I just resaw Sergio Martinez vs. Paul Williams

A great fight. And after watching it this second time, I agreed with Harold Lederman's score card except for rounds 5, 11, and 12. Harold gave those rounds to Paul Williams. Eventhough Williams fought better in round 5 compared to the previous rounds, I still think Martinez won that round. Martinez landed the more effective and meaningful punches, and was only shy of 3 punches compared to Williams according to CompuBox if my memory serves me right. I also feel that round 11 was Martinez's round clearly. Jim Lampley gave that round to Martinez, and Emmanuel Steward called it a draw. However, to me it was a clear cut win for Martinez. Round 12 was at least a draw if not another round for Martinez. Williams may have landed more punches on that round, but Martinez's was just more effective. I'm also thinking that since all the judges were American, that this gave a slight advantage to Paul Williams, although one could argue that some rounds were "close enough" that a judge could have given it to the other fighter. I like both of these fighters, but the valiant effort of Sergio Martinez was remarkable in face of the taller Williams. I also give credit to Williams for being resilient throughout the fight, and being the aggressor in the sense that he walked forward throughout most of the fight which is something I guess a lot of judges reward. Bravo to both fighters, eventhough I feel Martinez won, but no use in sourgraping since the result is final. I hope they can have a rematch. I like both fighters, and wish them the best in their career paths.

This fight along with a few other fights this year (and in the past) calls into question the need for better judging, or a revamping of the judging system. One judge had a wide margin of victory for Williams which is completely preposterous. Another judge had a close victory for Williams, and the last judge had the fight as a draw. The 3 man judge is an old traditional way of judging boxing. We should all reexamine the judging system, and look for better ways to improve on the accuracy. What is the point of two people fighting their hearts out and training (mind you) for several months only to be misjudged and robbed of a fair decision??? We are in the year 2009 and approaching a new decade. Why not have a 7 man judge as they do in figure skating competitions or diving competitions? The more judges, the less margin for error. The more judges, errors become outweighed by the better judging of most of the judges. Judges should also sit in an enclosed area devoid of the crowd's influence. We're all human, and therefore susceptible to the pressure and emotions of the crowd.

Anymore ideas, please respond. We all need to improve boxing, and give fighters their fair due.

 

I meant the punches landed in round 5 alone. If my memory serves me right, Martinez landed 3 less punches compared to Williams in round 5 alone, but I feel that he landed the more effective and powerful punches. Sorry for not being more clear.

 

I totally agree on replay for headbutts and knockdowns. Round 7 of the Sergio Martinez vs. Kermit Cintron fight is an example. In other fights, cuts are hard to be determined if they were caused by a headbutt or punch. In many other fights, referees often misjudge if a boxer's glove touches the canvas. Look at Mayorga vs. Spinks, or Barrera vs. Marquez.