Didn't Winky prove he was better p4p than Hopkins?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by sweet_scientist, Jul 25, 2007.

  1. divac

    divac Loyal Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2004
    Messages:
    31,154
    Likes Received:
    2,104
    Thats not true Scientist, dont misquote me!:twisted: :D

    I believe I actually gave Barrera three rounds vs Marquez!

    There was a few early shifts in momentum in the Hopkins-Wright fight, early on Winky got very aggressive vs Hopkins, really pushing the action, to the point that Hopkins was really forced to backpedal and use his legs to fend Winky.
    I had Hopkins edging those early rounds because he was imo nailing Wright with some clean single shot right hands on the inside and shooting some good shots to Winky's body......
    Hopkins was being more effective with his shots, although he was being clearly made to work hard for them.

    During those early rounds, my feeling was that although Hopkins was just edging those rounds, I did'nt think Hopkins legs would hold up at the pace that Winky was forcing Hopkins to fight.

    Had the fight gone at the pace of the early rounds, Hopkins may have wilted some down the stretch....but Hopkins made sure the pace slowed to his liking and got physical with Winky by mugging Winky on the inside, getting into clinches, pushing, pulling.
    The physical part of what Hopkins was doing is what imo frustrated and lead to Winky weakening down the stretch of the fight.
    Hopkins is used to that type of fight, as he's done it alot throughout his career.
    Hopkins mugs fighters!:lol:

    I've said it before Scientist, you hate giving a consecutive string of competitive rounds to one fighter. You like to divy up rounds that are close enough although it may deter from your usual scoring criteria.

    .....as you know, I've never had a problem giving a fighter a consecutive string of rounds that may be close.
    I follow the scoring criteria as I interpret it, and if a fighter edges 12 consecutive rounds in a row, then thats exactly what he will get on my scorecard.

    You've critiqued me on several of my scorecards, but how is it that in most cases, my scorecards happen to coincide almost exactly to how the actual judges scored in the fight.
    .....both Hopkins-Taylor fights, I believe I had Taylor over Winky by 3 points. I dont think I was off there, alot of people had Taylor winning.

    My JMM-MAB scorecard was right on par with the scores read by the actual judges.

    The Taylor-Spinks fight, now thats a fight right there where most rounds were carbon copies of one another, having said that, it's uncomprehensible to me why someone would split those rounds down the middle.
    It you gave one fighter a round in that fight, why the hell would you turn around and give a similar type round to the other fighter????

    I could go on and on......Chavez-Whitaker????:deal :yep Once again my scorecard coinciding with the official judges!:hey :yep :D


    Btw Scientist, I think you insinuated that I did'nt pay close enough attention to Hopkins-Winky......:nono
    That was one of those fights where I paid extra close attention.
    As a boxing fan that likes to score a fight as he watches, who would'nt pay close attention to a fight such as that between two defensive fighters that bring alot of subtleties to the table.

    I found myself paying extra attention as the rounds mounted, and the HBO guys were going against my scorecard and mounting rounds on Winky's column.
    I was shaking my head in disbelief that the HBO guys would nonchalantly give a round to Winky Wright......
    .....as the official scores were read and up came two 117-111 scores, I just nodded my head up and down absolutely certain that those wide scores could only go to Bernard Hopkins!

    I feel very confident and unashamed at the scorecards I post.....I score what I see, and I'm all too happy to explain my card, which is alot more than I can say to alot of guys around here who all they can do is critique others scores, but not explain there own.
     
  2. psychopath

    psychopath D' "X" Factor Full Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,390
    Likes Received:
    2
    The fight wasn't boring Dickhead? Is that the kind of fight that keeps you in the edge of your seat? :think

    Yeah there would be interest to a rematch for stupid fans like you but not Winky and Bhops, dumb****! :yep

    There's no reason for Bhops to fight Taylor again shithead, but Winky does. The first fight was a draw . . . do you even know that? :D :lol:
     
  3. sweet_scientist

    sweet_scientist Boxing Junkie Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13,744
    Likes Received:
    88
    I said you "all but" had JMM shutting out Barrera, not that you had him shutting him out :D.

    I don't score points for holding, pushing and rabbit punching, so I didn't give Bernard all that much credit for his work in "mugging" Winky. Where he was landing legitimate body shots, I credited him. His mugging did tire Winky out and allowed him to take the last couple of rounds of the fight. At 160, I don't think Winky would have tired as much as the strength disparity wouldn't be so great.


    You're right to do it as you do, and I myself would give every round to a fighter if I thought he edged every round, but I never give sympathy rounds. If a round is too close to call, I call it even (my cards usually involve one or two and sometimes even three even rounds if the fight calls for it) and if I feel a guy edged the round, he gets it, even if it was close.

    I think you should measure your scorecards against how intelligent boxing fans and scribes score fights rather than how judges score fights. I mean, judges sometimes score fights wrong, its rare that the majority of intelligent boxing fans or scribes do. I find the means (the average) reached amongst intelligent boxing fans and scribes' scorecards a much more accurate gauge of how a fight went down than how judges score fights generally. I mean, fancy boasting that you scored Chavez-Whitaker the same as the judges. That's almost as bad as saying you scored Lewis-Holyfield I just like the judges and trying to garner credibility from it!


    Here's an interesting thing. I didn't watch the HBO telecast, but by all accounts Harold Lederman was giving all the early rounds to Wright and the later rounds to Hopkins. I watched the Sky Sports telecast with an English crew including Jim Watt. Jim Watt had all the early rounds (bar the 2nd) for Hopkins and then scored rounds 7-10 for Winky. I take it that would have been almost a total reversal of what Harold Lederman had. Between the two of them, Winky was probably pegged down for winning 9 of the 12 rounds. Isn't that bizarre? I don't think so. It was a close fight. Rounds that were close could be seen to be going the other way.


    That's great, you do always explain your cards, and though I don't always (hardly ever) agree with them, I do read them and await what you have to say. :good
     
  4. divac

    divac Loyal Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2004
    Messages:
    31,154
    Likes Received:
    2,104
    Thats interesting what you say Scientist that the Sky telecast had rounds 7-10 for Winky......
    :huh Imo however Winky did better in the first half of the fight than he did in the 2nd half.
    .....and I thought HBO was terrible!

    Whats even more interesting to me is that you followed right along and scored right along the lines that Sky did!:think :?

    You had those rounds either even or gave them to Winky!:nut :lol:

    You're terrible Scientist, just terrible!:lol: :D ;)
     
  5. steelem

    steelem Active Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Winky was in terrible shape & looked as though he just had the free buffet at pizza hut - hopkins won & winky might as well just quit as he was Sxxx..
     
  6. sweet_scientist

    sweet_scientist Boxing Junkie Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13,744
    Likes Received:
    88
    Hey I thought Jim was making some good points :lol:

    But I disagreed quite a bit with his card. He had the 4th and 6th for Bernard, I had them for Wink. I had the 8th and 10th even, he had them for Winky. Those rounds could have gone the other way imo, could have been Bernard's just as well as Winky's.

    I'd like to see the HBO coverage, but I don't think I'm really missing anything. Jim Lampley's usually horrible at calling technical fights. He has no idea on calling a missed or landed punch. A thrown punch is as good as a landed punch for him... infuriating...
     
  7. achillesthegreat

    achillesthegreat FORTUNE FAVOURS THE BRAVE Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    37,070
    Likes Received:
    29
    I think Vasquez, Simon and Vargas were definitely putting more hurt on Wright. But it was a 12 battles that made up the war and X won more. So whereas the three mentioned may put more hurt on Wright they were losing the round or making it unnecessarily close by giving Wright openings. Xs work was paced better and easier to read. He was the ring general, took away Wrights jab and cracked his defence. His shots weren't hurtful but they were scoring. I think he got into Wrights mind too.

    I basically agree with everything you say. You scored it 6-6 and I had it for X, something like 7-5. I think it was close and competative but overall it was Xs night.
     
  8. divac

    divac Loyal Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2004
    Messages:
    31,154
    Likes Received:
    2,104
    Had it not been for Harold Lederman's round by round bringing out of his score, HBO's coverage was'nt a total waist.
    Lampley even mentioned while Lederman had Wright well ahead, that the fight could just as easily be scored differently by someone else, alos pointing out that Hopkins best shots were coming on the inside and from angles that would be harder to spot and recognize. (Lampley may have actually been taking a shot at Lederman's atrocious early scoring):yep

    I agree with you on Lampley's ability to spot certain technical aspects, but I get the feeling that most of the time its more his bias that gets in the way than his knowleadge.
    For this particular fight, Lampley was'nt that bad.

    The thing I did'nt like about the HBO telecast was that they harped so much on negativity on both fighters.
    Instead of trying to set a tone so that the viewers could enjoy the fight, Emmanuel Steward in particular was calling on both fighters to retire.
    ....thats fine and dandy if thats his opinion, but I'd wish he'd put more emphasis and describe the goings on in the fight instead of bumming us out that they've both declined considerably from what they once were.

    A few days back during the Holyfield Savarese fight, Bob Sheridan called the fight and was enthusiastic on the effort put forth by both fighters.
    I could not help but think that if it were HBO calling the fight, they would be bumming us out about the sad decline of Holyfield and pointing out negatives instead of positives.
    The Colonel made it an enjoyable watch by being optimistic and calling the fight between Holyfield and Savarese, not Holyfield and a supposed showdown with one of the Heavyweight champs.

    For my taste, of the current broadcasters, Al Bernstein I find is enjoyable to listen. He gives his opinion but does'nt come across as his word should be the gospel.
     
  9. China_hand_Joe

    China_hand_Joe Boxing Junkie Full Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2006
    Messages:
    8,217
    Likes Received:
    12
    Hopkins has to slip out the top 10 P4P fighters now -fullstop-
     
  10. Jinx

    Jinx Well-Known Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,839
    Likes Received:
    0
    i never saw the point of a Winky/Hopkins fight at this stage of their careers at 170...it should've happened at 160, and Winky probably would've edged out a close decision over Hopkins...but we have to take Hopkins' age into account, and a pre-Tito Hopkins beats Winky decisively imo...
     
  11. sweet_scientist

    sweet_scientist Boxing Junkie Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    13,744
    Likes Received:
    88
    Good call on Sheridan, guy does a great job calling fights, especially with the energy and passion that he brings.

    Bernstein is another good caller who I enjoy listening too. Much more insightful than the HBO crew imo, and less airs of smugness and omniscience.
     
  12. El Bombasto

    El Bombasto Ask yo momma Full Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Messages:
    3,269
    Likes Received:
    2
    Winky proved himself better than Hopkins by losing to him? Maybe in The Bizaro World, but not here.