Does anyone Know what happened with or anything to the Holyfield vs. Valuev Decision? I know it isn't like huge news right now but does anyone know?
Printable View
Does anyone Know what happened with or anything to the Holyfield vs. Valuev Decision? I know it isn't like huge news right now but does anyone know?
Holyfield is like what now 50? I'd rather just get some z's myself than watch a senior's match.
Regardless of how much you think Holyfield should retire; the fact remains that he won every round against Valuev and was unjustly robbed.Quote:
Originally Posted by fan johnny
However, in recent years I have come to expect less from WBA then the other alphabet gangs. They constantly out do them selves with stupid decisions.
I watched the fight yesterday and I had it a draw. It was boring and both should retire.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance UppercutRegardless of how much you think Holyfield should retire; the fact remains that he won every round against Valuev and was unjustly robbed.Quote:
Originally Posted by fan johnny
However, in recent years I have come to expect less from WBA then the other alphabet gangs. They constantly out do them selves with stupid decisions.
no he wasnt and if you genuinely believe that you really should just give up ever trying to score a fight again.
Turn the pro-holyfield volume down and you`ll see a very even fight that if anything valuev just nicked.
How the hell this has been investigated is completely beyond me and makes the WBA seem just that bit more farcical (if thats possible?)
Dude, it wasn't a hard fight to score; there was about 5 punches each round; and three of them were landed by Holyfield.Quote:
Originally Posted by hattonthehammerQuote:
Originally Posted by Lance UppercutRegardless of how much you think Holyfield should retire; the fact remains that he won every round against Valuev and was unjustly robbed.Quote:
Originally Posted by fan johnny
However, in recent years I have come to expect less from WBA then the other alphabet gangs. They constantly out do them selves with stupid decisions.
no he wasnt and if you genuinely believe that you really should just give up ever trying to score a fight again.
Turn the pro-holyfield volume down and you`ll see a very even fight that if anything valuev just nicked.
How the hell this has been investigated is completely beyond me and makes the WBA seem just that bit more farcical (if thats possible?)
I figured they would just wait for the contraversy to die off and do nothing. Is anyone really surprised by this? It was the cause of the moment, but the moment has passed.
My 1st post on this forum was in regards to this fight because I was amazed at how everyone thought Holyfield walked it. I had a discussion about how I thought it was a real close one but I had Valuev winning by 1pt. On a second watch I had Holyfield winning by 1pt. And randomly a couple of days ago I finally saw it on a nice big tele on Eurosport with British commentary and so had a clear picture finally and I had Valuev winning by 1pt again.
One of the reasons I rewatched was to hear the commentators views (the 2 Eurosport commentators always score along every round) and they shared my view one having Valuev by 1pt and the other a draw.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance UppercutDude, it wasn't a hard fight to score; there was about 5 punches each round; and three of them were landed by Holyfield.Quote:
Originally Posted by hattonthehammerQuote:
Originally Posted by Lance Uppercut
no he wasnt and if you genuinely believe that you really should just give up ever trying to score a fight again.
Turn the pro-holyfield volume down and you`ll see a very even fight that if anything valuev just nicked.
How the hell this has been investigated is completely beyond me and makes the WBA seem just that bit more farcical (if thats possible?)
so your admitting there was no more than a punch or two between them in each and every round but that holyfield deserved to take all 12 of them???
im seriously starting to ponder whether we have eugene williams in our midst :o:o:o
Yeah, I was watching this fight too. 4 times. I just couldn't help myself. Then, I stuck splinters up my fingernails and plucked my leg hairs one at a time. It was such a fun evening.
Honestly, I haven't seen the fight. But, imho, if a fighter cannot take the title away from the champ convincingly, he does not deserve it. I.E. Don't expect to edge a decision in someone else's home turf.
I had Holyfield winning it by a couple.But frankly this shady shite happens over seas pretty often as well as stateside.......and if it was not Holyfield,with past and stature,as well as being aired on a huge network......there would be no investigation and just an after thought.Valuev is a carnie act and I think he was a bit caught up in the moment.Holyfield should retire with pride,Finally!!
A two punch difference is a 40% difference when there is only five punches thrown you knuckle head.Quote:
Originally Posted by hattonthehammerQuote:
Originally Posted by Lance UppercutDude, it wasn't a hard fight to score; there was about 5 punches each round; and three of them were landed by Holyfield.Quote:
Originally Posted by hattonthehammer
so your admitting there was no more than a punch or two between them in each and every round but that holyfield deserved to take all 12 of them???
im seriously starting to ponder whether we have eugene williams in our midst :o:o:o
I had it very close,but I gave it to Valuev.
Even if you give the couple of rounds that could have gone either way to Holyfield,you run in to this.
Your fighting the champ on his home turf,youd better win convincingly,and that did not happen for Holyfield.
Now if we can get this over with,somebody can book someone with Valuev that will finally get that circus out of town
You must be one of the biggest Valuev/Holyfield fan; I made big efforts to stay focus till the end.Quote:
Originally Posted by J_C
perhaps I am missing something, but here goes...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance UppercutA two punch difference is a 40% difference when there is only five punches thrown you knuckle head.Quote:
Originally Posted by hattonthehammerQuote:
Originally Posted by Lance Uppercut
so your admitting there was no more than a punch or two between them in each and every round but that holyfield deserved to take all 12 of them???
im seriously starting to ponder whether we have eugene williams in our midst :o:o:o
5 total punches with three by Holyfield means two by Valuev, right?
3+2 = 5 right?
here's the tough part: 3-2=1. So there is a one punch difference between the fighters.
Also 3 is 50% bigger than 2. right? So in fact what we have is a one punch 50% difference between the fighters, not a two punch 40% difference.
I knew I went to school for something.
p.s. a two punch difference with 5 total punches is impossible