yes, and that breakdown reads like a mom talking bout her child. giving the benefit of every doubt to her beloved and doubting everything positive about her boys competition. just be real with the whole thing. thats my analysis on your analysis. my analysis on the fight itself is out there, first page of this thread as a matter of fact, and you can see within what the facts and the feelings are in the perspectives. heres rd 2, which you somehow gave to loma. only his mom would give him that rd. there are more silly calls, but that rd shows right off the bat what goggles youre using. This content is protected
When it comes to round 2 the punches were cleaner from Loma. You can see that a lot of teo’s punches were on the guard of Loma. As compared to the fewer punches from Loma but most if not all were direct hits and were cleanly landed. I understand the judges scoring that one in real time. But we are talking about a rewatch here, and Teo was swinging and missing a lot. It looked pretty with all the workrate, but if you look closer a lot were on the guard and blocked.
So its always workrate > efficiency? Big swings > landed jabs? Add the fact that scoring also includes defensive work… if a Guy is able to block and make the other Guy Miss, is that not a factor that shoukd be considered?
youre asking as if any of that changes who won that rd. no matter what scoring criteria you use and how much you manipulate that criteria, loma still dont win that rd.
Punches on the glove aren’t scored by compubox. Only shots which land on the torso and head are counted.
You see the difference. Ive explained what is considered and the factors that gave Loma the round. And all you do is deny WITHOUT actually saying anything substantive to counter what i Said. If scoring criteria doesnt matter, that would tend to more arbitrariness. Then your opinion is just mere speculation because your response to the answer of “why” Or “How do you come to that conclusion” is a simple “it just is” and “because i said so”. So How exactly is that any better than using specific criteria or following a Set of factors to Help us score a round, and much more a fight?
Again. As per my previous posts, landed punches is not the end all and be all of scoring. Ring generalship, quality of shots, and efficiency of shots are examples of what is used when scoring a bout. Willie Pep once won a round WITHOUT throwing a single punch, but he made the other Guy Miss a lot. Its just an example that landed punches is not the factor when scoring fights.
first, pep never won a rd without throwing a punch, thats just a myth started by a reporter who liked creating his own world. like you. second, lopez threw and landed more punches, dictated the action, and controlled where that action took place. nothing loma did was better than what teo did in that rd. thats just the bottom line. but im not trying to change your mind, the reality is obvious, how you choose to live with it is your deal.
Controlled where the action took place and dictated the action? Without actually landing much in the first 6 rounds. If you are unable to land conclusive hits and only won rounds due to the other fighter's inactivity, is that really dictating the action? Because his workrate suggested that it should have been a blowout with all those thrown punches... How is that dictating when his punches were not landing? As compared to the 7-11 where loma put his foot on the pedal, and he was landing way more of his jabs, he had teo on his backfoot, and was landing 5-6 punch combos. Who then based on those facts dicated the action? When teo was pushing forward not much was landing and loma was circling. When loma pushed forward he was landing a high number of his shots and had teo in his back foot. That doesnt seem like teo dicated the action? Loma Loma was circling him in his inactive rounds and teo would only land when he CAN. So he didnt control where the action would take place because he could only pick of loma in times and spots loma would make a mistake. So you might think, well if he is able to force loma to make mistakes then he controlled where the action takes place... but there wasnt one specific or set of spots or distances where teo would pick him of. In short he was only taking what was being given to him, and those were few and far between. Additionally, he missed some opportunities that loma slipped. So to counter your statement that teo dictated and controlled the action is erroneous. He wasnt even effiicient when loma makes a mistake. So how then can you say that teo controlled it? The workrate was there but the landed punches were not of his choosing, and he missed more times than he landed in the moments he should have landed. Does that really sound like a fighter in control of the fight?
i posted the tape of the fight, its there for anyone to see. me describing what is happening is not going to change anything. you either get it or you dont.
Again you deflect. Without raising any valid points. Thats deemed as an admission for not specifically denying what had actually transpired. All you give are motherhood statements with no actual substance. Different people will score the fight differently based on what factors and criterias they used. its not a hard concept to understand. A subjective dicussion is one where the main question is "why". But you havent ever been responsive to it. So it seems like you might be the one who is biased, simply because when asked why you cannot give a simple answer. And when your statements are countered by other with that they saw as well you dismiss it and fail to even adress them.
I expected lopez to keep it long but no he was aggressive and it was part of the reason he lost. He should stick to my gameplans next time.
you seem to think this is something that can be legitimately debated because its not clear. its clear. the only thing debating this proves, is how far you allow your emotions to cloud that clarity.
Again, the only one who has any semblance of clouded judgement is you. You again fail to even bring up any valid points that will defend you statement that the fight was not close. you say its clear, yet when asked why is it clear you fail to expound or explain. the only thing clear is that you have mentioned nothing that will help your opinion. You attacking my frame of mind is pointless if you cannot bring up a single valid point to counter it. Only one who keeps saying the same thing without bringing up valid points to defend it is the one with the clouded frame of mind. As compared to the one who has brought up multiple factors and different point of views on how something that is subjective is scored. If it is so clear how come all 3 judges had 3 different score cards? Again boxing issa subjective sport, its a mere opinion and there may different point of views in how one scores a bout. I hope at least that is crystal clear.
