Why Lomachenko was robbed..

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Quina74, Oct 18, 2020.



  1. Quina74

    Quina74 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,569
    4,454
    Apr 25, 2019
    Wow mate fantastic analysis go on give m e your analysis on why Lopez won round 3 and 6..go on I really would like to hear it
     
  2. DanielDimov

    DanielDimov Jabbing all night Full Member

    5,398
    5,099
    Feb 2, 2015
    Man I am a Lomachenko fan, but please don't embarrasse yourself. I scored the fight 8 to 4 for Lopez. Basically Lopez had 6:0 advantage after the first 6 rounds and he needed only a single round to win the fight. The 12 round is absolutely for Lopez. Quick maths.
     
  3. Quina74

    Quina74 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,569
    4,454
    Apr 25, 2019
    You think these old judges are able to see in slow motion lol we are able to watch the exchanges numerous times and in slow motion. This in itself is more accurate than what the judges do, I do not believe judges have superhuman ability to see the exchanges over an over again and with the addition of slow motion. Granted if I watched in normal speed I'dobviously be at a disadvantage compare to themm well apparently after what I've seen not so sure anymore
     
  4. Quina74

    Quina74 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,569
    4,454
    Apr 25, 2019
    Youre a Lomachenko fan, oh that must mean you're right then. Watch round 3 and 6 and tell me why Lopez won these go on please I'd really love to see
     
  5. captain hook

    captain hook Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,752
    309
    Dec 11, 2011
    The only right way to score is to watch the fight properly with sound and normal speed. The score you have from watching it only once is the right score, no rewinding, slow motion n stuff. That's how ringside judges score it, any other way is an unreal bedtime story.

    I am Loma's fan, this was a shock for me, but still, I gave the fight to Lopez from first watching 115:113. Ringside judges don't have a second chance to watch once more and change scores, if I am gonna watch it once more it will be for pure fun, without doing scoring again.
     
    Pimp C and iii like this.
  6. Quina74

    Quina74 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,569
    4,454
    Apr 25, 2019
    Please if anyone believes otherwise critquie my analysis properly by revisiting round 3 or 6. I do not believe many have actually sat down and carefully watched it.. And again I thought it was more in favour of Lopez the first time watching
     
  7. Ian_k

    Ian_k Active Member Full Member

    1,395
    221
    May 8, 2012
    Was you watching the same ****in fight??
     
    gogeta likes this.
  8. gold

    gold Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,679
    514
    Sep 18, 2009
    We all know Loma would win a rematch judging by the way the fight went. That we can all agree on.
     
    Quina74 likes this.
  9. Quina74

    Quina74 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,569
    4,454
    Apr 25, 2019
    Dude this means absolutely nothing. If a fighter lands better more numerous punches then that's all that should maters. Saying we should accept the result of the judge having watched it once is not really analytical or fair tbh. Again if you want to tell me exactly how Lomachenko lost round 3 and 6 I'd like to hear it..
     
    gold likes this.
  10. gold

    gold Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,679
    514
    Sep 18, 2009
    Lopez was getting carved up second half.
    Ring rust Loma. Easy win in rematch.
     
    Quina74 likes this.
  11. Quina74

    Quina74 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,569
    4,454
    Apr 25, 2019
    Hilarious, now tell me how did Lopez win round 3 and 6 smarty knickers
     
    gold likes this.
  12. Quina74

    Quina74 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,569
    4,454
    Apr 25, 2019
    Cool love how none of you are able to give reasons as to why a Lopez won round 3 and 6
     
  13. Grinder

    Grinder Dude, don't call me Dude Full Member

    5,413
    2,031
    Mar 24, 2005
    There was a fix in, everyone on the bandwagon about the dominance of the performance, the same old people scoffing at any possibility of anything except a Lopez win, Teo and his Dad talking about how he dominated in the press conference etc.

    It was a close fight where the only dominant rounds went to Loma. A draw was not out of the question but it was laughed out of the room quickly to avoid the inevitable questions and doubts.

    As I've said, Lopez possibly edged it but it was very close. As the holder of 3 belts Loma deserved a little more consideration, but there was a lot of vested interest in bringing him down.

    Loma needs to fight people remotely his size. He may be able to unify 130 and 126 at the same time if he can get the fights, but none of those guys will step up to the plate. Hopefully this loss will give them hope.
     
  14. PaddyGarcia

    PaddyGarcia Trivial Annoyance Gold Medalist Full Member

    16,194
    13,222
    Feb 13, 2014
    Good grief, just take the L
     
    Pimp C, gogeta and Bustajay like this.
  15. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    108,011
    38,439
    Mar 21, 2007
    Well, I use the D grazing factor, which I know is controversial but it was very popular in the 50s and 60s before it fell off after the Chuck Leslie-Johnny Persol fiasco. But that fight considered a bizarre number of grazing punches, almost 90% of all landed punches had a grazing factor of 2.2-3.75. That is absolutely unheard of.

    14% of grazing punches as watched at 1.5 times the normal speed in the third round land with a factor of lower than 2.2 here. We all know what that means!! We're in Leslie-Persol territory!! The difference is that the third round contains 9 landed punches that work on the B Russell extension factor, where punching through the target as measured by viewing at .5 speed and dividing the through factor by four as per Cagliari's 1990s measurement (Remember the Tua-Lewis fight??). Once you do that and adapt it for lightweight (its essentially heavyweight theory) you have a clear round for Loma!

    Of course, I don't particularly care for the Russll factor but what's it going to be if not that? You end up chalking the landing zones and that, to me, is just too complicated, though I might dig out the slow motion capture sensor later and adapt it, just for a laugh.

    Mad how these professional judges just use their eyes in real time speed isn't it? A wonder they get anything right tbh.
     
    alangjk, BoyBato, SHADAPBLAD and 4 others like this.