Simply amazing.. here's the master scorecard for Toney-Peter

[restless_438]

I scored it 9-9 in the 9th Peter won that round.

it could've gone either way i think if i remember it right, again, i'm gonna watch the fight again later tonight

[joeytrimble]

**** um ..they're just like kids...boxing died after the tyson experiment failed now we're reduceing to reaching out to the 15 16 year olds that'll eat up the fake scoreing and have no care in the world that the sport they like is fake

hey what ever keeps it going ... its a good show but we can never take organized boxing seriously agian we all know its fixed now
james toney knew his roll sam peters knew his the judges knew theres
you think as mad as james toney gets when someone bad mouthes him in the press confrence that he'd stand there for a second and take what those judges did to him? he knew he was gonna lose before we did

****s fixed no doubt

[Kball15]

**** um ..they're just like kids...boxing died after the tyson experiment failed now we're reduceing to reaching out to the 15 16 year olds that'll eat up the fake scoreing and have no care in the world that the sport they like is fake

hey what ever keeps it going ... its a good show but we can never take organized boxing seriously agian we all know its fixed now
james toney knew his roll sam peters knew his the judges knew theres
you think as mad as james toney gets when someone bad mouthes him in the press confrence that he'd stand there for a second and take what those judges did to him? he knew he was gonna lose before we did

****s fixed no doubt

wtf are u talking about?

thats taking it to the waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay extreme

toney is a champion, he can take a loss. but i guess he was frustrated because he tried to start that fight.

maybe the judges were fixed, but i literally laughed out loud when u said that toney knew he was gonna lose BEFORE the fight. lol

[Neckodeemus]

The judges don't know how to score a fight anymore and the 'net is playing a big part. I don't know how many times I've scored a fight for a guy and people say he should have lost, other times, like last night, I score for a guy and he gets the fight taken away. I always hear the same argument against me: "My guy threw X more punches and landed slightly more so he won." So what, it is a race now, we are watching amateur boxing? Because if we are we might as well give up shop.

It seems that judges score second by second instead of taking a round as an whole, they seem to give the nod for a guy winning the last 30 seconds of a round. What is that? Do we want boxer's or Sugar Ray Leonards (who earned his stripes but boasted about this trick in biography where they broke the Hagler fight into numbers). This isn't maths. You story a round then pick it and start a new round. Don't got he other way and then spill one round into the next and say: "Fighter A turned the tide in the last thirty seconds so I'm going to give him the start of this round by default." You are really saying that one guy fought for thirty seconds and you are giving him nearly two rounds.

Scoring is relative, yet there are rules and it seems they are not being applied.

Both Toney and Peter jabbed, lets break it down from the start. Peter pushed his jabs into Toney from a flat base and Toney powered jabs into Peter by stepping into them, forget bone and skin issues, that is why one guy got bashed-up.

Then they pot-shotted, Peter landed big, usually early when he was fresh and was then out-cuted, he hit Toney big and Toney winked at Sam's corner. Toney hit Peter big and punched through his head, not behind it. He got Peter in ring centre in 9(?) and smashed a shot right in. Toney landed the better punches, often Peter landed swipes and barely-legal blows. A guy has a right to defend himself using body movement and not get instant retribution, under the refs eyes, from illegal blows, are we going to say: "You only only block and parry with a perfectly straight back." What next? No body movement, no guard then just cement guys into the canvas and see who can land the most shots.

Toney beat Peter but we need judges who are trained to know the rules, know the applications and then apply them.

For instance, a 9-9 round. Why call it the ten-point must ruling when it isn't a rule that is applied. If a guy is punished for breaking the rules he needs to be punished. You take the round. If he wins it he loses it for, in effect, cheating his way to trying to win it. Take the round. As soon as the ref says "Deduction" the judge fills in the -1 on the deductions card and if the guy who breaks the rules won the round the judge gives it 10-10, then in the end the guy who broke the rules loses the round 10-9 or 10-8, he is punished.

Toney will be back. Boxing needs better judging in big fights and better, forceful, refereeing. Those who think that is harsh needs this

Only kidding. Peter looked anything but a genuine heavyweight hitter though.

[FeelTheA-Force]

Terrible.....

terrible bcoz you WANTED an american to win. admit it.

[enadeus]

I think it also has to do with the way that the judges were viewing the fight. Remember, we got the clear overhead view, and camera angles change for us. Judges don't have that. So some shots thrown by Peter could have seemed like they were landing. Also there is effective aggresivness, which they could have gave the edge to Peter. I dont know...its just amazing how he got the decesion, but thats a possibility.

[Stiv Rex]

I agree to the judges that Peter won 4 of first 5 rounds. Thats exactly how I scored the fight.

your nuts, anyone who thinks peter won that fight is nuts. i cant believe the kind of bull**** people will spit out. theyve got to be lying, because if they ACTUALLY believe peter won, they dont know **** about boxing and should pick another sport to follow

[Stiv Rex]

james toney knew his roll sam peters knew his the judges knew theres

****s fixed no doubt

are you ****ing ******ed?? you seriously think james toney knew he would lose? maybe the judges were, they could have just been ****** like you, not criminal. but no way ANY fight was ever fixed as much as you say, both fighters, managers, judges. you had two judges who did a bull**** job and we're never gonna know if they did it on purpose or not. man, take your pessimistic conspiracy theory garbage somewhere else. ****ing ******

[flipbjefrox]

I think it also has to do with the way that the judges were viewing the fight. Remember, we got the clear overhead view, and camera angles change for us. Judges don't have that. So some shots thrown by Peter could have seemed like they were landing. Also there is effective aggresivness, which they could have gave the edge to Peter. I dont know...its just amazing how he got the decesion, but thats a possibility.

NO!!!! I was sitting at the eleventh row.. pretty close but not as close as the judges And I CAN STILL SEE PETER SWINGING AND MISSING. No excuse for the judges. i was there live and i scored it for toney

[vB Martin]

For instance, a 9-9 round. Why call it the ten-point must ruling when it isn't a rule that is applied. If a guy is punished for breaking the rules he needs to be punished. You take the round. If he wins it he loses it for, in effect, cheating his way to trying to win it. Take the round. As soon as the ref says "Deduction" the judge fills in the -1 on the deductions card and if the guy who breaks the rules won the round the judge gives it 10-10, then in the end the guy who broke the rules loses the round 10-9 or 10-8, he is punished.

I agree with everything you said except this.

First, the point deduction IS a punishment, and applying it like it was last night the 2 judges WERE within the 10 point must system. It's no different than if Peter had absolutley dominated the entire round but suffered a flash KD as we saw in Little Klit vs. Touch of ****.
Since toney did very little prior to the "foul", and even less after, Peter won the round. The punishment was a 9-9 round rather than a 10-9. It was a 10 point round, with a point deducted from the winner of the round.
The 10 Point Must system does not mean that a fighter will always get 10 for winning the round. For instance, if there are 2 KDs against one fighter and 1 KD against the other in a round, after deducting 1 point for each KD, it's a 9-7 round. The winner of the round is still getting his 10 points, but suffering a penalty point for the KD.

As for the 11th round of that fight, the scoring was a travesty. Peter did absolutely nothing in that round, whereas Toney did almost nothing. It was a boring round, but almost nothing is still more work than absolutely nothing.