Which official points decisions have you diagreed with in the past?

the general impression I got was that when spoon stepped up a gear, he cause larry problems. but he was generally lazy in that fight and the one big dominant round he had he began charging with no defence and got hurt himself for his troubles.

holmes - spoon

1: 10-9 holmes boxed brilliantly behind the jab setting the pace and controlling the action.
2: 10-9 another good round for holmes behind the jab. couple of spoon's shots got through but larry controlled the action.
3: 9-10 good round for spoon as he finally penetrates larry's jab and lands some good shots of his own.
4: 10-9 a tactical battle as they exchange jabs for the most part, unfortunately for spoon he's up against the best jab in history
5: 10-9 another good holmes round fighting off the back foot with good jabbing and combos
6: 10-9 holmes boxing beautifully behind the jab landing big rights at times as well, some spoon punches get through but not often enough
7: 9-10 sppon edges a close round but ships some huge right hands in the process
8: 10-9 holmes controlling behind his jab for the most part, share inside exchanges during the last minute.
9: 9-10 excellent round by spoon as he almost stops holmes, survives some series bombs back off larry in the final minute.
10: 10-9 good homes round behind the jab, spoon finds some success late on in the round but yet again he hasn't done enough consistently
11: 9-10 spoon actually outjabbed holmes this round in a very good display by the challenger
12: 10-9 spoon should have taken the last round but began clowning when on top and tsrated eating jabs and rights off larry.

116-112

 

Froch v Dirrell

1: 9-10 good round for andre, standing his ground in the centre and outjabbing Froch for the majority of the round.
2: 9-10 another tactical round much closer but the clean shots came from andre with a great double counter left hook.
3: 9-10 tough round to score, froch's agression wasn't effective but Dirrell's defence was overly negative. Froch was clearly the ring general but the emphasis is on clean effective punches and it's undoubted who landed the more of those.
4: 10-9 much better by froch who starts to actually defend with something other than his chin.
5: 9-10 dirrell goes back to countering froch's shots with greater effectiveness thus landing better punches throughout the fight.
6: 10-9 much better round for Froch, setting his attack up behind the jab and cutting the ring off much better.
7: 10-9 Froch closes the distance with some good inside work completely taking dirrell out of his comfort zone and probably just edges the shot count with a clear advantage from being the ring general.
8: 10-9 close round, both land big shots on each other but the inside work is much more even. Froch gets the nod for ring generalship.
9: 9-10 much better round byr dirrell who barely takes a punch in the first 2 minutes whilst landing some solid hard counter shots.
10: 9-9 dirrell outboxes and outpunches froch with crisp accurate shots, more willing to trade now. loses a point for clinching or headbutting, not sure.
11: 9-10 andre again lans really good clean shots and looks a class above froch at this point.
12: 9-10 closer round, but again the better work is coming from andre.

112-115

 

I've watched all of byrd's big fights but actually think he deserved the decision each time aside from a draw v golota which I scored a draw also.

 

Just read through this thread.

Quite interesting for me, mainly because the fights mentioned here I've seen numerous times now and I don't always have the same winner.

It's partly why I believe now that the judge's decision should be respected and if it's controversial have a rematch to settle the score.

I tend to find now that if I watch a controversial fight I can find enough rounds where I think "I see why fighter A got that decision, even if I disagree"

That being said there's a difference between respecting the decision of the judge and crediting the official loser with a great performance.

For example Hoya - Tito, I can see which rounds could be argued for Tito even if I don't necessarily agree. So whilst Tito gets credit for convincing the judge's he was deserving to be the new champion of the world, I can credit Oscar with outboxing a great great fighter.

A lot of these cards posted here I've since disagreed with. Most I've watched at least 3 more times and flip flopped on the winner, hence my softened view regarding the official decision.