Can the Benavidaz-Herrera decision be justified?

If your offense consists of burying your forehead under your opponent's chin and landing punches above his ear...WITHOUT moving your forehead, it doesn't count.

 

What? Says who?

 

I'm sure Herrera got some great leverage on those shit burgers.

 

Those punches weren't even good enough to be scored in the ams. A punch is a punch? FOH.

 

The fighters you mentioned not named Herrera (1) actually land real punches and (2) actually get the decision.

 

I honestly wonder how many times judges do mix up the fighters.

 

Just a little more food for thought for you. I spent an hour and half looking at historical data from some the high profile fights involving guys that win fights by outboxing their opponents. What I found I that time and again the guy who wins by outboxing their opponent lands the overall better in connect percent. From all the obvious suspects like Mayweather, Pea, DLH, Leonard etc. to the somewhat recent Brook Porter, and the not so obvious Cotto, time and again the one who the judges and the majority of fans felt the one who the boxing match and fight landed at higher connect %

Even the controversial fights like Mayweather DLH, Leonard Hagler (at least according to someone) Cotto Mosley etc. the fight was given to the overall higer connect % As a matter of fact, the only high profile fight where I could not find this to be true was the infamous Mayweather Castillo. Now of course the reason I state all this is that Herrera did not win the connect % battle in either the Benavidez or Garcia fight. You may say to yourself well that's because he was robbed and that's your right to that opinion but, it does still stands to show a consistency, or a method to the madness on the part of the judging, that they are probably not corrupt, not imagining, and not just picking the winner out of a hat. And this would all make sense imo because outboxing is about out smarting your opponent, and you would think that the one doing that would be the more efficient one, not saying it is the opponent that is outboxing by default, just that the boxer is not doing a good enough job to get the win.

There is something of substance that is being seen time and again. Oh, and neither am I trying to say that Herrera did not outbox either Garcia or Benavidez, he simply did not do it in a dominant enough fashion to pull out the win. I apologize for not posting the punchstats that I found, but I would not lie because I'm far more interested in the truth, learning, and sharing, and you of course can get to the truth yourself. (spending long enough on this)

Also because I'm interested in seeing what you or anyone else's mind can come up with in terms of recalling controversial fights, finding the punchstats and seeing if you find what I found. And thanks for replying because you have explained far better than anyone else what they are seeing in terms of scoring, I finally understand, it no longer drives me up the wall!!...lol.

 

lol, yeah right, I grew up in Cali so sure, I hated all my friends growing up...lol.

 

Remind me again . . . . . who promoted the show on HBO?

 

What if the winners landed at a higher connect % because they were winning as opposed to winning because they landed at a higher connect %? Cause/Effect/Correlation mixup.

Fights should be judged by which fighter got the better of the action in each particular round. This could mean the guy got peppered with jabs all round but landed one punch and it split the other guy's eye open or knocked him back and clearly buzzed him, etc. It could mean the guy peppers another guy with jabs the whole round and never remotely hurts him, but backs him up, counters him, and totally prevents him from doing anything hurtful back. It has nothing to do with the number of punches or accuracy rate unless that's the only thing separating the fighters.

This is how I do it:

1. It goes to the guy who took less damage and gave more. ("Clean, effective punching")

2. If there was no damage, then it goes to the guy who was getting his way and preventing the other guy from getting his for the majority of the round. ("Ring generalship")

3. If everything else is even it goes to the guy who seemed to land more, meaning he got hit less. ("Defense")

4. If that's also even then there's a 10-10 option.

5. "Who would you rather be?"

 

Co-promotion between the former Cold War entities.

 

Thats the best explanation yet! It makes the most sense:good

 

Good win for Jose