It was close but Peter rightfully won.

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • loui_ludwig
    Undisputed Champion
    Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
    • Oct 2005
    • 7669
    • 184
    • 2
    • 19,376

    #71
    Originally posted by maxorido
    bull****. watch the replay and get that bias out of your heart, toney won that fight. the press row and al bernstein had him winning as well, utter bull****.
    Where do they get the judges anyway? Why don't they take people from the boxing press as judges.

    Comment

    • shellroc513
      Contender
      Silver Champion - 100-500 posts
      • Sep 2005
      • 229
      • 28
      • 33
      • 6,527

      #72
      JT Won the fight, I'm not gonna explain **** nig** watch the tape. If u think the african won, watch the tape. Then rewatch it and smack urself for being so dumb.

      Comment

      • Easy-E
        Gotta want it
        Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
        • Jul 2005
        • 22686
        • 865
        • 1,739
        • 32,777

        #73
        Originally posted by Kid Achilles
        Toney won the rounds he won in a big way, but Peter won just about all of those close rounds through being the aggressor and actually knocking Toney back when he did connect. Even his jab was forcing Toney backwards. There was only one instance in the fight where Toney landed a combo and it actually caused Peter to hesitate to take a forward step.

        This is pro boxing, not the amateur racket. You don't win a round by landing a higher % of punches than your opponent, you win it by doing more noticeable damage to your opponent with those punches than he does to you with his. It's quality over quantity in the pro game.
        That's why knockdowns have so much sway (10-8) on the judges card. If you stagger a guy in the round, and in that same round he doesn't stagger you once, and aside from that the the guy hasn't completed shut you out, then you win the round.

        Peter's frigging jab was forcing Toney back every time it landed. That is more effective than a counter uppercut that doesn't make the opponent even blink. I don't care how crafty, quick, and dangerous looking that uppercut is, the punches that actually force a guy back count much more heavily in scoring.

        Now I don't agree with the margin some of the judges had Peter winning by, but he definitely won.
        Rounds are scored on 4 things.
        Effective Agression, clean punching, defense and ring generalship.
        And here is me thinking you knew how to properly score fights.

        Comment

        • Evil_Meat
          Banned
          Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
          • May 2006
          • 2217
          • 135
          • 228
          • 17,290

          #74
          Originally posted by 7001
          I agree with Kid. I had the fight scored at 117 to 113 for Peter. I don't think that fighting the first 10 seconds and the last 10 seconds of a round allows you to win that round. Peter was agressive through most of the fight and had Toney hurt a couple of times. The ref should have been all over Toney for holding on to the ropes after Peter cleaned his clock in the 5th (maybe 6th) round.

          But I did think Toney fought well. He just spent to much time on the ropes and wasn't aggressive enough. It was a good fight and entertaining.

          Round Peter/Toney

          1. 10/9
          2. 9/10
          3 10/9
          4. 10/10
          5. 10/9
          6. 9/10
          7. 10/10
          8. 10/9
          9. 9/9 (I thought Peter was winning this round. The point deduction brought it to a 9/9 round.)
          10. 10/9
          11. 10/10
          12. 10/9

          Total 117 Peter and 113 Toney.
          LOL, as soon as i saw that u gave the first round to peter i stopped reading. U dont know **** about boxing if u gave peter the first round, and u obviously don't know how to score a fight so ur opinion doesen't mean ****.

          Comment

          Working...
          TOP