Sound influences not the eyes you are trying to sell that sound is more logical than the eye!That is false and misleading.Any fight can easily be faulyted without sound...Watch th Ali vs Mildenberger fight without sound ,then tell me it was a lopsided fight as the scorecards suggested!:nono You also completely spun around that other guys response which is why it is best without volume.at the end of the day kevin will try what I told him and say uncle was right,guaranteed!
No, i'm not. That is an absolutely absurd accusation based upon what I have actually written, but so there is no more confusion: Sight is first and foremost among the sense a person uses to score boxing. I would have thought that goes without saying and I would also say there is not one single thing I have written that contradicts that statement; but you thought so, and hopefully this makes it clear that is not the case. Sound inarguably supplements what you see when you watch boxing. It's a minor but important part of scoring a fight and the more fights you watch and score, the more you will understand what given punches sound like going in, landing flush, hitting the elbow, whatever.
Without sound you will see what punches land and what don't the same if not more..its that simple!And im almost positive after kevin watches it without volume he will see ali clearly wins that fight,it wasn't close as the scorecards suggested WITH sound.
Well you can see cant you?lol look commentary will always influence a viewer to a certain degree that's the way the human brain is wired,its not only that but a distraction of everyone putting their two cents into the fight!This is really simple .do you think one will see the fight more clearly with no volume ,no noise,no distraction from the crowd,etc...etc...or wwith the volume up with screaming and 3 ppl giving their point of view of it?Its a no brainer.
Yeah, it's a no brainer, have the sound up, loud, and listen as well as watch. My brain certainly isn't wired to allow a voice of a celebrity of some sort countermanding what i'm actually seeing.
You just don't get it!anyone who watches the fight both ways will have a different view most of the time. when trainers sit there fighters down to study footage do you really think they have the volume on?:-(
Back to the subject at hand - gunna watch it again as haven't watched it in a few years but I recall I gave it to Earnie Shavers pretty widely - I and I think I went back over my round by round scoring to see if there were any closish rounds that I could conceivably be swayed to give the other way and there just weren't - sure this was one of those that just mystified me - will watch it again now as its a quite night at work so will give it a watch now and put up my scorecard in a bit
Maybe, because a) they don't hear the punches go in or b) they are unduly influenced by the commentary. But probably most serious boxing people will come up with a similar scorecard most of the time and an identical one often. Yeah, probably. You really think these guys are being influenced by Max ****ing Kellarman? You think Steward was "Lennox...turn it down man, turn it down, Max messes with my head." Trainers aren't influenced by "crowd noise" and Max Kellerman. Obviously.
I think he deserved the nod, yeah - but again, it's worth stressing that Ali knew he only had to avoid KO to get the decision in the final rounds and that this influenced the way he boxed. Shavers was the most difficult hitter of his generation, after all.