Why a Guzman-Funeka Draw is reasonable

Co-sign

 

Clearly you're a puro-resu connoisseur, given your username.

As such, you've surely seen your share of "worked" matches. No workers in the game's history - not even the GOATs - could kayfabe a KD as vicious as that. Don't be absurd by suggesting there was anything premeditated about anything that occured in that 4th round. Andrade got caught cold and buzzed more than he's ever been by a clean fire******* on the chin, and then had his bladder ruptured by a Romanian Candle aimed a bit lower. Real as it gets.

That the fix may have been in for Guzman...I'm on the fence there, myself. One judge in three awarding him that many rounds, maybe. Two judges turning in 114-114? To accept this, is to accept that projected on a larger scheme, 66% of professional judges would score that fight a draw. No way. :nono

 

Guzman won 4 rounds tops.

 

Funeka broke his face period the end.

This thread is bull****.

 

That Dominican got his ass whipped huh?

 

Yeah, I tend to think that people get outraged when one guy wins "his" rounds big while the other guy's rounds are close, or debatable. That seems to be what happened here.

 

I suppose if you were his mother you might be able to find some way to give him 5 rounds but 6 is outright robbery along the lines of Casamayor over Santa Cruz.

 

yes sir! the Dumb-in-a-can got his face smashed!!

 

1 in 5 judges would score it a draw in my estimate, as they would have been influenced by the crowd cheering Funeka's many near misses.

Now those judges were likely corrupt.

But they what I believe to be the correct score by the wrong means. Their bias due to the pay-offs they recieved prevented them from being influenced by the crowd, by the near misses, by ineffective workrate.

 

WHA?? THat jab was doing damage from jump! His nose didn't get busted by itself.

 

I scored the fight 7-5 for Funeka, and there were a couple of rounds I gave Funeka that conceivably could have gone the other way. I wasn't thrilled when the result was announced, as Funeka clearly did more damage in the fight, and a draw was about as favorable as you can get for Guzman, but it wasn't even one of the 10 worst decisions this year.

 

Does it, Zak? Please illustrate which posts lead you to think that? Certainly not mine, which clearly indicate that this ISN'T the case? :think

 

Wasn't singling you out, but this is a general pattern. My point is that there WERE close rounds in this fight that could have gone Guzman's way. The OP pointed that out. So too did the fellow above who scored the fight 7-5. Think about it, with that ONE round scored differently makes it a draw.

 

A-ha. Here we are.

This is dodgy territory. Yes, it is best to reward clean effective punching and dismiss attempted blows that are missed/slipped/blocked/parried (and in fact, to reward the defender for these). HOWEVER - be wary of slippery slopes. You may be too influenced by a few misses and yourself missing what ought to be a few connects interspersed with them.

In many of the short-to-mid-range exchanges (anything further out than clinch radius), if memory serves, Funeka would fire from several angles trying to find a target. Guzman didn't give him an easy one, keeping a high guard. Of your two viewings, you say the first was from a low quality source. The second was on a proper television? Well I caught the early Sunday morning replay bright eyed and bushy tailed on a big screen. So there is little margin for technical error in what I sdaw, and my memory is fairly fresh and vivid.

For the sakes of argument and brevity, since the opportunity to dig up specific examples on YT isn't available to me at work, let's just use fictional punchstats, which shouldn't be too far off the mark. Let's say Funeka throws eight or nine punches. Not one contiguous combination, but a few consecutive combinations broken up by thoughtful moments trying to spot a gap in Guzman's very responsible defense. Of eight attempts, 5 punches land firmly and wholly on leather. One whizzes through the air and makes no contact with anything else. Two punches, however, punch through Guzman's guard and graze his cheek. They aren't hard lands. It's not the cleanest nor most effective punch - but it is a connect. So five blocks, one miss, and two connects. Responsible scorers will acknowledge that Funeka, in that exchange, touched Guzman twice. If, in that minute of the round, Guzman himself does nothing but shell up and evade, and Funeka has no other notable offensive moments - then the punchstats are as follows:
Guzman 0 thrown 0 connected.
Funeka 8 thrown 2 connected.

Funeka touched Guzman two more times than he was touched by Guzman. Funeka won that minute of the round. Repeat the pattern, and you have a round winner (as generally; winning two minutes = winning the round).

Now, an IRRESPONSIBLE scorer will look at that exchange and take away that Guzman was largely making Funeka miss and hit his gloves, and will then err in dismissing the two touches (using the "oh they were just glancing anyhow - that would be a "foul tip" in baseball terminology..." logic) and somehow their warped mind will produce the following rationale (still quite convinced they're using proper scoring criteria):
Guzman 0 thrown 0 connected but SPECTACULARLY SEXY RING GENERALSHIP AND DEFENSE
Funeka 0 thrown 0 connected (oh nevermind those two, they don't count)

 

I scored it round-by-round....and funeka dominated....I had it 118-110, 10 rounds-2 rounds......there was only 2 more close rounds, and in actual reality they weren't all that close, it was just guzman got inside and actually did some work....but in both those rounds he still got outworked and outlanded by funeka....

Even 115-113 is generous to guzman......114-114 no ****in' way...