Thread: Andy Lee - Billy Joe Saunders, who wins?

Originally Posted by denilson200

Originally Posted by Tam Seddon

With a summer show down iminent who wins

Lee was lucky to get draw aganist Quillin. For all those people who say boxing is rigged, you only need to watch the Qullin-Lee fight.

Qullin fights Lee (Irish Fighter) in Brooklyn, the place were Qullin now lives. The fight was on a Al Haymon show. Al Haymon is Qullin advisor and someone who he has a close relatiosnhip with. He has a close-ish fight against Lee and he could have easily been given the decision and no-one would have complained, but it was a draw.

As far as B.J.S chances of beating Lee. If you want to challenge for a world title then it won't get more easier than Andy Lee. Not that it will be easy for Saunders but as far world champions go, Saunders is not going to get better opportunity than this.

I can't think of any current junior middleweight, super middleweight or middleweight champion that would not beat Lee easily.

What about qullin do you think he beat him easily ?
Or did lee get a draw because he is white and racist?

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

Originally Posted by ross

"Peppering" a jab doesnt or shouldnt score points. In amateur at least a scoring punch has to land with force and on the scoring area, not arms and not little flicked out peppery jabs, proper shots that you have invested some effort in and commited to.

A peppering jab is still more than nothing at all. You just have to do more than your opponent to win a round.

Thats not true.

A judge is not supposed to give points to someone who does not commit to their punches. Im not saying you have to be a big puncher, otherwise Paulie Malignagi would never have won a fight. Just that if its clear the jab is just being flicked out or peppered, plus doesnt even land on target then thats not winning (or shouldnt be) you anything.

Eubank didnt do "nothing" in any round. Each round was at least competative apart from the last few.

Its almost like the ilusion people got from maidana over Mayweather, that he was out working him. Yes he threw alot of punches but barely any landed and the ones that did didnt even score.

Even in an amateur bout, you watch the scoring, little non effort punches do not score. This way the fighters are forced to actually invest and commit otherwise it wouldnt even be a fight.

Originally Posted by ross

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

Originally Posted by ross

"Peppering" a jab doesnt or shouldnt score points. In amateur at least a scoring punch has to land with force and on the scoring area, not arms and not little flicked out peppery jabs, proper shots that you have invested some effort in and commited to.

A peppering jab is still more than nothing at all. You just have to do more than your opponent to win a round.

Thats not true.

A judge is not supposed to give points to someone who does not commit to their punches. Im not saying you have to be a big puncher, otherwise Paulie Malignagi would never have won a fight. Just that if its clear the jab is just being flicked out or peppered, plus doesnt even land on target then thats not winning (or shouldnt be) you anything.

Eubank didnt do "nothing" in any round. Each round was at least competative apart from the last few.

Its almost like the ilusion people got from maidana over Mayweather, that he was out working him. Yes he threw alot of punches but barely any landed and the ones that did didnt even score.

Even in an amateur bout, you watch the scoring, little non effort punches do not score. This way the fighters are forced to actually invest and commit otherwise it wouldnt even be a fight.

1st of all amateur fights are scored on the 10-9 system now so cant tell what the judge deems a scoring punch. Back in the day when it was a point for landing a punch all you had to do was touch the guy with the knuckle part of your glove to get a point. Force meant nothing.

Its the same in the pros. Boxing is about hitting and not getting hit which Saunders did perfectly for the 1st half of the fight. You wouldnt have great fighters like Willie Pep if what you think boxing is was actually true.

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

Originally Posted by ross

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

Originally Posted by ross

"Peppering" a jab doesnt or shouldnt score points. In amateur at least a scoring punch has to land with force and on the scoring area, not arms and not little flicked out peppery jabs, proper shots that you have invested some effort in and commited to.

A peppering jab is still more than nothing at all. You just have to do more than your opponent to win a round.

Thats not true.

A judge is not supposed to give points to someone who does not commit to their punches. Im not saying you have to be a big puncher, otherwise Paulie Malignagi would never have won a fight. Just that if its clear the jab is just being flicked out or peppered, plus doesnt even land on target then thats not winning (or shouldnt be) you anything.

Eubank didnt do "nothing" in any round. Each round was at least competative apart from the last few.

Its almost like the ilusion people got from maidana over Mayweather, that he was out working him. Yes he threw alot of punches but barely any landed and the ones that did didnt even score.

Even in an amateur bout, you watch the scoring, little non effort punches do not score. This way the fighters are forced to actually invest and commit otherwise it wouldnt even be a fight.

1st of all amateur fights are scored on the 10-9 system now so cant tell what the judge deems a scoring punch. Back in the day when it was a point for landing a punch all you had to do was touch the guy with the knuckle part of your glove to get a point. Force meant nothing.

Its the same in the pros. Boxing is about hitting and not getting hit which Saunders did perfectly for the 1st half of the fight. You wouldnt have great fighters like Willie Pep if what you think boxing is was actually true.

I forgot amateur is similar to pro scoring now BUT the judges still have a clicker in each hand and are counting scoring punches for each fighter, then the winner is based on the amount of scoring punches landed. It is still based on how many punches are scoring. However, if there is a large difference in the scored punches then its 10-8 and so on.

I can tell you now soft punches shouldn't score. I was taught and learnt and its in the rules that a scoring punch must have been thrown with effort and land with the knuckle on the scoring area.

Willie Pep, iv never watched him and the myth about him winning a round without throwing a punch is utter bullshit. If a fighter could win rounds without getting hit it wouldnt even be a fight. A ballet dancer could come in and unify all the world titles in every weight without throwing a punch

A great fighter will still win fights by landing the better shots.

Like someone else said, Saunders jab "peppered" Eubank. It never really landed or landed with any force on the scoring area. You can land the heaviest shots in the world on arms but they wont win you a round.