Printable View
Going in I though BHop would have a forced retirement. Not a big BHop fan. After the 3rd round BHop controlled the fight(that 1st knockdown was clearly behind the head). After 5 BHop won every round in my opinion. He took the explosiveness away from Pascal and lead him to deep waters he was obviously not capable of. I clearly thought BHop won. On Pascal's conditions in Pascal's backyard BHop got a draw. I think that is a certain victory for BHop.
I missed it all as was partying. Controversy aside, was it a good fight?
Not often you see Hop down twice! You just can't keep that man down though!
The knockdowns don't bother me too much that he won just about every moment after them and didn't get credit is the problem.
I don't think they were really clean knockdowns. First was borderline behind the head/ear. Second was better, but still a little scrappy. More of a balance thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by 0james0
It was an interesting fight though.
I havn't seen the fight yet, but it sounds really like B-hop was hard done by...
Mainly in the respect that he obviously lost because the 2 knockdowns really put him behind on points, but to come back from that and dominate almost the entire rest of the fight to be a draw in score on 2 people's cards, that guy has got to deserve the win more than someone who got lucky for 2 or 3 rounds at the start of the fight...
Even though when it goes the full 12 rounds, points are everything, if you ignore the scoring, I doesn't sound like anyone would argue with the fact Hopkins clearly won the fight......
But every boxer knows, do everything you possibly can to keep it out of the judges hands, because anything can happen from that point.. And it's all out of your control... Sounds like Hopkins tried to do that, and Pascal rested on his 2 knockdowns...
So from that perspective alone, I support the word "robbery"..
But in a close fight where 1 or 2 points max separate the fighters, it's kinda fair it going either way.... But definitely sounds like Hopkins deserved it more..
Yeah he did deserve it more, but it's getting carried away to call it a robbery imo. When you get putdown twice, on foreign soil, in your opponent's backyward it's always going to be an uphill struggle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dizaster
The scores of the judges, two draws and one win for Hopkins testify to how close he came to pulling it off.
I thought he won, he is without doubt the moral winner, but to call it a robbery is overstating.
A drawn fight that was a robbery was the first Funeka Guzman fight. Guzman dominated by Funeka and somehow scraped a draw. I thought the Ortiz Peterson drawn was more controversial also. Both Funeka and Ortiz more clearly won that Hopkins imo.
Take away the knockdowns however and Hopkins DID dominate virtually every round. But losing two 10-8 rounds is such a big obstacle to overcome overseas for any fighter.
I just watched it and it was a very easy fight to score, in my mind B-Hop was robbed. Yes he was floored twice, the 1st knockdown being borederline rabbit shot. But he still won 9 rounds quite easily IMO.
1 Pascal 10-8
2 Pascal 10-9
3 Pascal 10-8
4 Hopkins 10-9
5 Hopkins 10-9
6 Hopkins 10-9
7 Hopkins 10-9
8 Hopkins 10-9
9 Hopkins 10-9
10 Hopkins 10-9
11 Hopkins 10-9
12 Hopkins 10-9
115-111 B-Hop
It seems like the contested round is round 10.
Boxing - Schaefer demands rematch
Apparently the Belgium judge gave the 10th round even when it was clearly a Hopkins round. Golden Boy saying they will sue if Pascal tries to dodge a rematch.........
I haven't watched it again yet although may well agree with your scores. I've seen a few people say Pascal won the 5th, and maybe edged the 12th though which would level it up. No doubt Hopkins was the moral winner. Pascal must be feeling pretty bad today, being humiliated by a 45 year old man.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICB
frst 4 rounds pascal won both the 1st and 3rd fair dues...rounds 2 and 4 where close...the first knockdown has case to dispute, if the ref counts that then he should have counted when pascal went down..but anyway hopkins won every round after the 4th....i would goes as far as to say pascal gave up by rounds 6-7, he looked gassed and confusseed aswell as totally beat at the final bell.....both him and his corner seemed to take in that hopkins won the fight, even after it was called a draw they seemed to still think pascal lost it took 10mins to sink in they still keep the belt...........b-hop was robbed
I also had Hopkins winning every round after the 3rd. I also had Hopkins winning the 1st very clearly until he was dropped by the hit behind the head. If that hadn't occurred Hopkins would have won 10 out of 12 rounds. Overall B-Hop won 9 out of 12 clearly.
So no way was this fight close, only close because of the scoring system of boxing. When 1 guy gets outboxed for 9 out of 12 rounds, no way is that close. From punch output to punch landed to ring generalship and to sheer dominance and will, it was 1 sided in favor of Hopkins.
Totally agree that's the reason i had JMM winning vs Manny Pacquiao in there 1st fight. Because despite the bad start he still won 8 rounds clearly vs Manny Pacquiao, and i don't see how you cannot win a fight winning almost 3 quarters of the 12 rounds, and in B-Hop's case he actually did.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
I agree with what you say, but judges arn't able to have an 'in hindsight' retrospective look back over the whole fight. They score each round idependently and total up the scores.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBTotally agree that's the reason i had JMM winning vs Manny Pacquiao in there 1st fight. Because despite the bad start he still won 8 rounds clearly vs Manny Pacquiao, and i don't see how you cannot win a fight winning almost 3 quarters of the 12 rounds, and in B-Hop's case he actually did.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
Maybe the scoring system isn't perfect but it's probably the best method we have. In theory knocking an opponent to the floor twice should count more than winning a round by points although again it's hard to score in practice, some knockouts are flash knockdowns, sometimes a fight can get battered without going down.
There are a lot of vagaries in boxing scoring, just like there are in any judging, or voting systems.
Hopefully they will order a rematch, and it will take place in America this time. Not sure pascal will want it much though. He looked a mentally beaten man by the end.
Massively impressive performance by Hopkins to come back the way he did.
I think the worse thing is that the 1st knockdown, wasn't even a legit knockdown. Yet the ref ruled a very similar incident a slip in the 5th round, and B-Hop may of got credited with a knockdown in the 11th round if it was in the USA.Quote:
Originally Posted by BilboI agree with what you say, but judges arn't able to have an 'in hindsight' retrospective look back over the whole fight. They score each round idependently and total up the scores.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBTotally agree that's the reason i had JMM winning vs Manny Pacquiao in there 1st fight. Because despite the bad start he still won 8 rounds clearly vs Manny Pacquiao, and i don't see how you cannot win a fight winning almost 3 quarters of the 12 rounds, and in B-Hop's case he actually did.Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
Maybe the scoring system isn't perfect but it's probably the best method we have. In theory knocking an opponent to the floor twice should count more than winning a round by points although again it's hard to score in practice, some knockouts are flash knockdowns, sometimes a fight can get battered without going down.
There are a lot of vagaries in boxing scoring, just like there are in any judging, or voting systems.
Hopefully they will order a rematch, and it will take place in America this time. Not sure pascal will want it much though. He looked a mentally beaten man by the end.
Massively impressive performance by Hopkins to come back the way he did.
Daniel Van de "im a f***wad" Viele is a freakin moron, at least he's being called out on his blindness for once. Usually judges get to come up with whatever freakin score they like and its fine, judges should be able to justify their scorecards and I'd like to see him justify giving the 10th to pascal.