Analysis of why it's so difficult to win a decision in Germany or Canada

Even though the majority of boxing fans had it for Hopkins, those who aren't delusional will tell you it wasn't a ''robbery'' by any mean and it could have gone either way.

The vast majority of people thought the Earth was flat during the Middle Ages. Does this mean it's true?

I reckon rounds 2, 4 (notwithstanding Pascal's legitimate KD of B-Hop which was ruled a slip), 5, 8, 10 and 12 were all close (there are probably more).

 

This is just BIGGOTRY.

I watch a HELL of allot more fights that are bad decisions here in the United States than those places. Hell 2 weeks ago we got the draw in Ortiz/Petterson. I had it 5-4 Ortiz with a 10-7 rd. and the 9th a draw. So that is 95-92. Not even close YET one judge had Peterson actually winning. (Ortiz needs a new trainer! - another subject)

One thing I have noticed is that Germany doesn't seem to like
boxers who just counter punch going backward. Which is understandable when 1 of the 3 scoring criteria is effective aggression. Which it seems that attach ring generalship to that as well. Probably why European fighters come forward and/or stand.

Did Chambers get a bad decision?
NO - He didnt back track - he side stepped and unleashed an ass whooping on that dude. Judges scored it exactly like I had it.

 

Sven Otke...Marcus Beyer... etc etc etc

 

The Huck-decision was terrible and there is no excuse for stuff like that but cmon, such things aren't exclusive to Germany and Canada...

German Felix Sturm got robbed big time vs Oscar de la Hoya in the USA, same with Axel Schulz vs George Foreman.

 

Although I agree with you on the subject of bad decisions and such, I thought Peterson won the fight. I gave Ortiz 3 rounds. 95-93 Peterson is not out of the question.