Were the judges smoking crack?

[bcollins]

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.

[El Gamo]

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.

CC,intelligent posting. Agreed on all points,in fact,I wrote a similar response in another thread but your is worded far better than mine.

Seriously I think all JT has to do is make it twelve rounds. I don't know what it is that judges love so much, I guess its that his punches are real flashy and easy to see, I don't know, its just hard to understand. I only gave Taylor the second and the fifth, maybe he could have gotten the sixth.

Thats exactly what I was thinking when I heard the scores!! What the heck were the judges doing? Thankfully,it's irrelevant to a degree but still,some of these judges need to be investigated. Didn't one have JT up by 4?

[LEGION]

Ridiculous scoring. No telling how much worse it wouuld have been had it gone the full 12 rounds.

[bcollins]

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.

CC,intelligent posting. Agreed on all points,in fact,I wrote a similar response in another thread but your is worded far better than mine.

CC back - and I doubt my wording's better!

[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.

Agreed, this was an intelligent post so thank you.
I had Taylor winning the first very clearly..He came out of the blocks extremely fast..Pavlik only really came on in the last minute of that round. You forget that the scores of 58-55 AREN'T one sided at all. That is a score of 4-2 with a 10-8 round. The third judge I would agree had it slightly wrong. I thought Taylor was using the ropes to draw Pavlik in sometimes and then exploding with a combination off of them. Could be considered ring generalship to have your opponent following you whilst still landing shots. As far as defence I think the stats show that in favour of Taylor.
People always forget that a scorecard doesn't always tell you how the fight went! A fighter can win all 12 rounds but that doesn't mean it was easy! Look at the Berto vs Estrada fight..I would have given nearly all of the rounds to Berto. Reading it on paper it would seem like Berto had an easy night when in reality it was a very competitive toe-to-toe battle!

[ICB]

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.

Agreed, this was an intelligent post so thank you.
I had Taylor winning the first very clearly..He came out of the blocks extremely fast..Pavlik only really came on in the last minute of that round. You forget that the scores of 58-55 AREN'T one sided at all. That is a score of 4-2 with a 10-8 round. The third judge I would agree had it slightly wrong. I thought Taylor was using the ropes to draw Pavlik in sometimes and then exploding with a combination off of them. Could be considered ring generalship to have your opponent following you whilst still landing shots. As far as defence I think the stats show that in favour of Taylor.
People always forget that a scorecard doesn't always tell you how the fight went! A fighter can win all 12 rounds but that doesn't mean it was easy! Look at the Berto vs Estrada fight..I would have given nearly all of the rounds to Berto. Reading it on paper it would seem like Berto had an easy night when in reality it was a very competitive toe-to-toe battle!

Like i said in other thread and i'll copy and paste the punchstats for first round Pavlik clearly won the first round.

Pavlik landed 43 out of 89 and Taylor landed 26 out of 72.

[Kev]

I must admit I didn't score it but I felt that Taylor was ahead upto the knockout. He had a HUGE second round and maybe psychologically I felt Pavlik was the more vulnurable in the rounds following that.

I did think Pavlik won the first though, then 10-8 Taylor round 2. After that I didn't score but really the rounds were close and could have gone either way.

Taylor certainly looked the stronger to me up until his complete collapse in the 7th but again it may be psychological following Pavliks near death experience in round 2.

Great fight though and the judges were never going to be needed anyways.

[OumaFan]

I must admit I didn't score it but I felt that Taylor was ahead upto the knockout. He had a HUGE second round and maybe psychologically I felt Pavlik was the more vulnurable in the rounds following that.

I did think Pavlik won the first though, then 10-8 Taylor round 2. After that I didn't score but really the rounds were close and could have gone either way.

Taylor certainly looked the stronger to me up until his complete collapse in the 7th but again it may be psychological following Pavliks near death experience in round 2.

Great fight though and the judges were never going to be needed anyways.

I gotta say I saw it totally different, he did have a good fifth round but I saw Taylor starting to look tired and desperate as it went on, throwing wild left hooks totally off balance, just looking shaky. His technique was just getting worse and worse. And Pavlik looked like he was just getting stronger.

[Myk_Myk]

By Danny Serratelli at Ringside (Oct 1, 2007):
"After the fight a lot of people questioned trainer Manny Steward's instructions in the corner. It seems that Steward, Taylor himself and many of the people watching the fight on HBO were under the impression that Pavlik was leading in the fight. From ringside, it is difficult to tell how they were under that impression. While there were several close rounds, most ringside observers were certain that Jermain lost no more than a round or two. It is becoming a trend for fans to put too much faith in punchstat numbers and commentators opinions that are often not totally in touch with the reality of what is going on in the ring."

I thought Taylor was ahead at the time of stoppage. To me it looked like he was landing the cleaner shots, and was slipping, blocking, and especially countering beautifully. I didn't think taylor was dominating, but it just looked to me like Pavlik was outclassed. Taylor was faster and his punches looked really sharp. I thought Pavlik was still in it because of his work rate, but he seemed a little nervous and overanxious to me. I thought Taylor was actually going to wear down Pavlik with his crisp counters.

Even though I've seen Pavlik fight a few times, I still get deceived by his punching power. I looks like he is flinging out wet noodles at his opponent until you see him land a really clean punch, and especially when you see it in slow-mo. I think that has a lot to do with me (and possibly the judges) thinking Taylor was doing more damage in most rounds.

[OumaFan]

By Danny Serratelli at Ringside (Oct 1, 2007):
"After the fight a lot of people questioned trainer Manny Steward's instructions in the corner. It seems that Steward, Taylor himself and many of the people watching the fight on HBO were under the impression that Pavlik was leading in the fight. From ringside, it is difficult to tell how they were under that impression. While there were several close rounds, most ringside observers were certain that Jermain lost no more than a round or two. It is becoming a trend for fans to put too much faith in punchstat numbers and commentators opinions that are often not totally in touch with the reality of what is going on in the ring."

I thought Taylor was ahead at the time of stoppage. To me it looked like he was landing the cleaner shots, and was slipping, blocking, and especially countering beautifully. I didn't think taylor was dominating, but it just looked to me like Pavlik was outclassed. Taylor was faster and his punches looked really sharp. I thought Pavlik was still in it because of his work rate, but he seemed a little nervous and overanxious to me. I thought Taylor was actually going to wear down Pavlik with his crisp counters.

Even though I've seen Pavlik fight a few times, I still get deceived by his punching power. I looks like he is flinging out wet noodles at his opponent until you see him land a really clean punch, and especially when you see it in slow-mo. I think that has a lot to do with me (and possibly the judges) thinking Taylor was doing more damage in most rounds.

I couldn't care less about punchstats, I don't bring them up ever, I've talked about how ridiculous they are and how inaccurate they are, I mean supposedly Gatti landed like 48 punches against Floyd. Please, more like 2. I don't care about the punchstats in round 1, it was clear to me Pavlik won it without the punch stat numbers.

I just think Taylor's punches are real flashy and easy to pick up on, maybe that's why the judges love him because everything's easy to see, he doesn't do inside work, everything's long, quick and flashy. I can't think of any other reason he constantly, and I mean constantly, gets the benefit of the doubt in close rounds.

If you scored it for Taylor fine, but the one thing I totally disagree with you about is Pavlik looking nervous, I'm not sure where that comes from. He's a very relaxed looking guy, the complete opposite of Taylor who is one of the most nervous looking fighters I've ever seen. He just looked pretty close to desperate by about the sixth round to me.

[Myk_Myk]

I couldn't care less about punchstats, I don't bring them up ever, I've talked about how ridiculous they are and how inaccurate they are, I mean supposedly Gatti landed like 48 punches against Floyd. Please, more like 2. I don't care about the punchstats in round 1, it was clear to me Pavlik won it without the punch stat numbers.

Where did I mention punchstats? I'm with you all the way on that one brother! They're almost as subjective as the scoring.

I just think Taylor's punches are real flashy and easy to pick up on, maybe that's why the judges love him because everything's easy to see, he doesn't do inside work, everything's long, quick and flashy.

Combine this with what I was saying about Pavlik's punches "looking" unimpressive, and that's my point about how the scoring is not so surprising.

I can't think of any other reason he constantly, and I mean constantly, gets the benefit of the doubt in close rounds.

Well I guess that depends on how cynical you are...

If you scored it for Taylor fine, but the one thing I totally disagree with you about is Pavlik looking nervous, I'm not sure where that comes from. He's a very relaxed looking guy, the complete opposite of Taylor who is one of the most nervous looking fighters I've ever seen. He just looked pretty close to desperate by about the sixth round to me.

Really more overanxious than nervous, but it was his first championship fight. I think the whole immature tongue sticking out business was largely a product of nerves. Obviously as the fight went on, he settled down.

[OumaFan]

I couldn't care less about punchstats, I don't bring them up ever, I've talked about how ridiculous they are and how inaccurate they are, I mean supposedly Gatti landed like 48 punches against Floyd. Please, more like 2. I don't care about the punchstats in round 1, it was clear to me Pavlik won it without the punch stat numbers.

Where did I mention punchstats? I'm with you all the way on that one brother! They're almost as subjective as the scoring.

I just think Taylor's punches are real flashy and easy to pick up on, maybe that's why the judges love him because everything's easy to see, he doesn't do inside work, everything's long, quick and flashy.

Combine this with what I was saying about Pavlik's punches "looking" unimpressive, and that's my point about how the scoring is not so surprising.

I can't think of any other reason he constantly, and I mean constantly, gets the benefit of the doubt in close rounds.

Well I guess that depends on how cynical you are...

If you scored it for Taylor fine, but the one thing I totally disagree with you about is Pavlik looking nervous, I'm not sure where that comes from. He's a very relaxed looking guy, the complete opposite of Taylor who is one of the most nervous looking fighters I've ever seen. He just looked pretty close to desperate by about the sixth round to me.

Really more overanxious than nervous, but it was his first championship fight. I think the whole immature tongue sticking out business was largely a product of nerves. Obviously as the fight went on, he settled down.

The article mentions punchstats, that's what I was talking about. And people on here using punchstats as the reason why a guy should have won or lost, not anything you said.

Maybe he was a bit overanxious although I thought he looked pretty composed. The sticking out his tongue was obviously silly and hopefully he learned from it. The thing I wonder about is why, with all the big fight experience he has, does Taylor still look so nervous and overanxious. I guess he always will be like that.

[Myk_Myk]

The article mentions punchstats, that's what I was talking about. And people on here using punchstats as the reason why a guy should have won or lost, not anything you said.

Oh yeah, duh...

Maybe he was a bit overanxious although I thought he looked pretty composed. The sticking out his tongue was obviously silly and hopefully he learned from it. The thing I wonder about is why, with all the big fight experience he has, does Taylor still look so nervous and overanxious. I guess he always will be like that.

Yeah, we can only speculate about what's actually going through a fighter's mind.

[Althugz]

By Danny Serratelli at Ringside (Oct 1, 2007):
"After the fight a lot of people questioned trainer Manny Steward's instructions in the corner. It seems that Steward, Taylor himself and many of the people watching the fight on HBO were under the impression that Pavlik was leading in the fight. From ringside, it is difficult to tell how they were under that impression. While there were several close rounds, most ringside observers were certain that Jermain lost no more than a round or two. It is becoming a trend for fans to put too much faith in punchstat numbers and commentators opinions that are often not totally in touch with the reality of what is going on in the ring."

I thought Taylor was ahead at the time of stoppage. To me it looked like he was landing the cleaner shots, and was slipping, blocking, and especially countering beautifully. I didn't think taylor was dominating, but it just looked to me like Pavlik was outclassed. Taylor was faster and his punches looked really sharp. I thought Pavlik was still in it because of his work rate, but he seemed a little nervous and overanxious to me. I thought Taylor was actually going to wear down Pavlik with his crisp counters.

Even though I've seen Pavlik fight a few times, I still get deceived by his punching power. I looks like he is flinging out wet noodles at his opponent until you see him land a really clean punch, and especially when you see it in slow-mo. I think that has a lot to do with me (and possibly the judges) thinking Taylor was doing more damage in most rounds.

I couldn't care less about punchstats, I don't bring them up ever, I've talked about how ridiculous they are and how inaccurate they are, I mean supposedly Gatti landed like 48 punches against Floyd. Please, more like 2. I don't care about the punchstats in round 1, it was clear to me Pavlik won it without the punch stat numbers.

I just think Taylor's punches are real flashy and easy to pick up on, maybe that's why the judges love him because everything's easy to see, he doesn't do inside work, everything's long, quick and flashy. I can't think of any other reason he constantly, and I mean constantly, gets the benefit of the doubt in close rounds.

If you scored it for Taylor fine, but the one thing I totally disagree with you about is Pavlik looking nervous, I'm not sure where that comes from. He's a very relaxed looking guy, the complete opposite of Taylor who is one of the most nervous looking fighters I've ever seen. He just looked pretty close to desperate by about the sixth round to me.

I like this post..we don't agree but you just posted your point maturely. It was valid too. Have a CC

[sexydarin]

Pavlik had taylor hurt in 2 rounds on top of knocking him out in the seventh round.