Josh James William Taylor vs. Jack Catterall & Robeisy Ramirez vs. Eric Donovan RBR.

My perception during the fight live - still not re-watched and given how scrappy an affair it was not sure I will - was that Taylor's aggression was pretty much entirely ineffective, with Catterall negating almost everything with either good head movement, blocking and sharp counters, and if those failed, tying Josh up in the clinch. I gave Taylor the 2nd, but nothing more till the 7th.

However, I was more pre-occupied by how of sorts Taylor was, and how fluid Catterall was to really be paying to much attention to precise scoring, and that perception could have led me to miss a few things, which is why I want to watch it again at some point, but will likely leave it a good few weeks

 

That's fair. Watching with the commentary off might make a difference if you ever have the stomach to watch it again.

 

Boxing is a subjective sport, if you don't see what I see that's fine.

However as subjective as boxing is, sometimes you have to concede if the vast majority of observers score it one way and you score it differently, you're probably in the wrong.

 

I'm not going to rewatch the fight, fair play to you for doing so.

But the problem was that Catterall was consistently outlanding Taylor round by round. He was landing cleaner, more snappy shots and he was avoiding almost everything coming back at him.

Not sure how into gambling you are, but here's an example of what I'm talking about in terms of how one sided it was.

I put a fiver on Catterall pre fight, after the talk of Taylor moving up to 147 I figured he might struggle in this one (and I fully believe that's why he struggled, Taylor is legit) the odds were 7-1 so I'd get £40 back if Catterall won.

After round 7, the bookie offered a cash out of £32 for my money. That's how convinced they were Catterall was winning comfortably.

Another bookie was that disgusted by the result they paid out on all bets that had Catterall winning on points.

As it happens I cashed out my bet, then placed a bet on Taylor to win, with him being the a side I knew he'd probably get a dodgy decision as its common place now in boxing that the a side gets the W.

The fight was absolutely dictated by Cat. Over 90% of people on this board scored it for him. Boxing publications call this one of the worst decisions ever.

As asinine as you find it, when that many people score a fight differently to you, you have to concede. I thought Ioka won his last fight, but I have to concede to the majority that I'm probably wrong.

 

So do you think Ward Kovalev 1 was a robbery or no?

 

Yea, that's what I thought. Credibility in the toilet. After the the Horn's rhythm will give Crawford problems fiasco I'm not sure you recover from this.

 

If the whole world disagreed with me I might also rewatch the rounds, but as it is my card isn't questionable.

The rounds you somehow view as close, weren't really that close. Catterall was clearly in charge.

The Prograis fights and Postol fights were close, everyone has them close. But here he jusy wasn't able to figure out Catterall at any point. I figured from your card you had picked Taylor though and I suspect that's why your judgement here is so far off the consensus view.

I wouldn't even know what his political views are, most people don't. They like Taylor because he has fought top competition and produces exciting fights. Although his post fight interviews have turned a lot of people away from him as he's has an opportunity to concede Catterall got the better of him and he didn't take it.

Betting on Catterall wasn't naive, it was reflective of the odds. Cashing out when he was miles up wasn't naive, it was reflective of the nature of British boxing these days. Betting on Taylor to win wasn't naive, it was reflective of how the A side often ends up winning fights they shouldn't. And whilst it seemed inconceivable that Taylor would get the W, I bet on it because this is boxing and crazy stuff happens all the time, plus the odds at that point were insane again in my favour.

You don't live over here do you haven't seen the backlash to it. There's consensus agreement that the wrong decision has been rendered. Even the polls on this site demonstrate a 90% vote in favour of Catterall. It isn't nonsense when everyone else who watched the fight is saying something different to you, it's an indication you're wrong.

 

The problem with group think is that most people watched the fight separately and reached the conclusion themselves. As for your ability to score, I'd say it's fairly well documented that your scores have come across as biased at times towards the fighters you picked in the league, but that's fine because your scores represent your own view of how a fight should be. It's just on this instance your views don't line up with the views of everyone else.

6 rounds a piece is too generous to Taylor. 7-5 is also pushing it tbh. The decision was an awful one. The judging is actually being reviewed by the BBoC it is considered to be thay poor. Catterall is likely to never again get a shot at all 4 belts, it's outrageous how much this has likely affected his carer, given how comprehensively he had beaten Taylor.

 

They were all (at least in the uk) listening to the same biased pro Catterall sky commentary though, which has a big impact on perceptions, especially when it comes to the casual boxing observer. So they didn't reach the same conclusion all by themselves, they were steered in that direction.

 

Catterall is a Frank Warren and BT Sport fighter.
Sky have a deal with Top Rank who signed Josh Taylor. Its absurd to claim Sky were biased against their own boxer.
The just called is as they saw it.