Finally saw Ward-Kovalev. No robbery!

So you believe kovalev would have activated his rematch clause if he had been given the decision? Think you're reaching there, there would be no reason for the rematch had kova been given the decision as no1. The right man would have been given the win in a fight that was close but clear in the majority of people's opinions and therefore no2. There would be no demand for it. So kovalev would have no reason to activate his rematch clause.

 

I saw that video. I also saw a much longer video where it shows Ward clearly initiating much more clinches and employing many more dirty tricks that I posted in the same topic. It doesn't do much to my overall message regardless. Most of the holding Kov did was to prevent a Ward headbutt. Ward was clearly more affected by the punches. Kovalev is a harder puncher and landed cleanly more times. Why would Ward not be hurt? Why would his face be marked up if he wasn't hurt? All of the evidence points towards Ward being more hurt than Kov throughout the fight.

 

If you ignore the evidence, then sure nothing points towards Ward being hurt lol.

 

So the point remains that there would be absolutely no call for a rematch had kova been given the decision, yet as the decision went the other way there is demand for a rematch, which speaks volumes.

I can't imagine one ward fan demanding a rematch had kova been given the decision, there wouldn't even have been a debate about it.

 

Ah this is becoming hard work now. I understand how a rematch clause works and why a fighter uses it. The point you seem to be missing is that if the decision had been given the other way then there would be no need for a rematch, as it was a close but clear victory for kovalev. The fact that there is a demand for a rematch in a fairly average fight completely contradicts the OP.

I can't believe you think a fighter losing is a reason to have a rematch, you realise someone loses in every fight right? (barring a rare draw), does every single fight in history warrant a rematch? You can't simplify this to 'he lost so there's a rematch'

 

I disagree on your scoring. Ward did not win round 1 or 10, those were clear Kova rounds.

P4P King Ward did however win rounds 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12 to win the fight 114-113 though. 8)

 

I couldn't agree more with that.

 

As much as I think SK won I'd hardly deem it a robbery,I used to watch Oscar always on the wrong side of decisions,they always felt like robberies to me?

 

Has wylan911 always been this thick and obstinate or is it a recent affectation?

 

Getting tired of arm chair fans ripping Lederman's judging. Fact is he is a professional HOF Judge. He's been doing it longer than most people on this form have been alive. If his card differs from yours often, it's probably because you rate defense and ring generalship greater than effective aggression and clean punches. In Harold's opinion the guy moving toward the battle gets more credit so long as he is landing and being effective. He also rates the punches that have a more obvious effect (i.e. do more damage) as cleaner punches. I.E. if two fighters trade nearly equal shots, the guy who stumbled back, got busted up, or retreats loses that exchange. If you understand that, you will understand his scoring. In short he favors the fighter who brings the fight and especially the guy who does more DAMAGE to his opponent. In professional boxing, I tend to agree.