Tweet
First let me say, only saw 4-5 rounds of this fight (will watch today), but what I did see was that Cano was the one pushing the action and landing the harder shots. He also seemed to go to the body well, all while Paulie pity patted. To tell you the truth I wish more judges scored fights like this judge that had it 118-109. Because he basically gave every close round to the aggressor and did not allow a guy to steal rounds with a jab. Don't get me wrong, boxers like JMM and PBF who truly outclass their opponents using the sweet science deserve to win rounds, but in a close round the man forcing the action should get the nod. I know this is different than judging guidelines, but boy would it lead to better fights. If technical boxers knew that in a close round they better push that extra bit to distinguish themselves. Then guys like Hopkins who sometimes stink up a fight and claim robbery when they lose could be told exactly that. Plus we wouldn't have to deal with robberies like Bradley over PAC.
-
-
yes great for boxing. that scorewas a little wide but no doubt cano won by landing the harder shots to the head and body while paulie just tried not to get knocked out. -
That score wasn't all that bad... Cano was landing power shots as often as Paulie was landing the jab.Comment
-
You would think a judge like that would start to earn a cult following, kinda like Smoger. Everyone knows that Steve is probably the best at allowing a fighter the opportunity to recover from hard shots or KDs. Why not judges that favor action, after all I watch boxing for entertainment and am best entertained when both men push themselves to fight, and not just skate by.Comment
-
So you make a thread praising a judge for a fight that you did not even see?
This was a close fight and the Cano scorecard was way too wide.Comment
-
Every single scored card was off in that fight, but this judge actually had the right guy winningComment
-
Cano was robbed.
I have a problem with the OTHER two judges who had the wrong boxer winning.Comment
-
I agree with you. It should be scored based on who is landing harder shots, hurting the other, and imposing his will on the other. If you didn't score the Cano-Paulie fight and ask yourself, who won that fight ... I think most people would say Cano.
It would definitely make for more exciting fights if guys knew they couldn't win by just jabbing and using their footwork to get out of all heated exchanges. This is not amateur boxing, this is professional boxing which is meant to be entertaining.
More good fights would be the result of scoring like this, and then boxing would make large strides and prolly even convert a lot of UFC fans.
My best friend said this and I think it brings up a very important point. "When a boxing fight is really good, nothing can come close to it, definitely not UFC. But the average boxing fight is boring, and a boring UFC fight is more exciting than a average boxing fight"
I don't fully agree with the last sentence but I can see his point.Comment
-
If UFC had a 10 count, and a submission didn't end a fight rather it just meant you would automatically win the decision unless you were submitted back (then it's back to judging) it could possibly provide entertainment almost comparable to boxing.Originally posted by Oh you out son View PostComment
-
Good for boxing not good for their careers to go against the house fighterComment
Comment