Following last nights controversial decision in the Valuev-Holyfield bout NSB has been over the top with cries of robbery, foul play and worse.
I had Holyfield winning 115-113 so I found it a close fight. Not a robbery as I could understand somebody giving the nod to Valuev.
I just checked the fight report from the great reporter Graham Houston (the fightwriter) and he scored it for Valuev! Mr. Houston is arguably the best boxing reporter in the world. Here's the relevant passages from his report:
"What on earth is all the fuss about? Nikolai Valuev was unimpressive, no argument, and Evander Holyfield showed that at 46 he is still a fighter to be taken seriously, but the decision in Saturday’s heavyweight title fight in Zurich was hardly one of the worst of all time.
This could have been scored for either fighter. It so happened that Valuev got the majority decision. One point on one judge’s card was all that kept this from being a draw. It was that close. The 116-112 score in favour of Valuev by the Italian judge seemed too wide, but I had no quarrel with 115-114 in favour of Valuev by Swedish judge Mikael Hook or the 114-114 score by Guillermo Perez, from Panama. I actually had Valuev winning, 115-113.
The fuss about the scoring, I believe, comes in large part from the TV commentary that had Holyfield winning practically every round.
Then we had the Swiss fans getting right behind Holyfield and cheering every time the great old warrior landed a punch or made an aggressive thrust.
....
The thing is, disputed decisions and refereeing controversies happen everywhere although it helps to be the fighter on home ground.
I hope I don’t sound as if I’m knocking Nick Charles and Al Bernstein, gentlemen who have been watching boxing for many years. Maybe they were completely right about Valuev-Holyfield and I was completely wrong. We see it the way we see it, and it is one of the intriguing things about boxing that two people can watch the same fight and see it differently.
....
And yet, sorry, I can’t go with the tide of condemnation over the Valuev-Holyfield scoring. The decision was debatable, that’s for sure, but in this minority view it was no robbery."
The whole article is here: http://www.fightwriter.com/?q=node/2020
I had Holyfield winning 115-113 so I found it a close fight. Not a robbery as I could understand somebody giving the nod to Valuev.
I just checked the fight report from the great reporter Graham Houston (the fightwriter) and he scored it for Valuev! Mr. Houston is arguably the best boxing reporter in the world. Here's the relevant passages from his report:
"What on earth is all the fuss about? Nikolai Valuev was unimpressive, no argument, and Evander Holyfield showed that at 46 he is still a fighter to be taken seriously, but the decision in Saturday’s heavyweight title fight in Zurich was hardly one of the worst of all time.
This could have been scored for either fighter. It so happened that Valuev got the majority decision. One point on one judge’s card was all that kept this from being a draw. It was that close. The 116-112 score in favour of Valuev by the Italian judge seemed too wide, but I had no quarrel with 115-114 in favour of Valuev by Swedish judge Mikael Hook or the 114-114 score by Guillermo Perez, from Panama. I actually had Valuev winning, 115-113.
The fuss about the scoring, I believe, comes in large part from the TV commentary that had Holyfield winning practically every round.
Then we had the Swiss fans getting right behind Holyfield and cheering every time the great old warrior landed a punch or made an aggressive thrust.
....
The thing is, disputed decisions and refereeing controversies happen everywhere although it helps to be the fighter on home ground.
I hope I don’t sound as if I’m knocking Nick Charles and Al Bernstein, gentlemen who have been watching boxing for many years. Maybe they were completely right about Valuev-Holyfield and I was completely wrong. We see it the way we see it, and it is one of the intriguing things about boxing that two people can watch the same fight and see it differently.
....
And yet, sorry, I can’t go with the tide of condemnation over the Valuev-Holyfield scoring. The decision was debatable, that’s for sure, but in this minority view it was no robbery."
The whole article is here: http://www.fightwriter.com/?q=node/2020
Comment