WBA Holyfield Decision?

[Lance Uppercut]

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.


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.

[BoomBoom]

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.

[J_C]

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.

[JonnyFolds]

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.

[Spicoli]

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!!

[iwng100]

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.

You must be one of the biggest Valuev/Holyfield fan; I made big efforts to stay focus till the end.

[HattonTheHammer]

Regardless of how much you think Holyfield should retire; the fact remains that he won every round against Valuev and was unjustly robbed.


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.

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

[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?)

Dude, it wasn't a hard fight to score; there was about 5 punches each round; and three of them were landed by Holyfield.

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

A two punch difference is a 40% difference when there is only five punches thrown you knuckle head.

[Trainer Monkey]

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

[CGM]

Dude, it wasn't a hard fight to score; there was about 5 punches each round; and three of them were landed by Holyfield.

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

A two punch difference is a 40% difference when there is only five punches thrown you knuckle head.

perhaps I am missing something, but here goes...

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

[No Contest]

They said they would "look at film" that was awhile ago, how many times you gotta watch that shit? They just swept it under the rug, thats what they do....they haven't issued a statement on it as far as I know.

[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

A two punch difference is a 40% difference when there is only five punches thrown you knuckle head.

perhaps I am missing something, but here goes...

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

You base your conclusion on the assumption that Valuev lands ever punch he throws when in reality he couldn't make contact with Holyfield, where as holyfield landed nearly all of the 5 punches he threw each round.

So yes, a two punch landing difference IS possible with five total punches thrown.

[CGM]

A two punch difference is a 40% difference when there is only five punches thrown you knuckle head.

perhaps I am missing something, but here goes...

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

You base your conclusion on the assumption that Valuev lands ever punch he throws when in reality he couldn't make contact with Holyfield, where as holyfield landed nearly all of the 5 punches he threw each round.

So yes, a two punch landing difference IS possible with five total punches thrown.

Ahhh, so clearly I misinterpreted your numbers then. That happens with statistics, don't it? cheers.

p.s., not too sure about that prime Tyson theory of yours. I don't believe you can dicredit a theory by attacking those who believe it as young and naive. Some of us guys who think prime tyson was a monster are in fact knowledgeable fans.

[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

A two punch difference is a 40% difference when there is only five punches thrown you knuckle head.

perhaps I am missing something, but here goes...

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

uppercuts just trying to dig himself out of a hole thats just too big for him, please ignore him.

The kind of guy that takes the opinion of broadsheet journalists looking to fill a page with a bit of controversy way too seriously rather than his own opinion.

If you think evander won the fight thats cool, it was a very close fight

if however you think he won all 12rounds you clearly know nothing about boxing!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Lance Uppercut]

A two punch difference is a 40% difference when there is only five punches thrown you knuckle head.

perhaps I am missing something, but here goes...

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

uppercuts just trying to dig himself out of a hole thats just too big for him, please ignore him.

The kind of guy that takes the opinion of broadsheet journalists looking to fill a page with a bit of controversy way too seriously rather than his own opinion.

If you think evander won the fight thats cool, it was a very close fight

if however you think he won all 12rounds you clearly know nothing about boxing!!!!!!!!!!!!

I bet if a "prime tyson" was the judge he would get it right.