me one of those situations, not unlike both Canelo vs GGG fights, where people are all up in arms on a "robbery" when the fight was close enough & the boxing 10pt must system works like it works which means a disputable outcome is where things land.

I mean think of it like this. 2 rounds were 10-8 Wilder for sure. Of the other 10 rounds you only need 3 of them to go to Wilder for a draw & 4 of them to go to Wilder for a win. And lets not bs like some crazy sh^t was going on by Fury all night long. There was a lot of f#cking nothing going on. And often times in those types of rounds they go to the title holder on principle damn near it seems like.

Its also worth noting with that in mind that of the 3 judges that they did have a consensus on Wilder winning 4 rounds outright (1, 7, 9 & 12). So that right there shows you all you need more or less is one judge to find two rounds outta the other 8 to give to Wilder & another judge to find one round outta the other 8 to give to Wilder for a draw.

The fight was closer than people wanna act like it was. And I think a lot of it is cuz Fury DID win those non-knockdown rounds he won wider than Wilder won the rounds one could give him. Problem is you still only get a 10-9 round regardless if you won it widely or closely. This feels like its often a problem fans aren't understanding with how fights are scored. They just see one guy looking real good in more rounds than they see the other guy looking real good & that = the first guy should win. That ain't how sh^t works doe.

[Boxing_1013]

Eh. None of the above.

I don't think the fight should have been waived off. I think the NY ref was just following NY protocol with the walking around stuff to make sure Fury was good thats become a thing only recently since the Magomed situation a few years back.

I'm more in agreement with 1 & 2, although obviously that means I don't agree 100% with 1 or 2. I thought Fury won the fight, but I thought it was close enough so with a margin of error one could score it towards Wilder or a draw.

So this is ultimately to me one of those situations, not unlike both Canelo vs GGG fights, where people are all up in arms on a "robbery" when the fight was close enough & the boxing 10pt must system works like it works which means a disputable outcome is where things land.

I mean think of it like this. 2 rounds were 10-8 Wilder for sure. Of the other 10 rounds you only need 3 of them to go to Wilder for a draw & 4 of them to go to Wilder for a win. And lets not bs like some crazy sh^t was going on by Fury all night long. There was a lot of f#cking nothing going on. And often times in those types of rounds they go to the title holder on principle damn near it seems like.

Its also worth noting with that in mind that of the 3 judges that they did have a consensus on Wilder winning 4 rounds outright (1, 7, 9 & 12). So that right there shows you all you need more or less is one judge to find two rounds outta the other 8 to give to Wilder & another judge to find one round outta the other 8 to give to Wilder for a draw.

The fight was closer than people wanna act like it was. And I think a lot of it is cuz Fury DID win those non-knockdown rounds he won wider than Wilder won the rounds one could give him. Problem is you still only get a 10-9 round regardless if you won it widely or closely. This feels like its often a problem fans aren't understanding with how fights are scored. They just see one guy looking real good in more rounds than they see the other guy looking real good & that = the first guy should win. That ain't how sh^t works doe.

I hear ya - I feel similar to you about this fight. I personally had it a draw, but have no problem with 8-4 Fury. I think 7-5 to 8-4 for Fury was the only good card. First 6 rounds were close and then the last 6 were all Fury, but he got caught twice in those last 6 so a draw is fine imo.

I would disagree a little bit with the GGG Canelo fights in the sense that Fury gave away 2 clear rounds here, most people scoring them both 10-8 for his opponent. As you mentioned that just means of the other 10 rounds, even if Fury won 6 of them clean, which is very hard to do it boxing, there were still 4 close rounds. If Wilder gets 3 of those then it is a draw. Sliding 3/4 close rounds is different and more acceptable imo than sliding 6/7 close rounds.

For Canelo and GGG - GGG is very hard to win clear rounds against because he is always scoring with his jab and usually winning the punch count in every round (not saying he never loses a round - just that he hardly ever CLEARLY loses a round), and Canelo had no KDs. When you start saying you have to give a guy 6/7 close rounds to get a draw win, instead of 3 or 4/6, those types of results are a lot more egregrious imo.

When one guy is getting all the close rounds on peoples' cards, or even getting pretty clear rounds for the other guy, I think it is fair to call into question those cards/results.

When you get KD twice and don't KD the other guy, odds are there are some other close rounds in there and it will probably be hard to say you CLEARLY won.

[SinderellaMan]

8-4 with 2 knockdowns is a Draw.
No clear win
No robbery
The last knockdown saved the fight for Wilder

[Boxing_1013]

8-4 with 2 knockdowns is a Draw.
No clear win
No robbery
The last knockdown saved the fight for Wilder

8-4 still a 2 pt win for Fury. 7-5 would be a draw.

I felt there were 6 close rounds (first 6) and 6 clear rounds (4 for Fury and 2 10-8 for Wilder). So have no problem with a draw.

[Eff Pandas]

When one guy is getting all the close rounds on peoples' cards, or even getting pretty clear rounds for the other guy, I think it is fair to call into question those cards/results.

You can't really expect judges to recall close rounds several rounds later is the thing. A judge, as the rules say now, must pick a person to give a round to based on their assessment of who did more even if its just a lil bit more. You aren't supposed to figure out some middle ground of closeness has been reached & then flip flop rounds back & forth when you deem the round too close to pick one guy.

With that in mind all sort of legit biases can come into play like does a judge prefer more punches or hard punches or ring generalship or damage or ??? with giving a guy a round.

Don't get me wrong there are still some corrupt or incompetent judges like Byrd who just seem to have a bias to a specific fighter which is a problem.

When you get KD twice and don't KD the other guy, odds are there are some other close rounds in there and it will probably be hard to say you CLEARLY won.

No question about this. Two 10-8 rounds in a fight is gonna be a game changer in a competitive fight & in even in a wider fight that sorta situation can put you into a dire situation