cause jurisdictions have differing rules maybe?Posted July 17, 2014 5:51 pm
You’re an idiot… That website DOES NOT give ANYONE a comprehensive rundown of the rules.
There is no comprehensive rundown of the many types of fouls, the 4 scoring criteria, and very little else, you brainless fuk.Posted July 17, 2014 5:26 pm
I’ll tell you what is stupid.It is the notion that I would have to do all this research to find what the bloody rules are. No other sport is like this.Because it would be insane that only the judges,but not the competitors,nor the media,nor the public,know what the exact rules are.higdeebigdee, just below this post, linked to the ABC which provides the official guidance on the rules – and that document does not back up you say.
Your argument that eveyone has to individually make this grand effort to find out the rules from judges,instead of the rules just being published by the ABC for all to see, is a crock of chihuahua feces. I’m done.Posted July 17, 2014 2:03 am
I didn’t change ONE DAMNED THING I said Logic… I said do your own damned research and find out what judges are actually taught.. Nobody gave it to me on a silver platter.. It comes for various commissions all over the country and all over the world … and there’s no magic website link that gives you a consensus.
However, generally speaking clean effective punches RULE!!!
EVERYBODY uses 4 criteria. That’s another bottom line.
The other 3 criteria are pursued if there is a tie in clean effective punches.. If a guy is outpunched 10 to 8 you don’t NEED any other criteria. You don’t say “well boxer B defended better that round.” That makes absolutely no sense if he’s out-punched.
More commissions have the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th criteria in that particular progression than any other progression.. Effective aggression is generally considered 2nd, defense 3rd, and ring generalship 4th … i.e. if you still don’t have a winner after the first three criteria.
A few juristictions want to do everything ass backwards…but that’s not what I’m talking about.. What is the broad consensus about how a round should be scored??? If you figure that out — that’s where you’re the safest in directing the training of your boxers.Posted July 16, 2014 7:34 pm
Tark, I ‘m not going to waste my time trying to prove something that you’re the one trying to claim.(although I see you’re already “backpedaling” from the way you were originally saying were THE rules.)
Every moron including me knew what the 4 criteria were.What you were saying that was different is that the lower 3 criteria were ONLY used as TIEBREAKERS. Read your own effin post,for chihuahua’s sake. Oh so now you’re changing it. THAT is why I’m not wasting my time looking for something MAY NOT EXIST except in your imagination.
Got it,windbag?Posted July 16, 2014 6:38 pm
Stupid says.., “Tark never gave a link to prove his theory”
Why don’t you bother taking the effort to find out how pro boxing judges are trained, and what criteria they’re taught?
Find your own links you stupid assed moron. The training and criteria can be worded quite a bit differently in each Boxing Commissions’ jurisdiction—but that’s basically what it is.. There’s always 4 criteria.. They always emphasize clean, effective punching over everything else – as it is the first and foremost criterion in judging who won a round.Posted July 16, 2014 4:00 pm
But,under tarks rules,lets say you had it all tied up going into round 11 &12. if you are like me you had a mother of a time figuring out who to give those last 2rounds to. with tarks rules,easy:since they were equal in effective punches,you automatically drop to criteria #2 effective agression.Boom,canelo gets both rounds,your job is done,and best of all,lara knows what hes gotta do for next time!perfect,no?Posted July 16, 2014 1:48 pm
holy crap pubic enemy, did a mexican chihuahua bite you on the behind when you were little? sheesh ,you gotta move on with your life!
hibdeebibdee,i plead innocent to all charges…
tark,again,I’m not calling you a liar.your idea would actually be much better than the confusion that we have now. I’m just saying,if it is true,wouldn’t they want to make these rules as public as possible,so for example lara and pubic enema arent incessantly whining about mistreatment?Posted July 16, 2014 1:35 pm
Mexican Corruption Destroying USA Boxing
Mexican Corruption is Destroying USA Boxing.. When you have A Corrupt Mexican Boxing Sanchioning body, A Corrupt Drug Addicted Mexican Boxing Promoter, A corrupt Mexican Judge giving the Bogus Win after Bogus wins to their Favorite Mexican Boxers you know it’s time for the USA to take a second look at our beloved Sport.. The Days of Boxing Fans respecting and appreciating the Sweet Science, the Sport where Hit and avoid getting hit ruled is replaced by who is the toughest and can take the most punches to the Face is when USA Boxing becomes just a Tijuana Cantina Tough man Contest…Posted July 16, 2014 12:26 pm
Dela Hoya has 10 fighters and 10 judges all picked out…SmhPosted July 16, 2014 10:29 am
‘Of course tark never gave a link to prove his theory.’ tarkie is a liar.Posted July 16, 2014 3:42 am
I’d just like Oscar de la Hoya to name the “10 fighters” that are in line in front of Erislandy Lara (that’s what DLH said at the post-fight press conference) before he can expect a rematch with Canelo.Posted July 16, 2014 2:14 am
“But if you really want to nitpick..”
I’m nitpicking, Logic? At who or what? You? No. I just read you the rules and gave a brief analysis of the fight based on those rules. That’s all.Posted July 16, 2014 2:09 am
@Fight Aficionado.., “You don’t win fights playing strictly defense with no offense.”
Anytime you land MORE clean effective punches than your opponent you’re winning offensively — as long as neither boxer was hurt, staggered, or knocked down.
Punching somebody in the face isn’t a defensive play. My card had Lara winning.Posted July 15, 2014 11:24 pm
This book I skimmed through called “Medical Aspects of Boxing” has a chapter at the end about all the dirty tricks the oldtimers used to do. those sonovabs make todays fighters look like choirboys.id give examples but i dont want to give any ahoes ideas,heh heh heh.Posted July 15, 2014 10:24 pm
Hibdeebibdee, that’s a pretty thorough analysis, though we know many fans don’t give a crap about fancy rules,and just care about how many bloodies their guy gave to the other guy.
But if you really want to nitpick,that link you provided talked about the scoring zone being limited by a line going from top of head down over the ears, over the shoulders,down the sides,ending at navel/hipbone level. And the navel must be visible over the belt.
Now how many times have we seen guys get knocked out behind the ear(roy jones jr has been both the benefactor and the victim of this foul ) yet the ref lets it go and everyone celebrates a glorious knockout? how many guys get away with the belt covering their navel(lara?).how many guys get away with liver/kidney punches behind the centerline(canelo?)
So in real life it’s the wild wild west – mayweather knows this,and he tries to get away with stuff like when he rubbed the inside of his glove across canelo’s face in a clinch, and canelo knows this and responded by shoulder-butting him,not waiting for the useless ref to do anything!Posted July 15, 2014 10:16 pm
Fight Aficionado,if we go by tark’s definition of ring generalship(control of pace,distance,and ring space), then backpedaling would seem to qualify as ring generalship, even though I agree that it is kind of a pathetic form that we see even lower ranked guys know how to do. where’s the skill?why should i reward backpedaling?
If you think about it,it is much harder to hit a guy in the face who is backpedaling, than a guy who’s trying to exchange with you. That’s why canelo,who is known to be accurate with decent range as he showed in the trout fight, could only hit lara’s face when lara decided to exchange.
Therefore backpedalers already get a defensive advantage by this unskilled tactic-why should they be rewarded with credit for ring generalship on top of that. But again,according to tark, ring generalship is only considered if defense is a tie so lara won at that level anyway.
Of course tark never gave a link to prove his theory.Posted July 15, 2014 10:01 pm
Lara’s performance was so gutless and pathetic, if he had received the decision I for sure would have vomited my breakfast. an absolute HORROR performance by lara. disgraceful (I had it 115-113 alvarez)Posted July 15, 2014 9:05 pm
“Therefore,according to what tark is claiming,lara’s defensive prowess and ring generalship should not even be considered except as tiebreakers in rounds where effective punching and agression are equal.” – Logic, I understand what you’re saying. But fact is Lara’s running does not equal ring generalship. You don’t win fights playing strictly defense with no offense.Posted July 15, 2014 9:01 pm
“Lara is sour grapes, he lost and it is history.”
Actually, Lara has a legit complaint. Levi Martinez has a long record of being very consistent in his scoring and more often than not his scoring has been in line with other judges. This time however, his score was drastically different than what the other two judges had. Lara wants to know why. Nothing wrong with that.Posted July 15, 2014 9:00 pm
“fight aficianado,pls read tark’s post carefully.he is saying that the criteria 2,3,and 4 ARE NOT EVEN CONSIDERED IF ONE FIGHTER HAS A CLEAR ADVANTAGE IN CRITERIA 1)CLEAN EFFECTIVE PUNCHING.
Therefore,according to what tark is claiming,lara’s defensive prowess and ring generalship should not even be considered except as tiebreakers in rounds where effective punching and agression are equal.
hibdeebibdee,that’s a good informatibe link,but it also doesn’t back up tark’s claim.still waiting for him to back it up!!”
Logic, I misread your original post but now I understand it as well as what you have just said.
Tark said, “Clean effective punching is the MAIN scoring criterion—TRUMPING defense, effective aggression, and ring generalship.” And this is very true because it is a boxing match after all. It’s all about hitting your opponent and defending yourself from him. Punching is what judges look at most.
But what happened in the Alvarez/Lara fight is that both fighters landed close to the same amount of “clean effective punches.” However, to two judges Canelo appeared to be landing the better of those punches. In other words, Lara’s punches weren’t as clean and/or effective and/or consequential as Canelo’s, even though Lara’s punches met the criteria for scoreable punches.
Canelo was certainly not an effective aggressor for much of the fight–he simply could not cut off Erislandy–and whether he displayed true ring generalship for a majority of the rounds is debatable. Additionally, since Lara landed more punches on him than Canelo landed on Lara, there shouldn’t be a debate as to who had the better defense. Lara did.
And, Lara was going backwards for most of the fight. Without punching! He was “running” so fast that several times he was off balance and had to use the ropes to keep him in the ring and hold him up. He even fell down once trying to evade Canelo, and stumbled a couple more times–not too impressive to most judge’s eyes, I’d imagine. Certainly Lara would score high in the defense department but not in the effective aggression department or ring generalship because as I said before, a fighter usually doesn’t score a lot of points for going backwards unless he’s throwing a lot of punches–something Lara didn’t do.
Regardless of what judge Levi Martinez scored for the fight, the other two judges reflected more accurately what really happened in the ring, IMO.Posted July 15, 2014 8:57 pm
Lara is sour grapes, he lost and it is history. Red goes on to new plateaus, maybe even Cotto and The Middleweight Championship. In that one Red KO’s Cotto.Posted July 15, 2014 7:07 pm
One more thing:
The ABC defines effective aggressiveness as more than just relentlessly boring in on an opponent:
“Determination should not be mistaken for aggressiveness when one boxer continuously moves forwarding boring in on the opponent regardless of the number of punches being received. If an attack is not effective, the boxer cannot receive credit for it. In order for the boxer to be effective in their aggressiveness, he or she must force the action and set the tempo of the bout through forward movement. THE BOXER MUST SCORE PUNCHES WHILE BLOCKING AND AVOIDING THE OPPONENTS COUNTER PUNCHING. An aggressive boxer who continues boring in and getting hit from every angle should not be awarded points based on aggressiveness.”
Canelo landed 10 less punches than Lara. Regardless of what kind of punches they were, Lara landed more than he did. Based on the rules above, it is easier to understand why Canelo may have been viewed by at least one judge as not being an effective aggressor.Posted July 15, 2014 6:48 pm
fight aficianado,pls read tark’s post carefully.he is saying that the criteria 2,3,and 4 ARE NOT EVEN CONSIDERED IF ONE FIGHTER HAS A CLEAR ADVANTAGE IN CRITERIA 1)CLEAN EFFECTIVE PUNCHING.
Therefore,according to what tark is claiming,lara’s defensive prowess and ring generalship should not even be considered except as tiebreakers in rounds where effective punching and agression are equal.
hibdeebibdee,that’s a good informatibe link,but it also doesn’t back up tark’s claim.still waiting for him to back it up!!Posted July 15, 2014 6:39 pm
Sorry for my lengthy post folks.Posted July 15, 2014 6:38 pm
“All rules are open to interpretation”
Not all rules, SRedmond. Some are very clear and concise with verbs such as “shall, shall not, will, will not, must, must not, etc. But, the ABC (Association of Boxing Commissions) also provides “guidelines” to both judges and referees so certainly there is room for interpretation.
What’s most important is how the judges apply their knowledge of the regulations and guidelines to what they see happening in the ring. The rules for officiating boxing matches specifically states:
As you can see, there is no rule stating power punches receive more weight than other types of punches. In fact, the rules also state:
“V. SCORING THE BOUT
So it is very realistic for Lara to have won the bout even though he appeared to be, or really did “run,” and he could have won the bout by landing more punches even if they were only jabs. His jabbing just had to be effective and consequential. Lara did manage to bust up Canelo’s face somewhat so clearly his jabs, and other punches, were effective and consequential.
Interestingly, if you ask any trainer what the most important punch a boxer can master is, they will tell you it’s the jab. Yet, in boxing matches fighters are often awarded more points for landing “power punches” than they are for jabs. And clearly, according to the rules, landing more insignificant punches over the course of a fight can give a fighter a win over an opponent who throws the most power punches.Posted July 15, 2014 6:37 pm
All rules are open to interpretation the FACT is that as per usual when Tark is on the WRONG side of a result he will go to the Supreme Court to get things overturned… This fight has RUINED his visions of Lara dominating 154 and getting enough buzz to get a Mayweather bout going… Its over now, Molina rematch!Posted July 15, 2014 4:05 pm
Logic: “tark, can you back up your post with a credible link…”
Logic, allow me to answer your question:
First of all, Tark is correct. Here is an excerpt from the Association of Boxing Commissions website regarding the Official Certification Program for Referees and Judges:
“III SCORING ZONE
The test to measure the awarding of points for “offensive boxing” should be the number of direct, clean punches delivered with the knuckle part of the closed glove on any part of the scoring zone of the opponent’s body above the belt line. The judges should also consider the effect of blows received versus the number of punches delivered…Punches that are blocked or deflected should not be considered in tabulating your score. Blocked or deflected punches that land foul are not to be considered fouls in the awarding of points at the end of the round.”
In other words, one of the judging criteria for scoring a boxing match is CLEAN, EFFECTIVE, AND CONSEQUENTIAL PUNCHING. Just as Tark said.
Here’s the link: abcboxing.com/documents/abcboxing_officials_certification_program.htmPosted July 15, 2014 3:11 pm
“First of all, there are FOUR (4) scoring criteria.. 1. Clean, effective punches… 2. Effective aggression… 3. Defense… 4. Ring generalship. – TARK is succinct here. Of the 4 criteria Lara only was effective at #3. The other criteria? FAIL. Game over.Posted July 15, 2014 3:07 pm
To: The Scientific Observer
Next time you write a one thousand word post at the very least please do us all a big favor and break it up into paragraphs.Posted July 15, 2014 2:45 pm
I actually agree with most of what you just posted there. Kind of ironic that you just said I should change my name to “idiot” on the other thread,eh? heh heh.
As for why canelo “deserves” to be a cash cow,er,it’s because he generates cash.duhPosted July 15, 2014 1:04 pm
Kooban Looses to Mexican
Thats all, Lara Lost fight.Posted July 15, 2014 9:57 am
It’s not very scientific to believe what someone writes. It’s scientific to be sceptical abt what someone writes.Posted July 15, 2014 9:07 am
I had this fight at a draw and if I had to call a winner, it would be canelo due to his more effective power shots that landed.
But on a side note I just wanted to ask you guys why Canelo deserves to be a cash cow right now?
What has he achieved in his career and especially at this stage in his career that sets him right under PAC and Mayweather.
I am not a hater but I am someone who is actually confused to why canelo is already held at such high elite status.Posted July 15, 2014 6:33 am
Game of Bro’s
GGG aint knocking nobody out,,,, but bumsPosted July 15, 2014 2:29 am
You cant’ win a fight by running. Lara was afraid to fight Alvarez. One left uppercut did more damage than all of Lara’s baby punches. If Lara wants to win a fight he needs to fight…………….I had the fight 117-111 for Alvarez, Lara did nothing but run like hell………………….
Alvarez would knock Cotto out…………………..Alvarez will probably fight Kirkland next, no way with he fight Golovkin. Golovkin would knock Alvarez out, he would also knock Cotto out as well as Lara, Soliman, Quillin, etc.Posted July 15, 2014 1:38 am
tark,can you back up your post with a credible link(not saying i believe or don’t believe,just want to know if it’s true)Posted July 15, 2014 1:00 am
Tark, your explanation of exactly how the scoring system works and why, if true, is the under-the-radar post of the year.
I don’t remember ever before seeing it explained clearly that defence and ring generalship are COMPLETELY IGNORED if one fighter has a clear advantage in effective punches. Or if the effective punches are even, the more agressive fighter (who is minimally effective) automatically wins the round!
So how come you’re the only one who seems to know these rules? While Lara,Vivek,TeTumbo,Q,Fight Afficianado,Boxtradumas,Sly Stallone,Showtime/HBO analysts don’t???Posted July 15, 2014 12:08 am
Excuse me, #4 should be “Clean, effective, consequential punching.”Posted July 14, 2014 9:57 pm
Wallace said fans judge fights differently than judges do. He also said: “Each judge is ordered to assess (3) things: Who presses the action? Who controls the tempo? And finally, who lands the cleaner, more effective shots.”
Wallace is wrong on both counts. Why? How can he possible speak for all fans? Secondly, when I judge a fight I use the same FOUR–not three–judging criteria that professional boxing judges use. Those criteria are:
1. Effective aggression
Vivek needs to learn more about boxing. Much more.Posted July 14, 2014 9:51 pm
DaTruth ass Hurtzzz
Ladren PERROS! Canelo won! The only thing Lara showed Canelo was how NOT to impress the judges…hahaPosted July 14, 2014 8:54 pm
Sellout Ref let Maidana use MMA to NO avail
MMA was defeated yet again!!!!! Hatton tried to use MMA TOO but he got his NUTHEAD cracked. Maidana may get his cracked this time TOO.Posted July 14, 2014 8:35 pm
Mexican Judge gave Canelo the win
The Sellout Judge, Levi Martinez who gave Canelo a 117 – 111 outrageous Victory is Mexican.. what else do you need to know??? LOLPosted July 14, 2014 7:32 pm
Lara lost this fight on this premise…..True he was making canelo miss but he wasnt making him pay for missing. Lara was controlling the fight rounds one through three so why didnt he continue that pace? If he continues.that.pace, he wins the fight easily.
For those who call fighters who uses their legs “runners” dont know squat about boxing. Its okay to move away from punches thats of course brain damage is ones goal. When floyd moves, hes usually keeping his opponent off balance so they cant figure out his pattern.
I leave fans with this one question…..WHERE WAS THE LARA THAT BEAT DOWN,TROUT AND ANGULO?Posted July 14, 2014 7:08 pm
Vivek is pulling stuff out of his tail again.., “Each judge is ordered to assess (3) things: Who presses the action? Who controls the tempo? And finally, who lands the cleaner, more effective shots … It’s not about who landed more. That helps. But the judges are asked to view other things that carry parallel weight.”
That’s a load of nonsense… Here’s the real deal.
First of all, there are FOUR (4) scoring criteria.. 1. Clean, effective punches… 2. Effective aggression… 3. Defense… 4. Ring generalship
Clean effective punching is the MAIN scoring criterion—TRUMPING defense, effective aggression, and ring generalship … IF your opponent lands more punches than you… 1. Your aggression wasn’t effective… 2. Your defense didn’t beat his offense… 3. Your control of the pace, distance, and ring space didn’t yield enough scoring opportunities.
Why were FOUR (4) scoring criteria established??? Here’s the real deal.
There used to be tons even rounds scored by judges… Judges scored as many as 8 rounds even in some fights … so tiebreakers were needed.
If both fighters land 7 punches in round, and there’s little to chose as to whose punches were cleaner and more effective—give the round to the more aggressive boxer… If both fighters had about the same aggression but one missed more punches—give it to the boxer who defended more punches and had the better connect ratio… And if both threw and missed an identical number of punches—give it to the boxer who controlled the ring square footage, the distance, and the pace… That solved the problem.
How many even rounds are seen today vs 60 years ago??? You rarely see them now.Posted July 14, 2014 6:33 pm
The One Main Thing that Lara proved is that Cuban Boxing School needs to stay right where it is…. In Cuba.Posted July 14, 2014 4:01 pm
That’s why Delahoya didn’t get a rematch.. actually Tito offered the Runnaway Bride DelaRunner a rematch but the spoiled PrimaDonna wanted the most money in the Contract. Tito told him to go fk himsefl.. LOLPosted July 14, 2014 3:46 pm
Hit and move is one thing, run run run and then hit then run again is completely different. Lara basically fought Canelo the same way Hakaar fought Hopkins.Posted July 14, 2014 3:36 pm
If the fight was fought under amateur rules, then Lara would have deserved the win. Too bad it wasn’t an amateur fight.Posted July 14, 2014 3:22 pm
I prefer fighters that box, utilize defense and counter. Lara didn’t do enough countering in this fight. he lost a close one; he should have done more.Posted July 14, 2014 3:20 pm
This is the type of fight that seems to always lead to a lot of fans thinking the fighter they wanted to win really won the fight because it was close. It’s always the same scenario…Posted July 14, 2014 3:17 pm
Lara won the fight IMHO as I have mentioned a few times, but others don’t want to see it that way. I have watched the fight over several times without bias and trying to even give Canelo as Many rounds as I could to give him the benefit of the doubt and it does not work. Please turn off the volume, score the fight by the following criteria: Clean Punching (Lara), Ring Generalship (Lara), Defense (Lara) Effective Agressiveness (Canelo was not effective) The punch numbers favored Lara. Canelo landed 24 head punches in 12 rounds?? I like Canelo as I have said and think he is going to be a great fighter one day, but he lost the fight. The Canelo crowd changes how they see punches when they are cheering at every punch Canelo throws even if he misses by a mile. Those Body punches were in just 2-3 rounds and many of them were caught on the arms and were not clean. I watched in slow motion. Lara, even though he didn’t throw a million punches, didn’t need to because they were so clean and crisp. The crowd was in awe throughout the fight. They were begging for Canelo to do anything, but Lara had them all tamed like a bunch of kittens. Lara’s defense, which includes moving, slipping, blocking and weaving is CRITERIA used to score each round. It was up to Canelo to find a strategy to stop Lara from doing those things like cut off the ring , and he didn’t. Lara had total control of the fight, and Canelo was desperate. Did you not see him miss by a mile. Lara moved right and Canelo was moving left. The man was confused and just plodded forward swinging for the fences. Lara was calm. cool and collected and he was a sharp shooter landing the jab, straight left to the head and body. Lara controlled the style and pace of the fight. Clean punches from Lara, Beautiful Ring generalship from Lara, Fantastic Defense from Lara and Canelo’s inability to use his Aggressiveness effectively all point to the obvious. Lara is the winner of this fight. Unfortunately, as real boxing fans know. The Cash Cow that has the big promoter(GBP/Oscar) in his pocket will rarely if ever lose a fight when he has a country (Mexico) behind him, and his fans come to pay their money to see him. They are doing a fabulous job of promoting Canelo. He’s slowly making the crossover to the USA fans. They market him on being the Red Headed, light skinned Mexican that is the greatest young fighter in history. Promoters will go at any lengths to make a connection between the young lion and the fans, which I guess is a smart move on there part, but in a fight, his opponents must not just beat him, but practically knock him out. This fight was a mere image of Pernell Whitaker vs Julio Cesar Chavez Sr. Whitaker dominated him in every way, but still lost because he was the boxer and used movement and defense instead of just slug it out. History always repeats itself. The sport will continue to be corrupt as long as fans let them do what they want.Posted July 14, 2014 3:13 pm
@hmmmmmmmm – seriously dude.. 10 more jabs technically means Lara landed more punches. Since you want to be granular…. 10 more jabs = nothing. Canelo landed the better shots. PERIOD.
I’m no casual boxing fan. I am a fan of the sport first but I like dramatic fights. Yes, Lara is a mover (runner)… and that makes for a good boxer… if you like that kinda= of stuff then you must like Amateur boxing. I don’t. I like warriors.
But I can appreciate a boxers lateral movements. Abner Mares, tried to slug it out with his opponent, but he was more effective when he employed lateral movement. That was what gave Abner the edge in that fight. Maytwitter is the ultimate pot-shot, runner… but the big difference is that Maytwitter makes his opponents pay when they miss. Canelo never paid a price for his missed shots.
As for the judge who scored the fight 117-111… that was a little off the mark but maybe that judge he gave more credit to the aggressor rather than the evader. Just my Opinion.Posted July 14, 2014 2:00 pm
Can you explain how that makes him a “runner”? If he’s smart enough to hit & move then good luck to him.
Most casual boxing fans think the only fight worth watching is a blood & guts tear up.
This fight was the classic clash of styles – brawler Vs mover.
Calling Lara a runner when the guy has landed more leather on his opp is the comment of a casual fan.
Either way, the point is Lara was scored 117-111 by a judge when Lara outlanded Alvarez. Even if you want to give Alvarez credit for coming forward which most judges do this was never a 117-111 fight. Not in a million years.
It’s about time they set up an independent panel to monitor judges with lifetime bans for repeat offenders. The amount of times you get 2 close scores and then a 3rd judgement way off the charts is too coincidental.Posted July 14, 2014 1:39 pm
Lara landed only 10 more punches, based solely on Compubox #’s.
Lara landed 55 Jabs – 52 Powershots
That’s a difference of only 10 punches that Lara landed more than Canelo. Hence Lara landed more punches. But they were jabs.Posted July 14, 2014 12:41 pm
when you fight in a weak Era such as this one,you have to have hype Jobs to keep the punters Interested.Posted July 14, 2014 12:21 pm
Gus, Lara wasn’t rewarded, he was royally f**ked.Posted July 14, 2014 12:19 pm
Kato Can you explain how Lara landed more punches?
Mayweather is a runner – he ran all night from Maidana. That’s running. Lara chose his moments, sticking and moving.Posted July 14, 2014 12:18 pm
Lara proved to be the faster runner than Canello. The fans paid to see a fight . Canello tried to make a fight of it, Lara tried to win doing his thing and did not deserve to be rewarded for running. I would not pay to watch LAra run. I can’t see Lara ever getting a big draw fight again.Posted July 14, 2014 12:16 pm
This is what I mean when I saw, we are swayed by subconscious events.
Lara was talking all kindda smack about Canelo. Canelo would be taken to Cuban boxing school. He doesn’t have respect for Canelo…
Canelo has proven why he is Mexicos Greatest head first Plodder.. Moves like a Walrus, Bobs like a Bobble Head stings like a Flea!!! he has now earned a fight with Puerto Ricos Great HOF Miguel Angel Cotto!!! at 154lbs!!! LOL Based on that flat footed wild swinging piss poor performance Freddy Roach and Cotto must see Cinnabum is ripe for the taking..Posted July 14, 2014 11:48 am
Gotta love all these Mexicans like (te Tumbo) now making the Case for why The Great Boriqua Tito Trinidad beat Delahoya like Canelo beat Lara who ran all night long like Delahoya.. Lara did not hurt or back up Canelo like DelaRunner vs Tito, Lara backpeddled all night long like Delahoya who Back peddled for 6 rounds and then Flat out Ran for the next 6 Rounds.. Yeap, Delahoya Clearly lost to Trinidad.. just like Lara Lost to Canelo.. Glad to see all these Mexicans especially Dumbo now see the light… Well, Lara’s Jabs did fk up Canelos Face pretty Baddly all night long while DelaRunner didn’t even give Tito a scratch.. LOLPosted July 14, 2014 11:29 am
None of these Flomos would be saying Canelo won on Saturday if he wasn’t a former FMJ victim. They would’ve all have been pulling for the black guy again and be screaming robbery from the rooftops at the top of their voices.Posted July 14, 2014 11:22 am
Just caught the fight on YT and yet again the foul stench of corruption wafts through it all.
How one of the judges saw that as a 117-111 fight to Alvarez is beyond me. Truly.
There seems to be a pattern with many of these fights – 2 judges scoring it close to how most ringside pundits and ex judges (e.g. H Lman) see it and then a 3rd judge who is so far off the script it’s fricking laughable.
My hunch is that most championship fights these days contains a bent ‘third’ judge who acts as the banker for whoever is the sweet flavor of the month and the promoter’s current gravy train.Posted July 14, 2014 11:14 am
It, s plain and it, s simple to conclude who win the fight from a fans perspective. Those who like lara , said he win the fight….those who like canelo , said he win the fight . Myself being a fan of boxing but a fan of neither and having watched the fight a few times , I had canelo winning the fight 115-113.Posted July 14, 2014 11:07 am
Fights are scored round by round, not by a summary of the total rounds put together, or by general impression. Scoring is more scientific than you think, or should be.Posted July 14, 2014 11:03 am
There is no scientific formula for judging fights. What do we think, that these people are the epitome of professionalism? What do we think they aren’t persuaded by their own subconscious inklings? Judges are people and falter the same as anyone of us. The 4 main criteria for judging a fight is clean punching, effective aggressiveness, ring generalship and defense.
Both fighters landed punches. Lara’s Landed 55 clean jabs to Canelos 9. However, Canelo Landed 88 power-shots to Lara’s 52. I am no judge but, there is no way that I can score a jab the same as I would a power-punch. Lara threw more punches but those punches were ineffective jabs. Canelo walked right through them.
Effective aggressiveness, Lara was not the aggressor at all. Just based on that alone, he didn’t win on that Criteria. Canelo, was the aggressor and made Lara pay whenever he connected to the body. And despite what Lara said, those body shots were effective. If those body shots weren’t effective, it wouldn’t have slowed him down… but it did.
Ring generalship, not even the Showtime guys could tell you exactly what ring generalship means. Paulie made the best case for it, but he’s the same type of boxer as Lara, so it’s easier for him to sympathize with that type of style. Runnin. Eithercase, why does ring generlship automatically favor the retreating fighter? It shouldn’t. What I saw was Canelo pressing the fight, taking the fight to Lara. but Lara would, run or use lateral movement to escape. He spent more time escaping and retreating than he did throwing punches. To me, Canelo was the ring general.
Defense, has to go to Lara. The point of boxing is to hit and not be hit. In that area, Lara is a true master of not getting hit. But what he failed to do was to couple that amazing defense with power-shots. If he threw more power shots he’d have probably won the fight. But he didn’t. In order to deliver a power shot, that’d mean Lara would have to plant his feet, and if he did that, then Canelo would be able to get to him.
Lara lost. PERIOD. He didn’t do enough and he ran all night.Posted July 14, 2014 10:51 am
“And a FORK is officially put in Lara’s SLIM chances of landing a Mayweather bout..“`
Vivek don’t know sh!t bout boxing if he scored this fight for canelo. go watch MMA that’s what yall like. Yall don’t know sh!t bout boxingPosted July 14, 2014 10:45 am
I don’t care about the numbers, that’s alie . I know what I seen and they always say ask yourself who would you rather be in the fight, and its clear to me that I would not have wanted to be the one that was being schooled. this was an easy fight to score. 8-4 Lara or 9-3 Lara. Canelo missed everything that’s what I know for sure. Lara hit everything that’s what I know. I don’t need anyone trying to convince me what my eyes saw. I been watching boxing for 25 yrs I know what I saw, and Lara won this fight easy. Abner did the same thing but in a worse way that Lara did. He fought differently that what he normally fight and you guys say he fought well. SMHPosted July 14, 2014 10:40 am
And a FORK is officially put in Lara’s SLIM chances of landing a Mayweather bout.. He needed to impress and overwhelm instead it appears he dropped a close fight… That ain’t cutting it!Posted July 14, 2014 10:17 am
@Vivek, how did you score the fight ??Posted July 14, 2014 9:22 am
Vivek reveals some ignorance abt judging criteria. That is disappointing for an ‘expert’.
And finally Vivek really gets logically tied up after telling us that judges follow only the criteria and the in the end says they may credit one boxer based on their record. Talk abt muddying the waters. As clear as mud is this rubbish.Posted July 14, 2014 7:11 am
“Who presses the action” is not one of the three main points in scoring a fight. Ring generalship, effective punching, controlling the tempo.Posted July 14, 2014 6:59 am
Brazilian Boxing Fan
I scored it 115-113 to Canelo.Posted July 14, 2014 6:32 am
Boxtradamus- there are over a million poodles out there with hard ons waiting for you. LolPosted July 14, 2014 5:02 am
Canelo WON just as I predicted! !!!!!!!!! I am the GREATEST Fight Prophet ever born! !!!!!!!!!!!!Posted July 14, 2014 3:28 am