the what fights did you watch today\scorecard thread.

Antonio, this is how I saw it when I viewed it.

Daniel Zaragoza v Carlos Zarate

I always wanted to see this to see what Carlos Zarate had left in the tank. There was some fuel but not like in his heyday. He was competitive in several rounds but Zaragoza was younger, speedier and was winning on workrate, although every so often Zarate would get in a good lead right, just not many. No sense in running a card here. I gave every round to Zaragoza with the exception of the 3rd which I scored even. Also there was a point deduction from Zaragoza in the 7th, which I have no clue why for a score of 89-82 when it was stopped in the 10th for Zaragoza (actual scores 88-81, 88-81 and 87-82 all for the winner). I'll give plaudits to Referee Vince Delgado for pulling Zarate out of there after a jarring lead left from Zaragoza. One might say an early stoppage, but he was starting to come apart at the seams and Carlos didn't complain.

 

There’s a certain point in history where it seems like every bantamweight had a last name that started with Z.

 

you saw the same fight I did except I actually gave Carlos the third. Back then in Puerto Rico, a lot of the fights that took place in the general area (from Canada to Argentina, Germany to the US West Coast more or less) were always live and free on Puerto Rican TV, even fights that did not involve a Puerto Rican such as Holmes-Cooney asd Chavez-Ramirez. I dont know why this one and Nelson-Martinez 2 were not shown live, but I enjoyed Zarate's work in round three; I think I'd loved seeing him life when he was at his top but I was only 4 then, my only contact with boxing was a Muhammad Ali doll grandpa bought me lol.. As far as the stoppage, Zarate was one punch away from hitting the floor anyways.

I want to see some Julian Solis tonight, we'll see! (pun intended lol)

 

No offense to you but the way you came into the fight with preconceived notions of how each guy fights and what they want to do is probably how you ended up with such a wacky scorecard and Bradley winning a fight he was easily beaten in. You say how pac likes to flurry and Bradley's jab prevented him from doing that but that's not how you score fights...at all. Who landed the better punches? Wasn't Bradley and his jab. Of course pac would love to flurry if possible but if he can't or doesn't want to...he's not auto losing. The opponent still still to put in the clean work...Bradley was not. He was hanging in there, but he was taking the clean punches, but pac and his reputation of being a whirlwind wasn't good enough. Bradley must be winning...he was not. If pacs name was Joe blow its very hard to see how someone could score the fight for Bradley. He was outclassed. Even the 2 rounds I gave him were very close and pac absolutely dominated 6 rounds so I just don't know how a Bradley card makes any sense in the world. Having high standards I guess is a bad thing cause if you don't blitz your opponent and kill them dead you are losing apparently. To be boring and barely do anything is better cause that's your baseline. If you go above that...easy win. To have a baseline of domination is impossible to live up to and you must be losing if you are simply taking your time and picking apart your opponent. If another fighter like Floyd fought this way...I bet it would be deemed a masterclass. No joke. Pac Marquez 3 a legit close fight, this one really wasn't at all but if someone scores this one for Bradley then I'm sure they would scream robbery at PAc Marquez 3 since the same dynamic was in play, slower fight where pac picks his spots, plays better defense, but that's interpreted as Pac isn't flurrying and killing his opponent he must be losing! I mean is he really? The punches should be the only metric to score on and pac Bradley was a pac walk in the park. The quality of punch and quantity was on his side. Some people seem to label one fighter as the "boxer" and the other as the "wild swinging maniac" so when the "wild swinging maniac" isn't doing that a lot he must be losing to the "boxer" even though the "wild swinging maniac" is actually landing the much cleaner blows he's not doing it the "right way" when the "wild swinging maniac" lowers his standards and outboxes the "boxer" with cleaner harder shots its not good enough because hecdidnt do what we wanted him to do!

 

Round 11 to Marquez makes no sense at all to me. Just watched it over and over. Pac landing the far better punches, pac landing more punches, pac still maintaining good balance and form connecting solidly while Marquez has ragged form and is reaching off balance even when he does connect his body weight isn't into it. I dont know I just don't get it. Marwuwz himself said he gave away the last 2 cause he thought he was up by so much, a contention I disagree with but it's puzzling to see people give rounds like this to the guy who was clearly beaten. If you go through it punch by punch pac landed far more shots but almost all the hard head snapping high impact shots were landed by pac. Maybe some people just liked Marquezs warrior spirit or ability to absorb punishment I don't know. Can't be explained. Why not just 12-0 Marquez? Drop the pretense of scoring a fight based on punches.

 

This content is protected

I have to say: those commentators then, would have put me to sleep. the fact there was only one man doing the commentary didnt help either. It wasnt as dynamic as now when you just feel youre hanging out with a few friends, in every sport show you watch.

 

This content is protected

I had it 60-54 for Rocky but wonder who this Burton was...he'd been an all time great in today's boxing.

 

I think one commentator can be just fine if it’s the right person. I think today’s commentary is mostly overdone, this feeling that someone has to be talking almost every second the entire fight … I wouldn’t want to go to the movies, much less watch a fight, with ‘a few friends’ who were as gabby as today’s boxing commentators. Sometimes less is more.

 

There used to be a good interview on YouTube with Graziano and Janiro, I can't find if now but it was interesting.

 

This content is protected

Please tell me what you think of this "fight"......

 

Sal, I've had this penciled in for awhile and finally getting to it.

Ezzard Charles v Joe Louis (heavyweight title) (NY rounds scoring)

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

Total: 10-3-2 Charles (actual scores: 12-3, 13-2, 10-5 all for Charles)

Where to begin? This may not have been on-the edge-of-your-seat action but I'll bet it was to those Yankee stadium fans wishing to see some of the old Joe Louis magic once again. Unfortunately, it wasn't meant to be as its always a young man's game and Ez had too much for Joe. There was still flashes of the old Joe, especially with the jab that closed Charles' left eye. But Ez was something here. A really beautiful style and he was like a can-opener in there. Always thinking, turning, twisting, looking for the opening that would open Joe up. He too, closed Joe's left eye and was finding a home for the overhand right that Joe could no longer see coming. A good fight to watch for historical purposes.

One last thought, I don't know if anyone else saw this as it was sort of under-the-radar kind of stuff. But between rounds 6 and 7, one of Charles' cornermen (not Arcel, or the other white guy in there, but the portly black man) gives Charles a slug from a vial and really surreptitiously - with his back to the referee - slips it back into the pocket of his cardigan. God only knows what was in that vial.

 

I think he cracked Tony pretty good. Legit knockdown.

In all likelihood at that stage Tony just didn’t want to get up and have to work the rest of the night so stayed down. Not a dive per se, just a ‘nah, I’m done.’

 

I agree with @Saintpat on this, it was a solid left hook. I also agree that Tubbs was in the game for paydays at this point. Nothing more.

 

This content is protected

Briggs got some revenge Tubbs shortly after

 

Yama Bahama W10 Joey Giambra

This was actually my first time seeing either man, and it was an interesting, if not scintillating affair. Giambra is clearly a "cute" fighter, not a puncher at all but a smart, learned fighter who knows all the tricks. Bahama is also a veteran and knows many finer subtleties, so it was one of those fights that appealed to true students of the science of the game and the minutiae that only the truly seasoned fighters are capable of showing.

Giambra just can't get started. He nullifies most of what Bahama is trying to do, but he's clearly trying to counter, and Bahama is smart enough to recognize the counter right Giambra has poised for him, and leaves his own right at home because of this. He continually spears Joey with his long jab though, making Giambra effectively have to restart everything all the time. There's a lot of grappling inside, but Bahama gives at least as good as he gets there. Giambra just seems at a loss as to what to do to stem the tide.

Bahama keeps him at bay until about round seven, when Giambra realizes he must jettison his original plan of countering and he goes after the Bimini native, not really taking over but forcing the action and generally now finding himself able to dictate terms. The second half of the bout is fough ton more equal terms because of this, but Bahama has already banked too many rounds. Giambra closes the fight qith a strong tenth when he forces the fight and presses the action, but it's too little too late. I had it a bit wider then the official scores for Bahama of 6-3-1, 6-3-1, and 5-4-1 for Bahama.

1. Bahama
2. Bahama
3. Bahama
4. Bahama
5. Even
6. Bahama
7. Bahama
8. Giambra
9. Bahama
10 Giambra

98-93 Bahama, or 7-2-1 in rounds.