the what fights did you watch today\scorecard thread.

Sal, I scored this one awhile back, here is how I had it.

Round 1: 10-9 Castillo
Round 2: 10-10 Even
Round 3: 10-10 Even
Round 4: 10-9 LaPorte
Round 5: 10-9 Castillo
Round 6: 10-9 Castillo
Round 7: 10-9 LaPorte
Round 8: 10-9 LaPorte
Round 9: 10-10 Even (Castillo edged most of the round but LaPorte hurt him within the last 30 seconds which drew it even on my card - also spelled the beginning of the end for Castillo)
Round 10: 10-8 LaPorte (Ref gave Castillo a standing 8 count)
Round 11: 10-10 Even (this round will test anyone's judging skills - Castillo has a good round but is dropped in the last 5 seconds of the round - can't ignore Castillo's work through 7/8 of the round, but gave Laporte point for the KD - even round)
Round 12: 10-8 LaPorte (LaPorte scores a knockdown)

Total: 117-113 LaPorte

If there was any round that would be very controversial, it would be the 11th round on how one scores it. I stated why I scored that even above, but that is me. I will mention that, this is one of those fights that I felt was a sure thing. I could not see Castillo losing. But that's boxing.

 

I know what you mean with the 11th. That's a perfectly valid way to look at it. I laid up, I suppose, and went with the more traditional 10-8 for LaPorte. The main difference is that I didn't score any rounds even, and you scored the 11th the way you did. Otherwise, it's more or less the same scorecard.

 

Finally got around to watching Gavilan-Graham III on Flea's channel. Interesting bout, very tough to score. I have relatively little confidence in my score, and would probably call a few rounds differently upon a second viewing. But here goes:

1. Gavilan
2. Gavilan
3. Graham
4. even
5. Graham
6. Gavilan
7. Gavilan
8. Gavilan
9. Graham
10. even
11. Graham
12. Gavilan
13. Graham
14. Graham
15. Gavilan

7-6-2 in favor of Gavilan. This was a very hotly disputed decision at the time, but I don't see it. It was so close that this honestly could have gone either way and therefore shouldn't be called a robbery. Depends what you like, the flashy, busy attack and aggression of Gavilan, who landed more, OR do you like the quieter efficiency of Graham, who probably landed the cleaner punches and showed the better defense?

One thing that helped tip the scales for me in Gavilan's favor was that whenever Graham landed a big shot (which was always one at a time) Gavilan would roar back with a vengeance to take the play away, never hurting Graham, but making him think twice before getting brave and it helped detract the judges from the clean shot just landed on him. Basically I have no problem with this decision. Gavilan worked harder and made the fight. About as even as even gets, though.

 

Sal, I'm seeing what you mean that it might be a case of what one is looking for while scoring. We had a total of 5 rounds even and of the other 10 we disagreed on 4 of them. Those are obviously tight rounds and can explain a little of the controversy. Good tough bout though.

Kid Gavilan - Billy Graham III (NY scoring which was the rounds basis)

Round 1: Even
Round 2: Gavilan
Round 3: Graham
Round 4: Gavilan
Round 5: Gavilan
Round 6: Graham
Round 7: Gavilan
Round 8: Even
Round 9: Graham
Round 10: Graham
Round 11: Graham
Round 12: Graham
Round 13: Even
Round 14: Graham
Round 15: Graham

8-4-3 Graham

 

Sal, have you checked out the 3rd and 4th bouts between Emile Griffith and Luis Rodriguez? I'd love to hear your scores.

 

Wow. Clairvoyant post. I haven't seen any of them but was going to this weekend.

 

No spoiler alerts then, just like to hear your opinion on them.

 

Okay, here we are then...…..

Griffith - Rodriguez III

1. Griffith
2. Griffith
3. Griffith
4. Rodriguez
5. Rodriguez
6. Rodriguez
7. Rodriguez
8. Rodriguez
9. Rodriguez
10. Griffith
11. Griffith
12. Rodriguez
13. Rodriguez
14. Even
15. Griffith

144-142 Rodriguez

I felt he got done a little raw here. Griffith forced the fight most of the time, but was rarely successful. After a few tentative rounds from Rodriguez, he was either stifled with a clinch or a rat-a-tat-tat of body blows. Rodriguez, lanky and gangly-looking as he is, is surprisingly strong and effective inside. In the middle rounds, he finally achieves distance and is able to frequently tag Griffith with longer shots, though much of the action still takes place up close.

Griffith tries hard to close the gap in the 14th and 15th, bulling Rodriguez as much as he can but it's too little too late, at least on my card.

 

Griffith - Rodriguez III - scored on NYs rounds basis

Round 1: Rodriguez
Round 2: Griffith
Round 3: Griffith
Round 4: Even
Round 5: Rodriguez
Round 6: Rodriguez
Round 7: Rodriguez
Round 8: Rodriguez
Round 9: Rodriguez
Round 10: Rodriguez
Round 11: Griffith
Round 12: Even
Round 13: Even
Round 14: Rodriguez
Round 15: Even

Total: 8-3-4 Rodriguez

Hate to have 4 even rounds, but they played it tight on the inside. Sal, we agreed completely on 8 rounds, had a smattering of even rounds and only disagreed completely on the 1st and 10th. Not too bad. Totally agree with you, a bad decision. Like their 4th fight, Rodriguez was simply the busier and I just don't know if they were ignoring Rodriguez' body work, because I didn't and evidently, neither did you. Official scores were 8-7 and 9-6 for Griffith and 10-5 for Rodriguez. Incidentally, the AP and UPI both scored it like you, 8-6-1 for Rodriguez.

Next up, Griffith-Rodriguez IV

 

Emile Griffith and Luis Rodriguez IV

Excellent fight until the latter rounds when clinches became more frequent, but did not detract from the fight for me. I will totally admit that my score is wayyy off from the official and unofficial scorecards. 5 point must system employed in Las Vegas, here ya go.

Round 1: 5-4 EG
Round 2: 5-4 LR
Round 3: 4-4 Even (I had Rodriguez winning this one but 1 point was deducted for a low blow)
Round 4: 5-4 LR
Round 5: 5-4 LR
Round 6: 5-4 LR
Round 7: 5-4 LR
Round 8: 5-4 LR
Round 9: 5-4 LR
Round 10: 5-5 Even
Round 11: 5-4 LR
Round 12: 5-4 EG
Round 13: 5-5 Even
Round 14: 5-4 EG
Round 15: 5-4 LR

I had it 71-65 for Rodriguez. I cannot come up with any way possible of favoring Griffith in this one. For me, Rodriguez is simply the busier fighter. I think his body work was really ignored in this one as well as their third fight. Perhaps the key is when Dunphy mentions Griffith was catching a lot on his arms. i don't know. Maybe at ringside it looked different, but on youtube, even allowing for Griffith catching blows, Rodriguez was still the busier fighter. And as the fight wore on Griffith's body language told a tale. One could see him shifting and grimacing when Rodriguez was going to the body. These blows were getting through and telling. I'm always confident in my scoring, but I will admit that I'm obviously at odds with what was written.

 

Yeah, can't see giving this one to Griffith. I guess I feel somewhat better knowing the AP and UPI matched my score, but for all I know our rounds could have varied widely.

 

I know what you mean. I once watched the DeLaHoya-Sturm fight and noticed that both Jim Watt and Harold Lederman both scored it 115-113 for Sturm. At first glance one would think they were both on the same page. However, when I compared their cards, they actually disagreed on 8 rounds. Thus, the controversy in that decision because the rounds were so close.

 

Freitas vs BabyBull Diaz yesterday

Clinical breakdown, all for Diaz.

 

Floyd Patterson - Jerry Quarry I (using 10-point must)

1. Quarry
2. Quarry 10-7
3. Patterson
4. Patterson
5. Patterson
6. Patterson
7. Even 10-10 (Quarry appears to be winning the round, but is knocked down in the closing seconds)
8. Patterson
9. Quarry
10. Patterson

95-94 Patterson. I'd read that this was a robbery, but am not terribly convinced. My overall belief is that if a fight is so close that it's only one point differential, it's not fair to call it a robbery either way.

 

Sal, here are my cards on the two Patterson-Quarry fights of '67. I scored it on the California system which is 1 point for the winner of a round (an additional point for a knockdown), no points for even rounds. As a great old west coast writer once said to me, "The old California system is exactly like the 10 point must system...only less math." And he was absolutely right.

Patterson-Quarry I

Round 1: Even-no points
Round 2: Quarry (2 knockdowns) 3 points
Round 3: Patterson
Round 4: Patterson
Round 5: Patterson
Round 6: Even
Round 7: Patterson (1 knockdown) 2 points
Round 8: Patterson
Round 9: Quarry
Round 10: Quarry

Patterson 6-5

Patterson-Quarry II

Round 1: Patterson
Round 2: Quarry (1 knockdown) 2 points
Round 3: Quarry
Round 4: Quarry (1 knockdown) 2 points
Round 5: Even
Round 6: Quarry
Round 7: Even
Round 8: Patterson
Round 9: Patterson
Round 10: Patterson
Round 11: Quarry
Round 12: Patterson

Quarry 7-5