Harold Lederman, Blind, biased or on the take?

the HBO team seems to always see the great things the house fighter is accomplishing to the detrimint of the Challenger wether he is a champion or not. Ive seen it in The Hatton v Collazo fight seen it in the Quintana fight these guys will be running their suck while the action is unfolding and the house fighter is getting lit up

The moment the house fighter comes out and gives some effort wether effective or not they sart claiming momentum shift or someother bull**** and will giive him the round. Yes he may be doing better than other rounds but he still may be getting his ass handed to him. This just annoys the hell out of me.

 

I couldn't believe he gave the 11th to Williams

 

lets say off night, then again he could be slipping cause lately he has come into question with some of his scores.

 

any of you guys ever notice how when zab judah is fighting and fighting well especially early against floyd and cotto larry merchant is always dogging him,
putting him down constantly?

im like wtf has zab done to larry ,larry hates the kid with a passion.

 

Lederman in my opinion has the right card say 85% of the time, and as such, he is a good judge. If boxing had three judges at ringside as good or better then Lederman, the decisions would be MUCH better.

Sometimes I think Harold Letterman does have bias fighters or styles. Like all judges, Lederman has his quirks. After watching him for many years, Lederman perfers clean coutners to power punching. He tends to go for the boxer over the puncher. Lederman also hates fighters who bed the rules and stall, but sometimes he is horribly one sided. Example. Wald vs Peter. Peter fouled many times, but Lederman only focuses on Wlad clinching.

There is a slight disconnect between TV judging and judging at ringside. Those who watch on see more angles. Those at ringside get a better feel of who’s getting the better of who.

PS: Julie Lederman ( Harold's daugther ) is one of the best judges out there. I've never seen her produce a bad card.

 

No, just a complete dip****.:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

 

I Always Find His Score Card To Be Off.

 

Please explain.

 

I don't think that the commentating was as bad as usual. They did acknowledge that Quintana was whooping some ass. I don't know what fight ledderman was watching though. he lost all credibility there.

 

what people dont realize is that the commentators are always thinking of the future. if a cash cow like williams looses to someone like quintana the sport will loose a few million because now people dont what to see a williams vs floyd or a williams vs cotto, simple because he has a blemish on his record.

commentators are bias to the overdog usually

 

Another poster brought this up on another Lederman thread and i think he is 100% accurate. Ledermen gives too much credit to the aggressor and seems to care less about clean punches. That's why he scored it for Williams. Williams was the aggressor but didn't land much.

Same situation with the Winky/Hopkins fight. While Winky was the aggressor in most rounds and threw more punches, Hopkins was much more effective. And Ledermen scored that one a draw.

 

Lederman is senile...his scoring has been ridiculous lately. His final scores aren't far off usually, but the rounds he picks seem to be opposites.

 

Lederman was also off in the Mayweather Hatton fight ...It's time for Teddy Atlas' s'core card !!!!

 

I don't agree with her Pavlik/Taylor card. 59-54 for Taylor.

 

Lederman is nearly always in favor of the agressor - thats is the main reason he scored this fight the way he did but **** was he way off:tired