Which draw was worse - Chavez/Pea or Canelo/Triple G

About the same. I scored GGG-Canelo 8-4 and Whitaker - Chavez 7-4-1.

Some folks argue that a draw was reasonable. First of all we are not in a court of law. It is not about what is reasonable but about what is right. Maybe you can give Canelo a draw if you give him the benefit of every doubt. But that is a biased view is not it. Judges are supposed to be objective.In reality, they are often biased towards the cash cow and future of boxing.It is all a business.

 

I saw a close fight.
But a 114-114 draw is generous to Alvarez. And a win for Alvarez is wrong.

 

That was the last time I scored it. Previously I scored it for Tyson. But the last time I just felt that Tyson only worked for the last 20-30 seconds rds 4-10. He often scored with some good punches during this period, but since Tillis had done good work for the first 2,5 minuter I felt he swept most of these rds (rd 4 of course went to Mike due to the KD). So it depends on what you like - the very late burst of heavy punches or the consistent scoring before that.

 

Thanks for that! Interesting.

SRL-Hagler certainly wasn't as controversial as GGG-Canelo, as you rightly point it. My theory to why this might be, which I of course can't prove in any way, is that people beforehand expected Leonard to be on the defensive the whole fight while it probably caught most by surprise that Canelo retreated as much as he did.

I think Canelo thereby can have been a bit unconsciously punished in people's judgement by defying expectations like that, and probably disappointing expectations as well.

 

I think far more people expected Leonard to be destroyed by Hagler, than Alvarez destroyed by Golovkin too.
Lots of people were picking Alvarez to win, it seemed. With SRL-Hagler I can't remember much of that.
Then again, people were picking McGregor to do well against Mayweather too. People are crazy. The world is a different place now, with so much media and discussion. Maybe that's the difference.

Some of the scores for SRL seem way off.
117-111 and 118-111, those are impossible scores.
I think Hagler won 115-114 at the narrowest, but I accept somehow others might be able to get a narrow one for SRL, 115-113 or something, though personally I can't ever see it. There's really no point arguing about the fight scores again, but the wide ones for SRL are surely based on something other than work inside the ropes. Expectations and showmanship played a huge part, I'm sure of it.

 

Same level. That was the first comp I thought of as it happened.

 

Yes there's about 7 cards in there reaching 117 or more for one side, 6 for SRL and 1 for Hagler. That's a lot of points in a fight regarded as close.

 

Fair calls. I cruised around a few sites last night and was surprised how many professional writers weren't overly worried about the draw. The feeling was that GGG won but it was competetive and both men had enough success via their differing styles for a draw to be acceptable.

 

Because they have become accustomed to bad decisions in big fights.Being competitive does not mean a draw is justified.Boxing has needed some serious reforms since a long time. However, there is willingness for changes as it is all about the money.

 

That's pretty much how I feel about it, EXCEPT the 118-110 is something that should be a concern.
It discredits the result a lot.

I think a draw is generous to Alvarez. I mean, 114-114 is a bit generous to him, but it's not completely outrageous by any stretch.
Yet Alvarez received the 118-110 as well.
That leaves a bad taste.

 

That's pretty much how I feel about it, EXCEPT the 118-110 is something that should be a concern.
It discredits the result a lot.

I think a draw is generous to Alvarez. I mean, 114-114 is a bit generous to him, but it's not completely outrageous by any stretch.
Yet Alvarez received the 118-110 as well.
That leaves a bad taste.

A draw may not be correct but it is within the realm of human error.
Also, having every close fight automatically declared a draw isn't such a bad idea.

I'm actually all for draws and even rounds, I don't see why they are despised for much. I'd rather sit on the fence that have to judge a professional boxer arbitrarily deemed to have lost a round because "you have to choose a winner".
The scoring orthodoxy is further skewed by the 10-point must system rarely using anything other than the 10-9 score. Meaning you have to score 10-9 rounds for the razor close ones you could well be wrong about, AND the same score for most of the obvious clear rounds too. It makes no sense.

 

I've thought about this a lot over the years and I'm more or less on the same page as you. My preference would be that the powers that be overhaul the scoring conventions so that relatively close rounds become 10-9, decisively won ones 10-8, and ones where a fighter is battered to the point of a near stoppage 10-7. I'm also in favor of 10-10 scores in any round that is truly too close to call. I'm all for knockdowns being automatic 1-point deductions, but I completely disagree with flash knockdowns leading to 10-8 rounds in rounds that were otherwise completely even. Just my worthless two cents on a topic I've spent way too much time considering.

An even nuttier pet idea of mine is that major fights should have more judges (5 or 7), as a layer of protection against one or two bad judges. The idea is worthless of course if the additional judges are also awful.

 

It is but it is highly doubtful that this was a genuine mistake. That is because wrong decisions happen over and over again in boxing.

Just one question, if you inverse the roles, do you really believe GGG would have gotten the draw? That is all you need to know then.

 

Actually the whole judging system would need reforms. For example, there could be a TV judge in addition to the two ringside judges.Promoters should not be allowed to appoint of judges as there is a clear conflict of interest. Even rounds should be encouraged etc etce

But none of this will be done. And you know why.