Quote Originally Posted by Althugz
Again, I don't see the big deal...I had Taylor winning all but 2 rounds I think. Boxing the socks off of Pavlik. These scores are nowhere near bad IMO
Look at the criteria for scoring and I think more of you will understand. Ring Generalship, Defence, Clean shots and effective aggresion.
Defence (making Pavlik miss and look slow) and Clean Shots was definitely Taylor..Ring generalship I would also have given to Taylor in most rounds..he had Pavlik following him when he wanted and he was backing him up when he wanted to. Effective aggresion..I think Pavlik maybe had the edge in this one..he could sometimes neutralize Taylors speed with his work rate.
British guest judge also had it something like 58-55 to Taylor going into 7
I would disagree on several points here. Defense was roughly even, depending on the round. Pavlik was blocking a lot of shots on his gloves and forearms, but JT was making Pavlik miss a lot, too. Obviously, the second and seventh rounds are an exception, but otherwise, that criteria was reasonably even.

Clean shots were also distributed evenly - I saw Pavlik landing a lot more clean, hard shots in the first round, but the judges gave that one to Taylor. Rounds 2 and 5 were the only ones I saw Taylor have a clear advantage in this regard.

As for ring generalship, I thought Pavlik won several rounds clearly. He was pushing JT back into the ropes at will, with the exception of round 5, where Taylor seemed to focus on boxing rather than slugging. I though Taylor showed a great deal of skill in that round, timing Pavlik's shots and generally having his way with him.

No way was this fight as one-sided as the judges scorecards indicate. There needs to be some discussion on scoring in boxing - fishy scores seems to be the norm, rather than the exception.