Here's my problem with your "opinion". Here it is, it's just a freaken "opinion". Opinions aren't facts. It's not black or white, right or wrong. One guy will swear on their life that Chad Dawson beat Glen Johnson while another guy will swear that Johnson won the fight. And this is based on an attempt from both parties to be objective when they scored the fight. Now, how you interpret both decisions are based SOLELY on how you scored it youself. If you had Johnson winning, you think the guy who had it for Dawson can't score a fight. And vice versa. It seems like you are indicating that there is a judge out there that can score a fight perfectly. But the thing is, there is no perfect way to score a fight. Scoring a fight is about as subjective as it gets. The man right next to you will see the same fight but come up with completely different results. I just think that you disagreed with a few of Lederman's scorecards and have come to the conclusion that he can't score a fight while ignoring MOST of the time he has been accurate.
LOL, not even close. Look at some of the posts in here, Klion. There is a certain culture of people that think Harold Lederman is on a different planet from the rest of us. Now, if you're on that planet with him that's one thing - but you have to understand there is a very large group of people out there that completely disagree with this guy in the most extreme sense imaginable. They think he's mentally ill, senile, or brain damaged. This isn't about a few cards.. I will say that he seems to have gotten worse over the years, but he's always been questionably qualified to judge fights, professionally or otherwise. I'm looking at fights right now, on the first one as we speak.. After 6 rounds of Jones/Trinidad, Lederman has Trinidad ahead 4 rounds to 2. Emanuel Steward immediately states after hearing this score that he doesn't agree at all. Max Kellerman quicky follows in saying (as a disclaimer) that he "respects Harold Lederman as a judge," but he thinks that he could maybe give "1 possibly 2 rounds to Trinidad at the most." Shortly afterward Lampley refers to how Harold and his daughter were "about 8 points apart" in scoring for Taylor/Pavlik I, and how Harold had Pavlik "well ahead" in the fight at the time of the stoppage..
Klion, Are you saying that there's no right answer to the question: " Who won that last round ? " That it's just a matter of opinion ?
the things i don't like are that a) he doesn't know the meaning of an even round because i don't i've ever seen him score one b) his comments sometimes can reek of bias i was watching hopkins taylor the other day and he said one of the reasons he had taylor 3-0 up in rounds was because he was getting off first and it was annoying him how hopkins carried his left hand low and invited taylors right. Does he not know that half the boxers around today carry their lead hand low. c) their's no consistency in his criteria for scoring sometimes he just randomly decides he wants to start scoring ring generalship and defense when he should be taking these into account anyway
You can say that again. Just watching Vargas/Flores right now.. Lederman had Vargas ahead on "punching power" after 4 rounds in a fight Fernando was getting tooled quite a bit early on.. Yes, "punching power." :nut Guys that can't punch might as well not even show up on the nights that Harold is scoring "punching power." lmao Now even though Roy Jones was clearly smashing on Trinidad with the heavier shots at the same juncture in their fight, Lederman had Trinidad ****ing dominating Jones like 4-0 or 3-1. I guess "punching power" isn't a criteria all the time.. :huh Harold's scorecards are all over the place. He's downright abritrary about his reasoning, all-the-freakin-time.
Harold Lederman: "clean and effective punching is 95% of scoring a round" He's right about that. ^ Absolutely right about. I just wish he could far more often (and a ****load of other people, judges included) follow, understand, and practice this guideline.
Agreed. Lederman doesn't blow any score cards by picking the wrong winner, unless its a 7-5 or 6-6 type of fight.
Even if you do not like him its funny to just listen to some of the stuff that comes out of his mouth when he explains his scoring. I love Larry Merchant because he is old and senile and you can't help it but laugh when he talks especially when he tries to bring something completely random into what his happening.
Yeah, merchant scores every second round a draw, which, in case you didn't notice, isn't possible unless point deductions or knockdowns occur in the round. Yeah, merchant can score alright. atsch
Jim I GOTTA TELL YA, I don't think HBO would be the same without Lederman. Even if his scorecards are a bit screwy BACK TO YOU JIM!
Do you care to respond to the obvious idiocy of your comment about merchant's scoring system? Yeah, he counts rounds as a draw, now THERE'S A GUY WHO CAN SCORE!!
WTF, douchebag.. Get out of here, please. DO NOT waste my time, fool. Go post nonsense somewhere else, I don't speak "moron." Now **** off.