~ ESB's BIG FIGHT PICKS ~ back with four new fights this week!

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by huki, May 13, 2008.


Page 6 of 7
  1. kg0208

    kg0208 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,031
    6
    Aug 8, 2005
    You brought up an excellent point. Most likely you will see people say that changing the way a fight ended will simply make things too complicated and you win some you lose some. They were reluctant to allow a committee to review outright robberies lol.

    How did Mijares look? Apparently he is only getting better.
     
    kg0208, May 18, 2008
    kg0208, May 18, 2008
    #76
  2. cuchulain

    cuchulain Loyal Member Full Member

    36,348
    11,383
    Jan 6, 2007

    Yes.

    Even against a very game and reasonably skilled fighter, he was dominant in nearly all aspects of the game.

    I would venture to say that at times he even made his man look foolish, swinging at empty air and frequently failing to connect.
     
    cuchulain, May 18, 2008
    cuchulain, May 18, 2008
    #77
  3. C Money

    C Money Paul McCloskey Full Member

    7,839
    0
    Feb 8, 2007
    I believe Northend and I are the 2 on record going against changing outcomes.

    To start re-arranging decisions?? :hi:

    **** would lose all integrity,

    No offense to panel members or league management:nono

    It just becomes too subjective.
     
    C Money, May 18, 2008
    C Money, May 18, 2008
    #78
  4. cuchulain

    cuchulain Loyal Member Full Member

    36,348
    11,383
    Jan 6, 2007
    Even though I'm certain Mijares won AT LEAST 9 rounds last night, I largley agree with C Money , and for the reasons he stated.
     
    cuchulain, May 18, 2008
    cuchulain, May 18, 2008
    #79
  5. huki

    huki huk huk ^_^;; Full Member

    6,475
    2
    Nov 12, 2006
    I'll give you the same score I got last week, pretty much the average score.

    Why were you banned? :lol:

    Yeah, even though there's no way that fight was close at all (I had it 11-1 Mijares and the worse it could have been is 9-3) I probably won't change it because people will start complaining. Mijares looked sensational BTW, you should check it out. One of the most impressive displays of defense, countering, jabbing, and overall technical skill in a while.
     
    huki, May 19, 2008
    huki, May 19, 2008
    #80
  6. psychopath

    psychopath D' "X" Factor Full Member

    26,390
    2
    Mar 13, 2007
    Hey Huki . . .the UD close is same as an SD . . . according to our rules? :think :D
     
    psychopath, May 19, 2008
    psychopath, May 19, 2008
    #81
  7. huki

    huki huk huk ^_^;; Full Member

    6,475
    2
    Nov 12, 2006
    Yes, a SD falls under close UD.
     
    huki, May 19, 2008
    huki, May 19, 2008
    #82
  8. kg0208

    kg0208 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,031
    6
    Aug 8, 2005
    Yes, but you changed it without a vote. I don't think that's fair because we voted it in. If it was simply a rule that was made by the league starter and then changed by the league starter, no big deal. But when something is put to a vote, and we vote it in, no single person should be able to change it without a vote. On any rule, not just this one. Just my opinion.
     
    kg0208, May 19, 2008
    kg0208, May 19, 2008
    #83
  9. huki

    huki huk huk ^_^;; Full Member

    6,475
    2
    Nov 12, 2006
    When the vote was made by Decebal about it, not a lot of people voted and it didn't include any of the points against it that should have been made. After Decebal dropped out of the league, I decided it should be gotten rid of.. it's a horrible idea and in situations like Mijares-Munoz, it gives people a ton of points when they don't deserve them. It's wrong for a number of reasons. I can make a thread for it or include a vote for it to be included again in the new predictions league. I'm almost sure after I make every point about it being wrong people will vote against having it.

    I understand why you think it's unfair that I changed it, it IS unfair. But it was important to me because I had strong feelings against it and I think I did the best thing for the league. I'll include a vote for it, along with a vote for the "big fights" question. After that, no more votes.. just picks. And I'll tell you what, if people end up wanting the ridiculous SD/MD pick option, you'll get your 50 points for your Mijares SD Munoz pick.
     
    huki, May 19, 2008
    huki, May 19, 2008
    #84
  10. kg0208

    kg0208 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,031
    6
    Aug 8, 2005
    I don't want the 50 points lol (thought it was 40 anyways). My point is, if we vote on something, ANYTHING, for whatever reason, if it passes it shouldn't be changed without another vote. It opens up pandora's box for someone to be able to say "I don't like that so lets change it" all on their own. Many examples abound of how that could be very negative. Its the same box we would open by overturning every questionable decision.

    I wouldn't worry about putting it to a revote unless someone else says anything. Lets just have fun with it.
     
    kg0208, May 19, 2008
    kg0208, May 19, 2008
    #85
  11. huki

    huki huk huk ^_^;; Full Member

    6,475
    2
    Nov 12, 2006
    Yeah, I agree it was unfair according to the rules we set. :D But there's no way that SD/MD option was good for the league. It was a bad idea and in the vote thread, if I remember correctly, arguments against it were barely included. Also, I don't think people understood what it was about very well either, they just saw "Should an SD/MD option be included" and voted yes, thinking "Cool, why not give people more options to give specific picks". BTW under the SD/MD rule, it wouldn't even matter if you said Munoz SD12 Mijares, you would have still won 50 points. It's ridiculous IMO.
     
    huki, May 19, 2008
    huki, May 19, 2008
    #86
  12. Zakman

    Zakman ESB's Chinchecker Full Member

    31,865
    3,115
    Apr 16, 2005
    I've got a quick question here. You said something about people with two stars being dropped. Something about not being in the top 25. But there are guys with lower scores than mine who don't have two stars? I don't get it. I would like to continue to participate.
     
    Zakman, May 19, 2008
    Zakman, May 19, 2008
    #87
  13. huki

    huki huk huk ^_^;; Full Member

    6,475
    2
    Nov 12, 2006
    The star next to the name means you were gone for a week. Two stars = two weeks. Three = three weeks, and you're out of the league.

    The lower scoring posters either haven't picked fights well or have joined late.

    If you want, I can start you over with the median score before I add up all the scores tonight so you could be back in competition (this is what I'll do with all the posters who joined this week). I know that you missed two weeks and that's the only reason you're so low.
     
    huki, May 19, 2008
    huki, May 19, 2008
    #88
  14. psychopath

    psychopath D' "X" Factor Full Member

    26,390
    2
    Mar 13, 2007
    That's right :yep . . . I got that one correct. :D :lol:

    :good
     
    psychopath, May 19, 2008
    psychopath, May 19, 2008
    #89
  15. DanePugilist

    DanePugilist God vs God - Death Angel Full Member

    6,837
    2
    Oct 14, 2006
    What about me? I was gone from this site from 3rd of Nov-Medio march - haven't I missed anything? And what about yourself for that matter, last I played we were no. 1 and no. 3 on the list.

    Nonetheless, Zakman should have diplomatic immunity...
     
    DanePugilist, May 19, 2008
    DanePugilist, May 19, 2008
    #90
Page 6 of 7