Who thinks Hopkins deserved the decision last night?

Hopkins wasn't robbed of anything.

The knockdowns both of them were properly called. Hopkins was hit on the side of the head not the back.

The judges didn't have to score them 10-8 rounds, and I have been arguing this for years but all of you ALWAYS call knockdowns 10-8 rounds so don't try and change now that it is convenient.

The rest of the fight had very close rounds.

Americans are the BIGGEST crybabies in the WORLD! And I should know since I am American and live with them.

Even the American judge had it only 2 points for Hopkins and that means one round changes EVERYTHING. I had Pascal winning the last round. What the judges had I don't know.

Too many American CRYBABIES. That fight like the 1st JMM-PAC fight was scored correctly. The fighter with early success started to tail off but had enough late round success to keep the other fighter from winning.

STOP CRYING AND WHINING AMERICANS!

 

I always try to keep it clean and dont call names, but except than that, very good post.

 

Hopkins definitely 100% deserved the win last night its a joke i dont know what the other two judges was watching to give it a draw lol, B Hop deserves a draw and it should be in vegas or something full stop !!!

 

I understand the controversy but not the robbery cries. Sure, Pascal was schooled in a number of the rounds and Hopkins definitely did the more effective work in the rounds he won. Pascal won his rounds only by a close margin. But we have to remember that boxing, like it or not, is scored round by round. It therefore always irks me when people pull up punchstats for the whole fight to back their claim up. It really doesn't tell everything.

I've just watched the fight and I scored it for Pascal although I could DEFINITELY see a Hopkins win by some rounds too. I'm of course always open for debate so if I post my scorecard we could even go as far as to analyze a round blow-by-blow. I watched Showtime and I thought thay sometimes did miss some shots that Pascal was landing so perhaps the excitement over Hopkins' legendary age-defying feat - because that's what it is regardless of the outcome - could be the reason that thay feel bad about the decision, so bad that it should be called a robbery?

My card:

1. 10-8 Pascal. Close drawish round before that but since the knockdown was clear I gave it to him by two. Could be argued but I value knockdowns.

2. 10-9 Pascal. Close but clear I feel.

3. 10-8 Pascal.Had Hopkins by a slight margin before that but still not by enough to give him just one point off.

4. 10-9 Pascal. I thought Pascal had this round, but it could be argued. Absolutely not a clear Hopkins round I must say.

5-7 Hopkins schooling Pascal, needless to say.

8. 10-10. I very seldom score a round even but I had difficulty separate them in this round. Could be a bit generous to Pascal perhaps. This is the clincher.

9. Hopkins close.

10-11. Hopkins very clearly.

12. 10-9 Pascal. Once again not all of Pascal's work in the clinches and overall was called. I haven't seen Hopkins being hit this cleanly in a round for some time.

Overall score: 114-113 Pascal. Very debatable but I consider myself exremely unbiased in this particular matter since I really don't like either of them. If we just take away one point fro Hopkins for the knockdowns and give him the 8th he wins the fight. Shame that Hopkins did some stupid mistakes in the beginning or he would have had this in the bag. The same goes for a tounger version who would have absolutely schooled Pascal, who disappointed me big time He should have adapted when he realized he couldn't counter Hopkins. Instead of retreating he should have stepped it up but he showed himself to be a bit unclever and one-dimensional. Hopkins should be pleased - Pascal not so much.

In a rematch I take Hopkins provided he stays sharp and doesn't commit too much. I would without doubt pick Dawson too. The way Hopkins hurt Pascal to the body makes me feel Dawson could do it too with his good right hook to the body.

Feel free to give me comments as to why I'm wrong but please point to specific rounds.

 

Just saw the fight again and here are my scorecards:

10-8 Pascal
10-9 Pascal
10-8 Pascal
9-10 Hopkins
10-10 Even - Both had some good action and thought it was only fair to make it 10-10.
9-10 Hopkins
9-10 Hopkins
9-10 Hopkins
9-10 Hopkins
9-10 Hopkins
9-10 Hopkins
10-9 Pascal

114-113 Hopkins

That's 7 rounds for Hopkins, 4 for Pascal and 1 even. There were a couple of close rounds between round 5-11. So in no way is it a robbery. It was a close fight due to the 2 KDs and you have to account for them. Pascal was pretty much up 5 rounds to nothing after the first 3 rounds due to those KDs. Just the fact that Hopkins got a draw shows you how great he did after round 3.

 

Let me just add that Pascal got suckered into Hopkin's fight. He should've pushed the action more in the sense that when he came in, he should've let his hands go with combinations, not just a shot or two. But you can't take nothing away from Hopkins. He discouraged Pascal to let his hands go.

 

Hopkins SD tbqh

 

This is the type of fight where Hopkins should've gotten the nod but a draw isn't the worst of things. But a Pascal win would've been properly classified as robbery. But at least Hopkins had the dignity to get the draw in someone else's back yard in a close fight. But Hopkins deserved the W.

 

Had it 9-3 Hopkins. Up by 4 points at the end. Felt he was a clear winner.

 

I had it 115-111, besides the KD rounds, Pascal didn't win any clear cut rounds after that, but I did give Pascal the 5th as well. Hopkins, was a clear winner and deserved the decision.