Porter won when you slow down the tape

PBC should show all of their fights in slow motion.

 

Ibragimov clearly beat Wlad when you watch that fight in slow motion x1/8. If you don't believe me go check it out.

 

watching fights in Slow-mo would actually be possible for the judges.

Watch the fight in another room slowed down by 33%. (So 3 minutes real time = 4 minutes) and skip the between rounds on their video. It would only end 1 minute after the real fight ended.

 

I dont have to watch it in slomo to see that porter won. Thurman was too inactive in the middle rounds and would catch porter clean in a round when porter had already landed about 3 headshots and 5 body shots. The reason its hard to see porters punches land is because his are more short and compact where as thurman throws his long and hard.

 

better yet, lets have the fighters fight in slow motion. Then you can slow it waaaaaaay down for the slow-slow motion rewatch.

 

:dead

 

Slow motion ultimately doesn't count. It's an aspect of point-scoring to give off the impression that you're landing more than you should be given credit for, and having better perceived defence than you actually had.

There's a whole science behind point-scoring which virtually all boxers and their trainers are too dumb to understand (other than Anatoly Lomachenko who's still continuing to learn).

 

Who wins when you play it backwards...?

 

Thurman's punches were cleaner, but Porter landed more and controlled the action more. I didn't need need slo-mo to see this.

 

Porter won for me in real time

 

If you watch it in slow motion, in reverse, while on shrooms, Malignaggi KO'd Thurman in the 6th with a spinning round house kick.

 

This is mostly true. However it isn't how you score a fight.

Let's check the actual criteria again:

Clean punching: Most of Porter's punches were anything but clean. Most of the clean punching was done by Keith over the course of the fight. And this is hard to debate. Porter landed maybe a handful more punches overall, but the cleaner shots were hugely in Thurman's favor. Check for Thurman.

Effective aggressiveness: Porter was clearly the aggressor for most (but not all) of the fight. We can all agree on this. But was it really effective? It did make Thurman uncomfortable and it did allow Shawn to out work him a few times. However it was also causing Shawn to smother his own shots and as a result not land much of real consequence. It was also allowing Thurman to catch him coming in with crisp power punches quite often which were harder more damaging shots and deserve more credit in pro boxing. I think if Shawn were able to get in regularly and work WITHOUT being nailed on the way in or the way out I would give this category to him. Or maybe if he was able to land cleaner shots once he got inside. But the way it went down I would say his aggressiveness was smothered and countered and was not effective enough.

Ring Generalship: Thurman is the more skillful fighter overall and used the ring better which allowed him to set up Porter for those clean counter shots. He knew that Shawn was going to bull-rush and planned for it. However, even though he had to eat some hard shots to do so, Shawn was also very good about getting inside regardless which allowed himself to set the pace of the fight overall and give himself his best chance to win. I think if Thurman used the jab more, he would have taken this category easily. But instead I give an edge here to Porter for controlling the action and pace of the fight which were the biggest positives for him the whole night.

Defense: This was pretty clearly another pure Thurman category. Again if he used a hard stiff jab more, it would probably not even have been a close fight. But either way, the % of shots landed is clear as is the fact that the majority of Porters shots that did land were glancing, smothered, or partially deflected blows.

There were ebbs and flows during the fight, but ultimately overall this adds up to a competitive but clear Thurman victory.