Brit Forum scores CONTROVERSIAL fights... #5 Brodie/Chi I

exactly right Beeston

also can i just say Clottey lost the fight by not doing enough and tahts maybe why people think Clottey won because he eased off and he should have won

 

I was identical through 8 Gaz and likewise, it was ****ing impossible in many rounds.. quite confident in my scoring of the last 3 though

Dodgy KD won it for MAB on my card

MAB/Erik

10-9
10-9
10-9
9-10
9-10
9-10
9-10
10-9
9-10
9-10
10-9
10-8

MAB 114-113 Morales

 

Clottey basically threw the fight away. All he had to do was make the championship rounds close and probablly would have got the nod. But he went on holiday instead.

 

thats correct HOYA i think tahts what makes the fight controversial

im pretty sure we all agree Cotto won

 

TFFP, if you can put up De La Hoya v Sturm .... In itself it wasnt a fight that you would usually watch over and over again but the consequences of this fight were a part of the most corrupt period in boxing over the last 30 years ..

Oscar De La Hoya moves up to Middleweight with a view to taking on Hopkins, he takes a tune up against the German Felix Sturm. He looks flabby and when the final bell rings he clearly loses by at least 4 points. At the end of the fight Oscar knows he's lost, Hopkins who is hoping for a massive payday against Oscar is watching a TV in his dressing room after his undercard fight and he is looking pale because he also knows that Oscar has clearly lost and his millions have gone out of the window ..
Then unbelieveably the scores come in and Oscar wins a unanimous decision off the judges ..
That controversial and corrupt decision sets up Oscar v Hopkins which is clearly another corrupt, bull**** fight were Oscar takes a bodyshot and is rolling around the floor in mock pain, ive never seen anybody take a liver shot and was able to roll around like he did, for me it was a total fix, an agreement between Hopkins and Oscar before the fight took place .. Hopkins took it easy on Oscar for a few rounds and then in the 9th he caught him with an obscure bodyshot that made the phantom punch in Liston v Ali 2 look 'on the level'.
Even at the end of the fight 1 judge called Mcdonald had Oscar ahead by 2 rounds which was totally ridiculous ..

Then to top it off a day after the fight, Bernard Hopkins joins Golden Boy promotions .... It was a disgrace to boxing from Oscar being gifted a decision against Sturm, to Oscar 'faking' a fight with Hopkins to Hopkins joining Golden Boy ....... Boxing Corruption at its most obvious !!

 

If he'd have won the last 2 rounds then he'd have won the fight on my card but he'd have still lost the decision on the official cards.

 

Watch rd 10 again mate, its one of the few that had a clear winner. Ive only ever heard of one other person scoring that rd for Barrera, that **** Harold Lederman.

That left hook thrown by Barrera missed clearly.

 

The majority of people already had it in their head who the thought won before we re-scored it tho, its hard to score it for the other guy when you already know who you think won - Im no different, in fact, I remembered my scorecard from watching & scoring it at home months ago, I never re-watched it this week... Ive seen this fight more than any other fight bar none so I know the rds like the back of my hand.
Couldnt be arsed watching it again despite it being the best fight Ive ever seen.

:good

 

I may be kidding myself but I [think I've done a good job of scoring the rounds as I've seen them rather than 'making sure' I ended up with the winner I scored for the first time.

 

I gave Morales rd 3 but other than that we have the exact same card :good

 

Yeah thats fair doos .... Your Oscar v Tito is a very interesting one. Im in no way a fan of Oscar but i have him winning that fight. The judges seemingly penalise him for being 'negative' in the final rounds, Oscar thought he had enough rounds in the bank and then stayed out of the way .... The question in this fight surrounds Trinidad. Did Trinidad really do enough to win this fight or did the judges score for Tito in the final rounds because Oscar clearly thought he had it won .. I have Oscar winning by 1 or 2 rounds simply because Tito didnt land enough and didnt take enough chances, Oscar's boldness and better boxing in the early rounds should have been enough .... Trinidad didnt land nothing ....

Another interesting fight to judge is Oscar v Mosley 2 .. Ive only ever seen this once and i had Oscar winning clear even though Mosley won, i'd have to see this again ..

Oscar v Quartey is another close one were it could have gone either way, at the time i had Quartey nicking it but its been a long time since ive seen it ..

Oscar v Pernell Whitaker is a clear robbery for me, 'Sweet Pea' beats Oscar in this one but Pernell was never appreciated by judges ..

Chavez v Pernell is very controversial, judged a draw but a clear Pernell win by at least 4 rounds. I feel sorry for Whitaker, for me he beat Oscar and Chavez but because these 2 guys were 'money' fighters, Pernell was screwed ..

Hearns v Leonard 2 - scored a draw but Hearns definately won, a kind of mirror to Holyfield v Lewis 1 were the 'money' fighter is gifted a decision

Carlos Zarate v Lupe Pintor - The biggest robbery ive ever seen, Zarate dominates Pintor, has him down in the 4th and gets the better of everything. After 15 the scores come in and its a joke ..

Art Lurie has it 143 - 142, Pintor
Harold Buck has it 143 - 142 Pintor
Bob Martin has it 133 - 145 Zarate

Judge Bob Martin had it spot on, that fight is one of the biggest robberies in boxing history ........

 

To be fair it was 19 knowledgeable fans and Betty Swollocks.

Not a surprise to see he was one of the two who actually gave it to Morales. Probably didn't like Barrera for being part of Hatton's ring entrances.