Óscar Rafael Valdez Fierro, Jr. vs. Robson Donato Conceição & Junto Nakatani vs. Ángel Acosta RBR

Me either. We don't react to failed drug tests like petulant manchilds do and let that affect our scoring of a prize fight. We just scored it straight up based on the scoring criteria, paying attention to clean punching and blocking. I can tell you were paying attention because you observed how well Valdez was blocking early on, something lost on the vast majority on here.

It's really sad how many posters on here acted like the first 6 rounds were all clear rounds to Conceicao. Just total disrespect to Valdez and how well he fought. Acting like he was getting schooled by Conceicao when most rounds were close and competitive is total lunacy.

 

What round does Davis knock Valdez out?

 

Always a pleasure to see your card and your observations. You're one of the rare unbiased scorers on this forum, and I literally don't know what this board would do without us. Thank goodness we are here to wake people up from their biased scorecards.

 

I had money on Valdez to win by KO but Concaicao boxed his head off,had Valdez punching thin air,blocked most of his punches & was criminally robbed by the referee (for his bull**** point deduction for tapping not rabbit punching the back of Valdez's head) & corrupt judges.Valdez's face looked like Wards after Kovalev 1.

You could say I was biased for Valdez as I put money on him to win by KO but there is no way he won that fight or even deserved a draw & those who think he won probably thought Ward beat Kovalev in their first fight & Clenelo beat GGG in both fights!

 

Valdez' failed drug test had zero influence on my scoring, nor should it have any influence on anyone's card that wants to be taken serious.

If you're admitting that his failed test influenced your scoring, then it voids your score of any credibility.

 

I literally scored round three for Valdez...

 

I didn't admit that, I actually said in my scorecard post that I expected it to influence others but I still wanted Valdez to win. I have no bias against Valdez.

 

Conceicao boxed well but Valdez was catching him with shots and blocked a lot of Conceicao' jabs. Valdez landed significantly more body shots on Conceicao throughout the fight. As far as the point deduction, in the opening moments of the 1st round the ref warned Conceicao for hitting Valdez behind the head, so it was not the first time he was warned about it.

As has been said on here many times, you don't score fights based on facial damage. Yes he busted up Valdez but the match was objectively close on a round by round basis. There's nothing wrong with arguing Conceicao did enough to win but the constant robbery claims every time there's a close decision is beyond played out. The people arguing Conceicao schooled Valdez are the same people who argued GGG dominated Canelo in the first fight. Anyone making such absurd claims have no clue what they are watching. They either have a vested interest in one fighter winning or they simply aren't paying close enough attention to what's happening round by round. They see a fighter throwing more punches and give him rounds because he's throwing more. That's not how prize fights are scored. Blocking and clean punching matters and the sooner you realize this the better. Otherwise you'll continue to be in perpetual outrage every time there's a judges decision.

 

I know that's one thing we agreed on.

 

We also agree that it was in no way a schooling or a shut out by Conceicao. But I cannot, for the life of me, find six rounds to give Valdez.

 

Well you gave Round 1 and Round 6 to Conceicao. Those were good Valdez rounds.

 

This dude likes to be a contrarian just for the sake of it, he could replace Andre Ward as a commentator with the job he's done to try to convince you albeit unsuccessfully that Valdez won the fight.

 

I call it right down the middle tough guy. I pointed out that Ward scoring round 5 to Valdez was wrong. I look at things objectively and do not give in to peer pressure or popular sentiment. That's the difference. This forum has a tendency to be an echo chamber, I am not sucked into that. I stand on my own two feet and see things as they are, without any spin or BS.

 

Shadow said: The poll is shockingly one-sided, I think it's pretty obvious that the positive drug test has had a massive

This content is protected

Thank goodness for IsaL and myself to come in here and wake people up out of their slumber.

Then you said:

The way you address Shadow is confusing. He's making one point, and you go off and apparently respond as if he was making a different point.

Then you accuse Valdez of beating Berchelt only because of drugs, you have no proof, and yet Berchelt and Concecaio fight nothing alike. I favored the bigger Berchelt going into his fight with Valdez, but soon realized that he was taylor made for Valdez and wasn't going to plow throghh him because Valdez was faster and more accurate.

Valdez' fight with Concecaio was different because he fights completely different to Berchelt. Yet you use that as a gotcha moment, as if he was supposed to tee off on a fighter who will fight off the back foot unlike Berchelt.

I feel like you're really emotionally influenced by the positive drug test, and Valdez getting the win in a fight you scored against him.

For the record, I'm a huge Berchelt fan, and I am very annoyed that Valdez tested positive, but that doesn't influence my scoring.