Is even more incompetent than the delusional judges that gifted the farce of a win to Calzaghe over Hopkins
Getting really sick of scorecards filled before fight, he must have taken some money he could not get 114 113 NO WAY!
Not trying to offend you, but if you think this is "incompetence" you are sorely mistaken. Boxing is corrupt as hell. All you have to do is watch Pacquiao-Bradley I and Floyd-Canelo. Those are textbook fights where you CANT score it how some of those judges scored it. Like it's impossible to do that without corruption. EDIT: You are a moron. Calzaghe clearly beat Hopkins. Deal with it.
Thing about these judges is if they were in other fights that were semi close they could have completely changed outcomes For example a Cotto vs Mayweather type fight where Cotto actually tried and put pressure, Shumenov was punching air most of the time
Because of this outrageous decision (I had it 118-109 Hopkins, giving rounds 1 and 2 to Shumenov) I went back on Boxrec just out of curiosity to check Gustavo Padilla's judging record. Since 2007 he has had 10 out of 26 fights that have gone to the scorecards in which he does not have the same result as even one of the other judges. This didn't change the result, Hopkins still got the victory, but this is yet another example of how boxing judging is inherently wrong. Especially when after the fight, a fighter who was involved the split decision says things like, "Hopkins was the better man." "I used the wrong strategy." "Tonight wasn't my night." "I am angry I did not get the victory." Edit to clarify, when I say "Same result" I don't mean "Same score". I mean he had a different fighter winning, or a draw, when neither of the other judges agreed.
he must be paid and proud of it , theres no way you can get a score of 114-113 even if his mother was scoring the fight.
The only thing Shumenov had was activity. But that is meaningless when you are missing, getting hit, and not controlling the pace. I'll admit, it is easy to hop on a bandwagon when one guy is in control, but Jesus H. **** this was pretty one sided.
Yeah thats what im saying, in a fight like Cotto vs Mayweather where Cotto actually landed some shots and hit to the body if these dodgy judges were there then you couldnt be shocked if they had Cotto winning lol
Pacquiao Bradley 1 and Floyd Canelo were both close fights that could be scored to either fighter depending on what you prefer. I thought Hopkins Shumenov was very close and it wasn't really until the knockdown that Hopkins pulled away. The commentary on Showtime, especially without Paulie, was awful. I mean it was so one-sided for Hopkins it was ridiculous. Bernstein called Shumenov's performance lackluster during the middle of the fight, yet Shumenov was out throwing Hopkins 2 to 1, and I had him winning many of the rounds. It's the age old conundrum : quality punches vs volume. If you prefer volume, then it is reasonable to give Shumenov many of the early rounds. So I did think Hopkins won, by a round or two and the extra point for a knockdown. But it was a close fight and I thought the Showtime commentary team acting like Shumenov was doing nothing was ridiculous. Similarly to the HBO commentary team during Bradley Pacquiao. A lot of times these commentary teams star-gaze throughout the fight, meaning Hopkins is a star, Pacquiao is a star, in the case of Canelo vs Floyd, Floyd was the star. And they go into the fight with a certain bias, and give the more popular fighter (Pacquiao, Floyd, and in this one Hopkins) the close rounds. In reality, these fights are close and could be scored for either guy and it's a matter of opinion who you think won. Here's how I had it: Round 1 : Shumenov 10-9 Round 2 : Shumenov 10-9 Round 3 : Hopkins 10-9 Round 4 : Hopkins 10-9 Round 5 : Shumenov 10-9 (Hopkins was winning the round but Shumenov had a flurry late in the round and I though he stole it with that) Round 6 : Hopkins 10-9 Round 7 : Hopkins 10-9 Round 8 : Shumenov 10-9 Round 9 : Hopkins 10-9 Round 10 : Shumenov 10-9 Round 11 : Hopkins 10-8 (KD) Round 12 : Hopkins 10-9 115-112 Hopkins Hopkins won, but the love fest by the Showtime commentator team was ridiculous. In the middle of the fight, when it was actually close, Bernstein was acting like it was a shutout for Hopkins and Shumenov wasn't doing anything, which is completely absurd since Shumenov was the much more active fighter and up until that point neither fight really hurt one another. Too much star gazing by the showtime commentary team, call the fight down the middle.
I don't like Calzaghe at all, but I have no idea how anyone can say Hopkins won that fight. Clearly out-worked.
I'm quoting this just to make sure I am not a ****** and everyone else can tell me I am not one. Neither of those fighter were close in the least bit, hence the controversy world-wide with the first and thankfully nobody robbed in the other fight.