Jack Culcay vs. Demetrius Andrade RBR.

Now if this was the year 2006 and it was..

Arthur Abraham vs Demetrius Andrade.

No way in hell does Andrade leave Germany with the Win.

 

Really good post.

You already touched upon the psychological pressure of fighter of fighting in an opponent's backyard...Now, combine that with the pressure of facing an opponent that you handily defeated several years earlier and realizing that he's improved quite a bit since that time. Sometimes, a boxer doesn't have to be better than his opponent to get an edge...He just has to be better than the opponent thinks he is, and that was the case tonight.

There's a certain peskiness and trickiness to Culcay that impressed me this evening. As you said, he picks off and avoids a lot of shots on the way in, and his flurries have a way of catching the eyes of judges-especially at home. He might not ever blow away anyone else in the Top 10 at 154lbs, but I can see him hanging with just about anyone else in the division and finding a way to have his moments against them.

 

So is Andrade a dead duck Vs. The elite @154lbs?

 

Regardless of where they themselves are from, they're local judges when they're paid by a local promoter.

 

All those guys who were screaming how GGG was ducking Andrade needs to stand in the shame corner for 5 minutes.

 

A lot of you guys are underrating Culcay, he may not be a top 10 light middleweight, but he is still a good fighter

 

So Andrade will now face Erislandy Lara sometime later in the year, maybe they could fight in the new tournament created by Richard Schaefer and Sauerland promotions?

 

Your shitting on Andrade to much

 

I'm looking at Andrade's amatuer record and he has some good wins over Keith Thurman, Diego Chaves, John Jackson, Jack Culcay, Charles Hatley

 

It's you who has a lot to learn about boxing if you believe that. The commissions or title sanctioning bodies assign the judges, but the promoters pay them. That's how boxing works. That's why judges and refs are never truly neutral. Promoters at worst engage in shady deals behind the scenes with officials, at best judges know they'll get more work if they favour what promoters want. (Or I think they sometimes go against what they think they expect promoters want, in a deliberate attempt to try to be impartial.)

 

Whatever repercussions there may or may not be: the fact is promoters pay judges. Any process they go through with commissions and title sanctioning bodies doesn't mean much because they are employed in the end by promoters.

 

How many people, really, were actually saying that?