Who did you score wolak/rodriguez for?

I provided objective evidence for my viewpoint. And listen, let's be clear - I am NOT arguing against those who had it a draw or close for Rodriguez. As with many fights, there were some close rounds that could have be scored either way, depending on what one looks for.

What I AM arguing against is the attitude that there was a clear winner in this fight. There wasn't - and whatever you think of them, the Punchstats back that up!

 

Many will disagree, but everyone is entitle to their opinion.

 

DR isn't an elite fighter himself, but he is clearly a level above Wolak.

 

Workrate and ring general**** is a lame way to score fights. Guy that wins is the one that lands the hurting punches and does the most damage. Or at least lands the punches with most snap cause some guys are feather fisted. That is it.

To me throwing punches means absolutely nothing in a scorecard. The only way I give a guy that threw more punches and was more aggressive a fight is if they both connected great shots, but one guy initiated most of the action, in that case I give him the fight for taking risks and still landing great thuding shots even though his opponent countered well and landed thuding shots of his own.

 

Iniating the action but absorbing punishment while not dishing anything out is ineffective aggression. Like the criteria says, effective aggression is what is scored.

 

Then why did they fight to a standstill? Furthermore, how much more effective would Wolak be had not had to box with a huge hematoma and a totally shut eye for half the fight? No excuses, as these injuries were the direct result of D-Rod´s punching, but still he was pretty unfortunate to get such a nasty ass swelling as a result. Furthermore, find me a single published article, which suggests Rodriguez clearly won this fight, was a level above Wolak or that this was a bad decision. Just a single one.

 

they didn't fight to a standstill in my view, I thought the fight was close but DR clearly won it.

Who gave Wolak the hematoma? **** didn't just appear.

I don't have to find an article supporting an opinion, I believe DR clearly won the fight 6 - 4.

 

Refs made a good call..

 

:-( Effective punches are one kind of criteria, but in no way shape or form, should they take precedence over total punches landed, especially if the latter was clearly in the person´s favor. To show you that your criteria are seriously flawed, let´s consider an extreme example - suppose you have a Paulie Malignaggi type of fighter against a Mike Tyson type of fighter. The Paulie type fighter lands 300 punches, that do absolutely no damage. The Tyson type of fighter lands 20 gorgeous, memorable punches that almost take Paulie out of the fight. But Paulie manages to survive. Who wins on the cards? According to your above criteria it should be Tyson. But by now, it should be clear to you, that this would be a huge, highway robbery.

 

No way is a score of 6-4, especially in a fight like this, a clear cut victory. You basically agree with most people here that its a very close decision but you´re labeling it as something else. And unsupported opinions are like ass holes - there´s just too many of them to pay attention to.

 

Sorry, I haven't seen this fight yet. But they are replaying it on ESPN Deportes and I'm about to watch it. Notice I didn't say who won, my post is in response to the posts some people have made.

Anyway, notice how I mentioned that some guys are featherfisted and WILL give them credit for punches with good snap. Look at Winky, he was feather fisted but landed nice, clean thuding shots.

Of course it's all relative, if the guy that landed the prettier shots lands many less punches then yes he can lose and he can also suffer more punishment because of accumulation, absolutely.

 

There are four scoring criterias: ring generalship, effective aggression, defense, clean punching.

DR dominated more rounds in all four scoring criterias than wolak did.

 

6 - 4 is a clear victory, for DR, it sure as hell wasn't a draw and no way Wolak won.

I didn't say it was a robbery, but I find the scoring it a draw suspect.

 

Think you made a case for Tyson, l

 

Maybe I should have said Haye instead of Tyson.