Thread: 2013-02-23 Vyacheslav Glazkov vs Malik Scott- thoughts and views!

I was having an engagement on this fight between Malik Scott and Vyacheslav Glazkov. It was an otherwise uneventful Heavyweight fight, but for some reason it has garnered some attention from fans and analysts for what it COULD have represented- an over-protected American prospect in Scott (that many feel was ducked, and has not had a rigid fight schedule in 3-4 years or so) vs. a European Olympian in Glazkov!

The fight ended in a draw and some people were pissed. They were pissed because they felt as if Scott was robbed. A few felt as if Glazkov won, but this was my take: Neither deserved the win IF you were objective and not mechanical in your scoring aptitude.

For example, sure, Scott moved around the ring and countered Glazkov's shots. But Glazkov had ring generalship and controlled the ring. Glazkov tired by the 7-8th round, but Scott didn't start to take control of the fight or the center of the ring either.

This was was what it was- a draw! Neither deserved to win this fight. Scott didn't deserve the off-the-top extra point for being undefeated neither for his resume, and neither did Glazkov for his scant record. Sure, it was Scott's hometown, but even that only got him a draw.

Plus, Glazkov was an Olympian. His handlers expected him to beat-up and dispatch with an over-protected Scott. Glazkov didn't exactly rise to the occasion either. So, to me, it was what it was!

Know what I would do in this case? Automatic rematch, 8oz gloves, smaller ring, new ref (one that let's em sling, kinda like Smoger or, hehehehhehehe, the ever incompetent and corrupt Mercante Jr.), 12 rounds, no standing 8 count and no 3 knockdown rule- somewhere in Florida or Mississipi. Somewhere where the rules are a bit shaky!!!

We would see a champion rise out of this one if we had the stipulations like that.

What do you think?

Your solution of put them in an even smaller ring (if that is possible) with 8 oz gloves and let them beat each other's brains out doesn't sit well with me. It shouldn't sit well with anyone who watches the sport of BOXING.

I don't normally like runners like Cory Spinks, but in this case Malik Scott countered beautifully and clearly deserved to win the fight. He didn't run, he boxed. All this despite being the underdog and opponent for the hot new Eastern European prospect.

A draw was nonsense. It was a bit similar to how Cunningham was screwed against Adamek, only worse.

Originally Posted by Hulk

Your solution of put them in an even smaller ring (if that is possible) with 8 oz gloves and let them beat each other's brains out doesn't sit well with me. It shouldn't sit well with anyone who watches the sport of BOXING.

I don't normally like runners like Cory Spinks, but in this case Malik Scott countered beautifully and clearly deserved to win the fight. He didn't run, he boxed. All this despite being the underdog and opponent for the hot new Eastern European prospect.

A draw was nonsense. It was a bit similar to how Cunningham was screwed against Adamek, only worse.

Let's get serious here: this is BOXING! Not Basketball or "football". You are supposed to beat the other guy up. Even in amatuer boxing you are supposed to FIGHT and land shots.

8oz gloves will allow guys to actually fight harder or quit. Smaller ring will stop all of the running and cause them to actually fight and box a lot more.

The fight was a draw as it was supposed to be- because neither of them deserved to win. Do it again.

Besides, a lot of analysts and non-judges FORGET that you win/lose points or favour in the judges eyes for LACK of aggression and LACK of enagement in the ring.

You can't win a fight off of counter-punching alone and slipping punches. You have to initiate the mix-up as well.

I has it 96-94 Glazkov. He moved Malik when he connected, cut him off, better puncher and his body work was solid. Malik was boxing well in spots but it was Glazkov who changed the fight when he wanted.

I dont agree that smaller gloves and a small ring would 'make' guys fight though. With respect that's a bit cro-mag logic. It's professional boxing and you'll see a mesh of styles. Sometimes they work, sometimes you fall asleep. These are boxers not not roasters in a cock fight. If you wanna motivate make it winner take all, larger purse, or simply tell the promotion next time his fighter stinks out the joint and keep him off the airwaves. Even then a fighters going to fight what they know.

On a sidenote I'm more convinced that are feeding BJ Flores a cocktail of bathsalts and LSD before he calls fights. He is easily one of the most biased and or dellusional guys today. Malik was boxing well, ok, but the minute he says he reminds him of Pernell Whitaker he needs to have that headset yanked off his melon. His t shirt must be too damn tight.

It is great to see two young hopefuls clash though. Regardless of preference if the division has any hope it needs more mutual step up fights like this! A draw sucks but at least they met.

You said it yourself Spicoli- when Glazkov connected he pushed Scott back. And when Scott got pushed back, in my estimation, he started to run more and more. The punchers gloves would solve all of this- when a gut gets really hit, he will have to respond by either taking a knee or punching back to fight the other guy off of him.

To me, and we can all agree, Scott ran way too much for our likings? No? Even people that called the fight for Scott said he ran. But Glazkov did nothing to say he should get extra point on the top when Scott, even in his running around the ring, was the better counter-puncher, at least.

This was a good call for a draw. They should be made to do it again, with all of my specific dimensions into consideration.

8oz gloves
Smaller ring
New ref (automatic anyways)
and to add to all of this... a very "stiff" and solid mat. No bouncing around and whisping away. Stand and box and fight.
No 3 knockdown rule (because of the 8oz gloves and the smaller ring, give them as much times to get up and fight)
No standing 8 count
12 rounds

I watched this bout and thought Scott out scored his opponent 3 to 1 and landed the more meaningfull shots 2 to 1. he used the tiny (for heavyweights) ring looked to be 17'10"" to his advanage actually. He engaged then walked across the ring (3 steps) then beat his opponent to the punch throughout the entire match. It was uneventfull but clearly a decision win but as Mr. Scott said immediately after the fight he fought a Main Events fighter on a Main Events card came in short notice and they fought in a ring that was too small for heavies! My surprise was Ms. Letermans score card, she's usually consistant and does see intriquicies that others miss. I think she scored it even, a joke! It reminded me of Adimeks fight, the fact that your moving forward is important to me but you have to score and neither of these "slow footed slow handed" fighters did! If they moved their hands as much or as often as their opponents they'd recieve more props! Scott was far more busy and more accurate than Cunningham was.
Scott did moer than enough to win, it really wasn't close at all!! Ray.

Originally Posted by ray corso

I watched this bout and thought Scott out scored his opponent 3 to 1 and landed the more meaningfull shots 2 to 1. he used the tiny (for heavyweights) ring looked to be 17'10"" to his advanage actually. He engaged then walked across the ring (3 steps) then beat his opponent to the punch throughout the entire match. It was uneventfull but clearly a decision win but as Mr. Scott said immediately after the fight he fought a Main Events fighter on a Main Events card came in short notice and they fought in a ring that was too small for heavies! My surprise was Ms. Letermans score card, she's usually consistant and does see intriquicies that others miss. I think she scored it even, a joke! It reminded me of Adimeks fight, the fact that your moving forward is important to me but you have to score and neither of these "slow footed slow handed" fighters did! If they moved their hands as much or as often as their opponents they'd recieve more props! Scott was far more busy and more accurate than Cunningham was.
Scott did moer than enough to win, it really wasn't close at all!! Ray.

Yep. Some people will just disagree with the obvious to get attention and a rise out of others.

Originally Posted by ray corso

I watched this bout and thought Scott out scored his opponent 3 to 1 and landed the more meaningfull shots 2 to 1. he used the tiny (for heavyweights) ring looked to be 17'10"" to his advanage actually. He engaged then walked across the ring (3 steps) then beat his opponent to the punch throughout the entire match. It was uneventfull but clearly a decision win but as Mr. Scott said immediately after the fight he fought a Main Events fighter on a Main Events card came in short notice and they fought in a ring that was too small for heavies! My surprise was Ms. Letermans score card, she's usually consistant and does see intriquicies that others miss. I think she scored it even, a joke! It reminded me of Adimeks fight, the fact that your moving forward is important to me but you have to score and neither of these "slow footed slow handed" fighters did! If they moved their hands as much or as often as their opponents they'd recieve more props! Scott was far more busy and more accurate than Cunningham was.
Scott did moer than enough to win, it really wasn't close at all!! Ray.

First of all you are wrong when you say Scott landed more meaningful shots. Glazkov had the more meaningful and telling shots- as he moved Scott backwards more than Scott did Glazkov.

Second, that ring was 18' plus. If they whittled it down to the basic 16' it would be a funny and exciting fight to watch.

Originally Posted by Hulk

Originally Posted by ray corso

I watched this bout and thought Scott out scored his opponent 3 to 1 and landed the more meaningfull shots 2 to 1. he used the tiny (for heavyweights) ring looked to be 17'10"" to his advanage actually. He engaged then walked across the ring (3 steps) then beat his opponent to the punch throughout the entire match. It was uneventfull but clearly a decision win but as Mr. Scott said immediately after the fight he fought a Main Events fighter on a Main Events card came in short notice and they fought in a ring that was too small for heavies! My surprise was Ms. Letermans score card, she's usually consistant and does see intriquicies that others miss. I think she scored it even, a joke! It reminded me of Adimeks fight, the fact that your moving forward is important to me but you have to score and neither of these "slow footed slow handed" fighters did! If they moved their hands as much or as often as their opponents they'd recieve more props! Scott was far more busy and more accurate than Cunningham was.
Scott did moer than enough to win, it really wasn't close at all!! Ray.

Yep. Some people will just disagree with the obvious to get attention and a rise out of others.

Exactly, I saw this thread when there were no additional comments and decided not to reply because the starter was clearly clueless and has no understanding of boxing. "Smaller ring" Why not just tie them together with a rope?

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

Originally Posted by Hulk

Originally Posted by ray corso

I watched this bout and thought Scott out scored his opponent 3 to 1 and landed the more meaningfull shots 2 to 1. he used the tiny (for heavyweights) ring looked to be 17'10"" to his advanage actually. He engaged then walked across the ring (3 steps) then beat his opponent to the punch throughout the entire match. It was uneventfull but clearly a decision win but as Mr. Scott said immediately after the fight he fought a Main Events fighter on a Main Events card came in short notice and they fought in a ring that was too small for heavies! My surprise was Ms. Letermans score card, she's usually consistant and does see intriquicies that others miss. I think she scored it even, a joke! It reminded me of Adimeks fight, the fact that your moving forward is important to me but you have to score and neither of these "slow footed slow handed" fighters did! If they moved their hands as much or as often as their opponents they'd recieve more props! Scott was far more busy and more accurate than Cunningham was.
Scott did moer than enough to win, it really wasn't close at all!! Ray.

Yep. Some people will just disagree with the obvious to get attention and a rise out of others.

Exactly, I saw this thread when there were no additional comments and decided not to reply because the starter was clearly clueless and has no understanding of boxing. "Smaller ring" Why not just tie them together with a rope?

You are the one that's clueless. Ring size means a lot to a fight at times- ring size and tight/stiff ropes.

Scott did not deserve to win this fight. Period. The same argument can be applied to the DLH/Trinidad fight to certain extent- just that DLH did more to win the fight up until the 11th round to get the nod. Scott stopped fighting at about the 7-8th round, and Glazkov tired- but still was coming forward.

You can't be a champion on weak stuff like that. Let them fight again, 16ft ring, 8oz gloves (the Reyes punchers gloves) and let's see a fight, not a pitty-patter dance party!

Skills comes out when you are tested. Nothin tests your metal in contact sports than when you are hit or involved in a supremely physical task. That's why we watch- not for a dance party with love taps!

I thought BJ Flores was ridiculously biased in his commentary.

I watched it first on Russia 2 and scored it a draw. But then when I watched if on a video of the NBC telecast I could understand how BJ Flores could have swayed some viewers into believing Scott won. He did the same thing in the Adamek-Chambers and Adamek-Cunningham fights.

Flores is awful, he's basically just a cheerleader for American boxers.

Originally Posted by Freedom

I thought BJ Flores was ridiculously biased in his commentary.

I watched it first on Russia 2 and scored it a draw. But then when I watched if on a video of the NBC telecast I could understand how BJ Flores could have swayed some viewers into believing Scott won. He did the same thing in the Adamek-Chambers and Adamek-Cunningham fights.

Flores is awful, he's basically just a cheerleader for American boxers.

Flores sometimes gets carrway for American fighters.

Originally Posted by Freedom

I thought BJ Flores was ridiculously biased in his commentary.

I watched it first on Russia 2 and scored it a draw. But then when I watched if on a video of the NBC telecast I could understand how BJ Flores could have swayed some viewers into believing Scott won. He did the same thing in the Adamek-Chambers and Adamek-Cunningham fights.

Flores is awful, he's basically just a cheerleader for American boxers.

I watched it on a Russian stream and scored it 97-93. Can't remember the exact round break down.

Originally Posted by ykdadamaja

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

Originally Posted by Hulk

Originally Posted by ray corso

I watched this bout and thought Scott out scored his opponent 3 to 1 and landed the more meaningfull shots 2 to 1. he used the tiny (for heavyweights) ring looked to be 17'10"" to his advanage actually. He engaged then walked across the ring (3 steps) then beat his opponent to the punch throughout the entire match. It was uneventfull but clearly a decision win but as Mr. Scott said immediately after the fight he fought a Main Events fighter on a Main Events card came in short notice and they fought in a ring that was too small for heavies! My surprise was Ms. Letermans score card, she's usually consistant and does see intriquicies that others miss. I think she scored it even, a joke! It reminded me of Adimeks fight, the fact that your moving forward is important to me but you have to score and neither of these "slow footed slow handed" fighters did! If they moved their hands as much or as often as their opponents they'd recieve more props! Scott was far more busy and more accurate than Cunningham was.
Scott did moer than enough to win, it really wasn't close at all!! Ray.

Yep. Some people will just disagree with the obvious to get attention and a rise out of others.

Exactly, I saw this thread when there were no additional comments and decided not to reply because the starter was clearly clueless and has no understanding of boxing. "Smaller ring" Why not just tie them together with a rope?

You are the one that's clueless. Ring size means a lot to a fight at times- ring size and tight/stiff ropes.

Scott did not deserve to win this fight. Period. The same argument can be applied to the DLH/Trinidad fight to certain extent- just that DLH did more to win the fight up until the 11th round to get the nod. Scott stopped fighting at about the 7-8th round, and Glazkov tired- but still was coming forward.

You can't be a champion on weak stuff like that. Let them fight again, 16ft ring, 8oz gloves (the Reyes punchers gloves) and let's see a fight, not a pitty-patter dance party!

Skills comes out when you are tested. Nothin tests your metal in contact sports than when you are hit or involved in a supremely physical task. That's why we watch- not for a dance party with love taps!

U really are clueless. It was already a small ring. Making a smaller ring would favours the come forward fighter. All you are looking for is action. Go watch the UFC. Boxing is an art and isn't just down to who can hit harder or take the harder shot. Jensen why people like Mayweather, Whitaker, Ali etc were such great champions.

Scott is not a big puncher and knew he could not stand toe to toe with Glazkov so he controlled the fight with his jab making Glazkov swing wild and pick him off when he did so. Of course Glazkovs punches were making Scott move back.... That was Scott's game plan. Don't get involved in the inside.