I thought it was a CLOSE fight, in which either fighter claiming victory...but the margin of the scorecard simply shows that the "other kid" got all the close rounds. Thats why when I score fights....all CLOSE rounds (rounds in which no fighter CLEARLY wins)...I score it 10-10 if theres a lot of activity or 9-9 if no fighter lands much. That what score will reflect a close fight. Example..I was watching Cotto vs Clottey with several friends....some were Cotto fans, some were Clottey fans. And if you all remember, THAT WAS A CLOSE AS FIGHT. The Cotto fans scored the really close rounds for Cotto and Vice-Versa for Clottey fans...and in the end, there score cards were not indicative of a CLOSE FIGHT...118-110 ON BOTH SIDES...and my scorecard was 114-113 Cotto.
you're right but unfortunately it doesn't work that way. A fighter can win a round by a hair and its 10-9.
It's not a matter of seeing the fight. It's a matter of corrupt promoters buying the judges, because they don't want to see their undefeated cash cow lose it's worth to an unmarktable fighter with 6 losses on his record.
I thought Vanes won by a round but for Ouma to lose by wide scores just shows these judges only gave Ouma the rounds he dominated which show biased judging.
It was a clsoe fight,I thought Ouma won it by 3 points but I could see how you would have a draw or Martirosyan winning. The scorecards however give you reason to call this a robbery.
I saw the fight and I had Vanes winning by 2 rounds. Even in the round with the flash knockdown you have to consider that Vanes won the round before & after the KD. I wasn't a robbery but many rounds were close & open to interpretation. I always thought of Ouma as a very busy fighter but he didn't throw enough in the later rounds.
Those scores were total BS, I has Ouma winning by 2 rounds, 97-92 even after the KD!? This guy needs to learn how to judge.