Oleksandr Oleksandrovych Usyk vs. Tyson Luke Fury & Jai Opetaia vs. Mairis Briedis II - RBR.

This was my first time. I was hanging out with my son yesterday. We actually got home and tuned in at the very end and then watched some highlights of the knockdown in R9.

(that's when I popped in to make the following post)

 

Rounds 1-3 and 12 are the ones where I’m in, if not disbelief, then disappointment at how many people think Fury won them. I know we all have our biases and it might not be deliberate, but you really have to be not fully comprehending Usyk’s work to not see he’s winning those rounds imo.

 

Ah cool, so this is how you saw it with the luxury of being able to focus and score properly without getting too caught up in the drama of the live event. The commentary was so biased hey, really struck me watching it back.

I had my son with me too yesterday so wasn't really able to score as he's only 3 and was jumping around the living room throwing fresh air punches at the screen every time the crowd noise amped up. Haha. Had to watch again when he was in bed to have a stab at scoring it.

 

That's not me. Shania Twain, maybe?

 

I am away from home visiting with relatives. I was at a birthday party and missed the big fight. It sounds like it was a really good one. I hope to catch it on a replay soon. OLEKSANDR FREAKING USYK! Wow!

 

What I would say to IB and others who scored it wide, namely 117-110, as it seems we have a handful of 117-110ers, is that, we've been here before, haven't we. We've seen this sort of thing before, and I can't say I'm surprised. We've been here before when we've had close fights argued to be much wider than the judges had it. i.e. Canelo GGG 1 & 2.

I'm not gonna sit here and rain on the parade of those who had it wide for Usyk, particularly those who boldly invisioned a Usyk victory beforehand and have been validated by the result, a result that I also came to as well, albeit by a much narrower margin. Credit to those that predicted a Usyk victory, we can differ on how wide we had it, but can agree on who deserved victory.

But I do think, particularly in IB's case, is that you're glossing over how close and how undeniably hard to score the first 3 rounds were, and with IB citing an erroneous 52% to 18% accuracy figure in an effort to justify the scoring of those rounds via an inaccurate statistic, whilst completely ignoring the near even total landed numbers, doesn't exactly instill confidence.

On the other hand, to score the first 3 rounds in favor of Usyk, I wouldn't conclude that is inherently unreasonable, but I do think having those rounds noted as "close" is an important distinction if you are so inclined to score them each to Usyk. To give the impression that each of the the first 3 rounds were "clear" Usyk rounds as IB's seems to be doing comes across as disingenuous and rather biased.

That's what I try to guard against, not the final score total so much, but rather how you got there, and showing how conflicted you were over hard to score rounds. I recognize that scoring close rounds can be subjective and multiple swing rounds can indeed turn a 1 point margin into a 7 point margin. But to give the impression that a observably close matchup was one-sided and easy to score, that's just not consistent with reality.

I would be able to relate better to your 117-110 had you made it clear, that yeah you had it wide, but darn there were multiple hard rounds to score that you gave to Usyk, but that you were conflicted over, then I could live with that. But lets not pretend that Fury wasn't having his way with Usyk or that Usyk wasn't in it deep at the midway point, lets not act like Usyk didn't have to pull a rabbit out of a hat over the final 6 rounds to turn the tide. And failure to recognize this in my view reduces the thrilling dramatic turnaround that we all witnessed that would only increase the respect that Usyk earned by the adjustments he made and the never say die fighting Spirit Usyk showed into a Ho-hom one-sided easy to score imaginary fantasy that simply didn't occur.

 

Yea @Scotty Cork confirmed its a pic of Shania Twain. I really thought it was a picture of you though.
Anyway you both look alike of course you look a lot younger though.

 

Not to be that Compubox guy, but Compubox had Fury outlanding Usyk over the first 3 rounds 37-35. With those kind of numbers, it shouldn't come as a shock that those rounds were hard to score and could each be given to Fury. I see rounds 1-3 as close rounds that could be argued either way. Of course Compubox isn't the be all end all, but each of those rounds the landed punchers were near even. In cases when the number of landed punches is about even, it often comes down to who had the more eye catching shots, who had the better ring generalship. Fury was the volume puncher in those rounds, he had a much higher work rate than Usyk did in each of those rounds, and he arguably landed the majority of the eye catching shots. Further he didn't fade down the stretch and left an impression on the judges. That's generally a recipe for winning rounds.

To the contrary, in Round 12, Compubox had Usyk outlanding Fury significantly 18-10. Fury did much better according to Compubox in Round 11, with Usyk outlanding Fury in that round by only a single punch 13-12. But yet far more fans and experts alike gave the 12th to Fury than they did the 11th.

Of course there are aspects to scoring rounds that go beyond Compubox numbers, factors that exist in some rounds but not others that can offset a larger disparity in Compubox numbers. For example, I scored Round 11 to Usyk but gave Round 12 to Fury.

One of the reasons why is due to how Usyk finished the 11th round. When you have a close round and one fighter finishes the round with a flurry, it makes sense to score the round to the fighter who put an exclaimation point on the round. In the 12th round, while Usyk may have outlanded Fury throughout the round, it was Fury who finished the round strong. And also it was Fury who landed the harder more eye catching shots.

So if, in Round 12, we've concluded that Fury may well have been outlanded, but he finished the round strong, and landed the harder more eye catching shots, then that largely explains why Fury has a case to winning the 12th. And when you factor in that Usyk won each of the previous 4 rounds due to late flurries, rounds that were very even, it's not unreasonable to give the final round to Fury.

In rounds 1-3, you didn't have the same dynamics that existed towards the end, of Usyk closing out rounds strong. In fact, particularly in the case of Round 2, it was Fury who came on strong down the stretch after a good start by Usyk. So the ebb and flow of the round plays a role, and although I would agree Compubox shouldn't be used to score a round, it certainly can be used as a gauge to ascertain how close a round was particular when an impression is being given by some to how clear a round was for a certain fighter, only to be brought back to earth by near even compubox landed punch numbers.

 

I flagged the only round on my card for Usyk that was so close it warranted mentioning - the seventh. The first three were clear for Usyk, as much as the subsequent three were for Tyson Fury.

I also never once said my scoring was tied to that one offhanded remark I made laughing about the Sky Sports stat graphic. In no way was that a "justification" of my scoring - it was an aside. A separate comment. If the actual figures are 52% and 28% - okay, that's still a very wide disparity for Usyk. I maybe wouldn't have made a "wow" comment about that as I did for the 52-and-18 they flashed onscreen, but if you think that somehow topples my scorecard for rounds 1-3 like a house of cards, it doesn't.

 

And that's the issue I had, not that you scored the first 3 for Usyk, but that you are in fact aruging that they were clear Usyk rounds. I think we can safely say that the vast majority of fans would disagree with you that those were clear Usyk rounds. Not that being in the minority means that your wrong, but it is something to consider. Rounds 1-3 in my view, were each extremely close and hard to score, and arguable for Fury. When you make the argument that a close hard to score round is in your mind a clear round, that screams bias. So again, IB, I don't have an issue with you scoring rounds 1-3 for Usyk, but I do have an issue with you acting like those were clear Usyk rounds, that in your mind you can't score them for Fury. that's insulting to me and many others, and frankly to the sweet science. It's insulting to our intelligence to act like a close hard to score round was easy to score. That's the problem we have, not that you scored each of those rounds to Usyk, which I have said is not unreasonable.

It was a false impression that you provided, but if in fact Sky Sports put up an incorrect stat on the live telecast, then your reaction to that stat would be understandably shocking. Surely you were shocked by how one-sided 52%-18% was, when in fact it was 10% narrower.

What I would also say you to is that, while you are conveniently focused the % difference, whatever happened to volume punching, whatever happened to work rate? Tyson Fury clearly outworked Oleksandr Usyk in rounds 1-3. Why is it that you ignore volume and work rate when it suits you, in addition to ring generalship. Fury was clearly the ring general in rounds 1-3, and maintained that distinction until the latter stages of Round 7 when Usyk changed the course of the match.

Where were you praising % accuracy in Canelo GGG 2 when Canelo had a 32.5% accuracy advantage to GGG's measely 26.6%? At that time, it was all about volume punching and work rate, not efficiency. We can cite body punches landed as a reason why Usyk deserved to win, which I would agree. But in Canelo GGG 2, Canelo had a far larger body punch landed advantage (a dominate 46-6). Far more dominant than Usyk's 70-46.

So, and I'm not accusing you of this directly, but we can hand pick certain statistics that suit our biases in order to justify our scoring where convenient. I would encourage you to hone in on rounds 1-3, and instead of focusing on Usyk, focused on Fury. Pay attention to the punches Fury landed on Usyk, and how he took over Round 2 down the stretch.

IB, stand by your 117-110, but leave open the possibility to score rounds 1-3 to Fury. FYI I scored ROund 1 to Usyk, and 2 and 3 to Fury. But guess what, I admitted how conflicted I was about Round 2. I considered scoring it even. I recognized what Usyk accomplished in that round, the great one two to start the round, the body jabs, etc. But I couldn't ignore how Fury imposed his will on Usyk down the stretch. You didn't seem to notice that, why is that it seems? And you can't say I'm on an island here because of how many fans scored rounds 1-3 to Fury.

Why can't you admit that OK you scored 1-3 to Usyk, fair play, but also show some integrity and acknowledge how close those rounds were and how effective Fury was as well. That way, we can have a worthwhile debate over it, we can make arguments and counter arguments that can stand on thier merits, rather than you're fingers plugging your ears la-la-la those could only be scored for Usyk. When you do that, you limit your open mindedness at alternative view points. I'm trying to stay open minded and build a bridge between those that scored it wide for Usyk and those like myself who had it close. Even if you dont' agree with me, there are plenty of respectable posters here that scored it as I did. So your view of rounds 1-3, and how one-sided you think they were aren't just incongruent with my view, as I've put myself out on a limb with unpopular scores myself, but I always make it clear how hard to score rounds were when I do that, something that you refused to do. That's your call, but it would seem that the majority of scorers acknowledge how close rounds 1-3, and the Compubox numbers further validate that view. So please consider what I'm trying to bring to your attention, not to disparage your view but to simple reach an mutual level of understanding of what occurred there.

 

Eh. I don’t think Fury is at his best anymore. The Wilder fights took a lot outta him, and he lost to an mma fighter, even you scored it for Ngannou at the time. Do I think he was at 100% against Ngannou? Probably not, but people over exaggerate the condition he was in. There just isn’t much to prepare against Ngannou especially at that time since there isn’t boxing tape on him.

Still a great win by Usyk but this also isn’t a Fury from Wilder 2

 

R1 - Usyk
R2 - Usyk
R3 - Usyk
R4 - Fury
R5 - Fury
R6 - Fury - Best round for Fury
R7 - Fury
R8 - Usyk - Breaks Fury's nose
R9 - Usyk 10-8 - Should have been a Round 9 KO.
R10 - Usyk
R11 - Usyk
R12 - Fury

Usyk 115-112, if you are a clown and believe Fury was robbed on the cards.. Usyk was robbed of a Round 9 KO, it shouldn't have went to the cards.

 

Usyk clearly won rounds 1-3, Fury 4-7 and Usyk 8-12.

it was a great, competitive fight but in the end not as close as many have scored it. Fury was in top form, but was just unable to handle Usyk. That is why the fight took so long to make.