Your round by round scoring for Calzaghe - Hopkins...

I have long since lost my scorecard, but Hopkins won. Calzaghe simply did not land enough punches overall, or in each individual round, to call himself a winner.

Funny, HBO "discovered" a straight left hand landed by Calzaghe in the Hopkins fight they featured in the new Countdown show for the Pavlik fight. They showed 6 or so total frames, featuring 3 or 4 sequences - 2 of which were looped. One of Calzaghe landing that left (the only scoring punch featured in the highlights), and another sequence they showed twice at different speeds where Calzaghe landed nothing, as well as another sequence where Calzaghe landed nothing. In other words; only 2 of the 6 featured highlight clips showed Calzaghe landing an actual punch - and they were the same shot. Not even the professional editors and the guys with the master copies of the fight (from all camera angles) can find landed punches by Calzaghe. It's a ****ing joke really.

 

Judges don't score 10-10 rounds? Shall I find you a real scorecard, or just take for granted that you have no ****ing clue?

 

Agreed, it's absolutely nescessary sometimes.

 

Ok judges "very rarely" score 10-10 rounds, you'll get a 10-10 round basically if nothing happend and 2 punches were landed each other than that it maybe happens once in 15-20 fights.

Ok lets see some scorecards then.

 

http://www.boxnews.com.ua/en/photo/10449/Official-master-scorecard

They don't?

Notice round 9 of the first judge's scorecard.

[/edit]

And yes, it's a professional judge. Which means if someone scores a round even, that doesn't point to amateur scoring.

 

I don't need to provide scorecards. You just conceded to being wrong. Before it was your claim that judges DON'T do it, suggesting that amateurs mix this fact up.

 

I had it 115-112 to Hopkins. Calzaghe just didn't do enough for me to give him more than 5 rounds.

 

Every scorecard on here seems to have a 10-10 round which points to amatuer scoring.

 

thank you

 

Would you lads be happier if it were 9-9 instead of 10-10? It makes no difference, really. Personally, I never score 10-10 unless I cannot decide who won it and it's an all-out-action-packed round, where both gave their all; otherwise: 9-9 or 8-8, if few punches are thrown.

Also, unless you score even rounds, you are unfair when you score 10-9 rounds, because you deem a very clear won round of equal worth to a very even round, which is unfair to the guy who won the round very clearly.

 

I would be happier if you just picked a ****ing round winner and went for 10-9 to someone :rofl

I can't stand 10-10 rounds, its my official hate.

 

American judges don't score even rounds. It's a tradition over there. Here in Britain judges will often score even rounds. Please stop calling everyone else amateurs (aren't we all amateurs when it comes to judging?)

 

unless you score even rounds, you are unfair when you score 10-9 rounds, because you deem a very clear won round of equal worth to a very even round, which is unfair to the guy who won the round very clearly.

 

Especially British judges we have these days, sometimes i don't know what they are watching.

 

Thats the flaw of the boxing scoring system not a flaw of mine.