the what fights did you watch today\scorecard thread.

Hey all, so, i just watched Erik Morales vs Wayne McCullough* a fight I have watched a few times, but only the HBO broadcast, with the standard commentary crew for the day of Lampley, Merchant, and Foreman, and the Sky Sports broadcast with Ian Darke (American fan here, but generally love his takes and work, same for Glenn McCrory) . Lederman finishes up with 118-110 "El Terrible" Morales. McCrory has it 117-111 and Darke has it 118-112. but the link below is the Sky video feed with the INTL enngish feed done by Dave Bntempo and Tony Paige. Paige has Wayne up by one going into the 12th!? Someone care to score this version?

This content is protected

 

I recently watched two controversial Tony Baltazar fights. Here is the first and one of the funkiest fights I recall seeing. The Roger Mayweather - Tony Baltazar bout. Funky because it would test anyone's criteria on what they're looking for in a fight. Here's how I had it, but be forewarned, I felt comfortable on very little. Thus, controversy.

Round 1: 10-9 Mayweather
Round 2: 10-9 Baltazar
Round 3: 10-9 Mayweather
Round 4: 10-9 Baltazar (this round was only a 2 minute round - timekeeper error)
Round 5: 10-10 Even
Round 6: 10-9 Mayweather
Round 7: 10-9 Mayweather
Round 8: 10-9 Mayweather
Round 9: 10-9 Mayweather
Round 10: 10-9 Mayweather (50% of this round was clutching)

Total: 98-93 Mayweather

Official scores were 98-95, 96-95 and 96-94 all for Baltazar. How is that for a disparity from my card?

Again, rough one to score. Baltazar chasing, not throwing much and missing when he did. And Mayweather running and jabbing. Mayweather never really got off his toes and engaged until about the last two rounds. Again, rough fight to score, but I would appreciate the input from you guys.


The second bout I watched is the controversial Howard Davis - Tony Baltazar fight. It was fought in Atlantic City, so New Jersey rules apply which is a rounds basis and no extra points for knockdowns. Here we go.

Round 1: Baltazar
Round 2: Davis
Round 3: Davis
Round 4: Even
Round 5: Baltazar (scores a knockdown)
Round 6: Davis
Round 7: Baltazar
Round 8: Baltazar (scores a knockdown)
Round 9: Baltazar
Round 10: Davis

Total: 5-4-1 Baltazar

This was a unanimous decision for Davis with scores of 5-4-1, 7-3 and 8-2. NY and NJ rules really messed up a lot of fights - although in this case, even with the 2 point round for a knockdown Baltazar would still have lost a split decision according to these judges. Other fights off the top of my head that were hindered by the rounds basis with no extra points would have been Coetzee-Snipes and the first Benitez-Curry fights. The only thing one could have counted on in this kind of scoring was their supplemental points which could only be applied in the event of a draw. So let's say I scored the 9th round even (which I almost did because it was close), with a 4-4-2 score I could employ extra points for Baltazar's two knockdowns scored. Regardless, only the 5-4-1 score for Davis can be considered legit. The other two judges must've been at the concession stand most of the fight because they certainly weren't watching.

 

George, finally got around to scoring this. Saw it back in the day but didn't score it. Was a big MAB fan and thought he was robbed. Looking at it with a more level-head, still had it for MAB, but it was damn close.

Erik Morales v MAB I

Round 1: 10-9 Morales
Round 2: 10-9 MAB
Round 3: 10-10 Even
Round 4: 10-9 MAB
Round 5: 10-9 Morales
Round 6: 10-9 Morales
Round 7: 10-9 Morales
Round 8: 10-9 MAB
Round 9: 10-9 MAB
Round 10: 10-9 Morales
Round 11: 10-9 MAB
Round 12: 10-8 MAB (the knockdown was clearly bogus, but it counts)

Total: 115-113 MAB

Actual scores were 114-113 MAB and 114-113, 115-112 both for the winner Morales. Again, it was very close as well as every round and although I thought MAB won, it was too close to say robbery.

 

It was very close but it was surprising that Morales got the verdict, purely because the final round knockdown (bogus as you say) felt likely to swing it in Barrera's favour.

 

Julio Cesar Gonzalez v Julian Letterlough

You weren't kidding George! That was a crazy fight. Are these guys two of best scientific boxers you're ever going to see? No, of course not. But neither of them took a backward step and it was just heart and will that kept them both on their feet at the end.

I gave Gonzalez every round that didn't include a knockdown. He was busier and landed a lot of the cleaner punches. Letterlough landed the biggest punches of the fight, including the monster knockdown in the 10th. I'm still not quite sure how Gonzalez survived that.

Skill-wise it doesn't quite match up with more famous great fights in light heavyweight history such as Saad-Lopez 2 or Moore-Durelle but drama wise it's high up. A closet classic?

1 10-8 (Letterlough down early)
2 10-9
3 8-10 (Gonzalez down on one knee)
4 10-9 (close)
5 8-10 (Gonzalez down hard this time from a big left hook)
6 10-9 (both fighters very tired)
7 10-9
8 10-9
9 10-9
10 8-10 (unbelievable! Gonzalez looks out of it as he is dropped even harder than in the 5th. He could only have been a punch or two from being stopped)
11 10-8 (remarkable recovery from Gonzalez)
12 10-9

Gonzalez 114-109 Letterlough

 

Yeah, just a monster tear up. It's been a while since I've watched it, myself. Although it's interesting what became of their careers; González challenged both Jones and Mikalshevski, beating the latter. He is possibly the least known lineal champion, next to his conqueror. His fight with Glen Johnson is fun.

Letterlough wouldn't accomplish as much, but he did go onto fight Vasily Jirov at cruiserweight. He also had a fairly fun fight with Richard Hall, although I haven't looked further into him than that. The Jenkins fight is a must-watch, too.

Unfortunately both passed away in tragic incidents. Letterlough in a bar, and González in a motorcycle accident. Such a shame. González was a suave, classy family man, and Letterlough was well named... Mr KO. Tyson. He was a brute, and served 7 years in prison for assault.


https://www.*******.com/julio-cesar-gonzalez-mans-fighter--50533
You'll have to change the ****** for 'boxing scene', no space.

https://ringsidereport.com/?p=67473

 

Scored Lewis v Holyfield I today, which I did not do when I first viewed it live way back when. Here we go.

Round 1: 10-9 Lewis
Round 2: 10-9 Lewis
Round 3: 10-9 Holyfield
Round 4: 10-9 Lewis
Round 5: 10-9 Lewis
Round 6: 10-10 Even
Round 7: 10-9 Lewis
Round 8: 10-9 Lewis
Round 9: 10-10 Even
Round 10: 10-9 Holyfield
Round 11: 10-9 Lewis
Round 12: 10-9 Lewis

Total: 118-112 Lewis

Actual scores were 115-113 Holyfield (can you believe it?), 115-115 Even and 116-113 for Lewis for a Draw. Absolutely one of the worst verdicts I've ever seen. I looked up Eugenia Williams who scored it for Holyfield and saw that she wasn't given another assignment for a year and a half. Moreover, she never really appeared in any marquee event again. That's what they need to do to weed these bad or corrupt judges out of boxing.

 

Getting around to hitting all the controversial fights I can. And few more controversial than this. The 1976 Ali-Norton fight in Yankee Stadium. Scoring on the NY rounds basis.

Round 1: Ali
Round 2: Norton
Round 3: Ali
Round 4: Norton
Round 5: Norton
Round 6: Norton
Round 7: Even
Round 8: Norton
Round 9: Ali
Round 10: Ali
Round 11: Ali
Round 12: Norton
Round 13: Ali
Round 14: Norton
Round 15: Ali

Total: 7-7-1 Draw

Actual scores - 8-6, 8-7 and 8-7 all for Ali. Damn close fight right down to the wire

 

Just for a reference, when you guys score your fights, do you watch straight through, meaning, do you allow yourselves to use your own media players to slow mo any exchanges to see who or what did/didn't land etc? Do you allow yourself to watch the in between round slo-mos, if there are any, or do you try to do it as close to how an actual judge would? Just curious, as the 2nd rd of Ali vs Norton 3 has just finished and I may score and post....

 

I usually go straight through, but if there is an exchange that I can't immediately tell the effectiveness of (prevalent on old film), I'll rewind 10 seconds and re-watch it.

 

I too try to score right through. It has to be an anomaly for me to rewatch something, such as the MAB v Morales which I recently scored. I had to see that 12th round knockdown again just to be sure. It was a mis-call by the referee, but you have to score it a KD if the ref calls it. So it was really just for my own sake I did so.

 

Cool thank you for the reply. After thinking on it for a sec I figured it may not really be worth trying to watch it as tho I was a judge, meaning not allowing myself replays etc, as we've likely already have to much of an "advantage" by seeing all the multiple angles anyway so may as score it using all the advantages we have if/when it seems necessary.
Sidenote: the American commentary for Ali vs Norton 3 is truly abysmal. Atrocious even. Four rounds in and seen so many landed shots for both men called as blocked and vice versa. Save me...

 

Thanks as well! I see you and @roughdiamond and a few others really do contribute a lot to help keep this thread, which, when at it's core it's a thread about old fights, fresh with a lot of new posts, which equals new stuff to read, and if you happen to frequent other boxing forums, this thread topic isn't usually as lively as what I see here.

 

Yeah, I've seen on boxing scene. People would write 'Ali vs Norton III', for example, with no follow up whatsoever, literally one line, on the 'scored / watched' thread lol.

 

Exactly the thought that created the comment lol