whats youre opinion of Lehdermans scoring on HBO

I know many think its absolute ****, however more often than not I have to agree with his scoring....he has gotten many a robbery correct,

perfect example is the 1st Mayweather vs Castillo fight which he scored for Castillo.

 

I probably agree with his scoring about 85% of the time. He loves the aggressor, even when they aren't effective sometimes.

 

I agree with him 4 times out of 5 which isn't that much when you think about how one sided a lot of rounds/fights are.

I disagree with him a lot. The guy is an idiot more often than not and will always favor the guy who throws more punches unless it is an extreme scenario of inaccuracy.

Often times he'll score a fight 118-110 when I think it was a clear case of 116-112, for example.

I find myself amazed by his scoring every third weekend and wonder how HBO has kept him on the broadcast for his scorecards, let alone for him opinionated, righteous, and annoying persona.

 

All you need to know about Lederman is that he scored the first Marquez-Pacquiao fight 7-5 to Pacquiao.

The most rounds even *******s gave Pacquiao was 5.

5 was the rounds needed with 3 knockdowns involved to have Pacquiao winning, so it was the consensus popular rounds *******s voiced to giving Pacquiao.

Lederman must have been drunk as a wino to have had the audacity to claim Pacquiao had won 7 rounds on his card.
Insane scoring by Lederman that night.

Lederman has alot of bad scoring nights. He's got to be one of the worst judges in history.

 

His scoring of Mayweather-Hatton was atrocious. Had it tied going into the 8th round. And I'm pretty sure that was including the point deduction of Hatton.

 

The reason to keep Lederman at HBO is that he can be manipulated to go along with the house agenda. That simple!

 

I guess me and him just score different things, but to me 80% of the time his scoring is awful. He seems to get it right when its very clear to see who won a round, but I feel if someone has thrown more punches and come out as the aggressor he gives them the round, even if they have hit air for the round.

So IMO he is awful. Very awful

****://***.youtube.com/watch?v=SmM1pRVeFP0

 

he's a coont

 

I usually agree with him, minimally he does a better job than most commentators etc. He scores aggression appropriately, usually.

 

:deal

 

he's very good.

 

I like lederman and the late manny steward.

both of these guys know what theyre talking about and what to look for in a fight.

people need to cut Harold some slack. hes 73 years old and his eyesight is probably not what it once was.

 

I agree with his cards a lot of the time but he can also be a delusional fanboy when it comes to his favourites.

Ex) His hard-on for Pacquiao in the Bradley fight. Hitting the air is not activity.

 

I think if anybody scores and puts their cards up in public, in real-time, there's bound to be people who disagree with it. He gets it wrong sometimes, but so do the vast majority of people if they score in those circumstances over a long period of fights. He's not the worst and the scathing criticism is often unjustified. He got Rigondeaux - Donaire pretty spot on for example but nothing much was said about that, people tend to remember the bad cards.

 

Put it this way-he's better than official judges.