lederman is shot now..his cards were good in his prime but now he is past it...he starts alot on controversy with his cards
Some take the opposite viewpoint. Namely, that unless somebody clearly wins the round, it shouldn't count. In a chess match, (a different game altogether, but the point is the same)at one tine you got a point for a win, half apoint for a draw, and nothing for a loss. In big match, the first player to get twelve and a half points was the winner. At top level, many (maybe most) games are draws, and a two or three point lead is near impossible to overcome on the way to 12.5 One player gets up by a couple of points and then deliberately plays for draws the rest of the match, reaching the target first, but making for boring games. So changes were made. Now, to win, you have to get six points. you get one point for winning a game and neither player gets anything for a draw. This encourages both players to play for a win at all times, no matter what the score. In boxing, you could have one guy winning five rounds clearly and maybe the other guy winning three rounds clearly, with four rounds razor-close. If we can't have EVEN rounds, then the fight could be determined by how those even rounds are scored, and that could be very subjective. Some feel it leads to more chance of a bad decision. If, as in chess, you toss out the rounds that were too close to call, you might get a fairer decision. (In boxing, scoring a round even is the same as not counting it at all.) There are others still, who believe that you shouldn't score fights at all. The winner becomes the winner when his opponent takes a 10 second count (that was 60 seconds in bygone days), or is unable or unwilling to continue. A bit extreme, but it takes the scoring debacles out of it.
They sure do have a good reason why they never show his face, and I just love it when he screams the rules, and ends it with his wonderful "JIM!", makes me smile every time. I think he has kind of lost it these last couple of years, but before I usually found myself agreeing with him most of the time.
Harold used to be good. Always spot on.. But now hes gotten alot older...sort of driving a car as a senior..your reflexes are shot and you're a danger on the road
Harold is on the decline, but HBO Boxing wouldn't be the same without him. However, they do owe it to the viewers to give accurate and objective scorecards.
I gotta tell you guys something ;-) I don't understand people who don't like the HBO team, I think it's a wonderfully entertaining team, people seem to especially dislike Larry Merchant, I absolutely adore Larry, he has always been sharp and great, granted, he is totally out of it drunk/senile nowadays but I still think he has it. Lampley, well he's an idiot, but a great commentator, and I like Emmanuel Steward, he might be captain obvious, but I think he has a lot of great input most of the time, and when Lennox is in, well.. I will never have a problem with Lennox, he is one of my all time favourites.
I wish judges would score more even rounds when there is no clear winner. It'd get rid of some of the bad decisions.
Watch him here on Youtube. I don't believe in reincarnation, but this guy sounds like he was a voice over for all those cartoons earlier this century.