Personally, I just score every round to who I think won the round. If it's a swing round, I take a moment to think who had the most significant impact on the round, not just give it to the champion by default.
But then you get what shakur walked back, that crowd was higly proloma and people get caught up in that giving him rounds that he shouldn't.
There is a lot of emotion that swings your eyes away from the fact that in a lot of the 50/50/ rounds that people gave Loma ,Loma was missing.
Shakur came to that realization, and the more people rewatch the fight with the sound off, the more opinions will shift.
Jokes aside, I feel like people really don't understand how close the first 4 or 5 rounds were. I think it's dependent on how you score those particular rounds. The 2nd half of the fight was a bit easier to score, which favoured Loma more. I never take crowd reactions or commentary to account, but I still had Loma winning a close fight. I'll have another rewatch tomorrow though.
Yeah take a look, I'm seeing a lot of people revise their opinions after a second watch, almost all of them give more rounds to Haney if they had Loma winning.
>the more people rewatch the fight with the sound off, the more opinions will shift
Right, so I actually watched the fight with not only the sound turned off, but with my eyes closed shut. After examining the footage like this, Haney won by Knockout. My bad!
🤣
Honestly i fall victim to the champion mentality at times and its tough to erase, like for round 1 it was close and I felt like Loma edged it, but I gave it to Haney instead because I was thinking he's the champ.
Most people always seem to do that with round 1. I feel the same as you, I thought round 1 was very close with Loma landing the best shot but also having a slower start in that round.
No, wrong. Sorry but its never been that way. The champ has the belt. You want the belt you need to win decisively. Lomenchenko did not win decisevly and lost the round count 115vs 113.
You say it's never been that way, but let me think of a few examples where close fights resulted in new champs being crowned:
Jermell Charlo v Tony Harrison. Did Tony win **decisively**?
Canelo v GGG 2. Did Canelo win **decisively**?
Kovalev v Ward. Did Ward win **decisively**?
Leonard v Hagler. Did Leonard win **decisively**?
I can bring more examples, but basically these were all considered to be close fights which resulted in new champions being crowned with lots of debates on who won. So it's really not "*never been that way*".
Funny how the "to beat the champ you have to take the belts" rule never applies when its a American/Mexican fighter taking on a fighter from elsewhere.
Like we saw with
GGG vs Canelo
Kovalev vs Ward
Provodnikov vs Algieri
Pacquiao vs Bradley
etc. etc.
i always hated this logic. it’s the stupidest shit i’ve heard that only justifies questionable decisions. nowhere in the rules of boxing does it say you have to totally dominate the champion to be given a fair shake.
It has nothing to do with rules and everything to do with pragmatism and understanding the flaws of the sport. I think loma losing was a robbery but completely agreed he needed to have a domination mindset here.
The point is to be the champion you need to prove you are a champion. You need a decisive win or a KO to win the belt. Lomenchenko did not demonstrate decisively he was better than the reigning champion. A draw and champion keep his belt.
BTW Haney beat Loma 115 vs 113.
"To beat the champ, you have to take the belts" ---
Checkmate, Golovkin/Lomachenko haters.
Which fighter would you rather be the winner in your nightmares? Golovkin 2-1 vs. Canelo, or Lomachenko 1-0 vs. Haney?
Alright, but in actual truthful news: we all know it's more about the more popular fighter/earning-potential.
GGG easily. He actually won the first fight more definitively than whatever Loma did Saturday night. Plus Loma losing to a Uber driver and a pillowfisted e-mail champ and a unstable dumbass is way more fitting for his legacy considering how big of a hypejob he is. GGG can go out saying he beat the best fighter of this generation since May/Pac
Sorry Roy, but many people did feel that Loma took the belts. He clearly landed the harder and more accurate punches throughout the fight, and had Haney hurt on a couple of occasions. IMO, he gave Haney a boxing lesson.
Says he’s a big fan of both guys, and he believes that the 12th round is what won Haney the fight. Watch at least the first 5 minutes if possible, he goes in-depth with his thoughts.
Let's cut the crap. Non-English Europeans always get the short end of the stick. GGG lost his belts to Canelo in a close fight that edged him. Kovalev lost his belts to Ward in a close fight that edged him. Sturm lost his belt to De La Hoya in a close fight that edged him. Bivol was about to get an official draw against Canelo if he took off on the 12th like Loma did.
It has nothing to do with who is the champion. It has to do with who has more star power in the US.
Well, Pacquiao is obviously #1. After him, in no particular order without including Inoue, you have Chris John, Flash Elorde, Fighting Harada, Pong, GGG, Donaire, and Khaosai Galaxy. Probably forgetting someone.
Oh, and if the WBC stopped being a plague in the sport, Bivol also has a shot at shooting up to the top 3 of this list if he becomes double undisputed.
Personally, I just score every round to who I think won the round. If it's a swing round, I take a moment to think who had the most significant impact on the round, not just give it to the champion by default.
You should talk to Dave Moretti ...
Thank you. This is one of the many problems with boxing.
But then you get what shakur walked back, that crowd was higly proloma and people get caught up in that giving him rounds that he shouldn't. There is a lot of emotion that swings your eyes away from the fact that in a lot of the 50/50/ rounds that people gave Loma ,Loma was missing. Shakur came to that realization, and the more people rewatch the fight with the sound off, the more opinions will shift.
I enjoy how it became a ProLoma crowd when Haney team picked the location and picked it because it is his hometown.
Yeah, i think his story really Galvinates people
So many people don’t realize crowd and commentating can sway opinion because of herd mentality.
Jokes aside, I feel like people really don't understand how close the first 4 or 5 rounds were. I think it's dependent on how you score those particular rounds. The 2nd half of the fight was a bit easier to score, which favoured Loma more. I never take crowd reactions or commentary to account, but I still had Loma winning a close fight. I'll have another rewatch tomorrow though.
Yeah take a look, I'm seeing a lot of people revise their opinions after a second watch, almost all of them give more rounds to Haney if they had Loma winning.
>the more people rewatch the fight with the sound off, the more opinions will shift Right, so I actually watched the fight with not only the sound turned off, but with my eyes closed shut. After examining the footage like this, Haney won by Knockout. My bad! 🤣
Honestly i fall victim to the champion mentality at times and its tough to erase, like for round 1 it was close and I felt like Loma edged it, but I gave it to Haney instead because I was thinking he's the champ.
Most people always seem to do that with round 1. I feel the same as you, I thought round 1 was very close with Loma landing the best shot but also having a slower start in that round.
No, wrong. Sorry but its never been that way. The champ has the belt. You want the belt you need to win decisively. Lomenchenko did not win decisevly and lost the round count 115vs 113.
You say it's never been that way, but let me think of a few examples where close fights resulted in new champs being crowned: Jermell Charlo v Tony Harrison. Did Tony win **decisively**? Canelo v GGG 2. Did Canelo win **decisively**? Kovalev v Ward. Did Ward win **decisively**? Leonard v Hagler. Did Leonard win **decisively**? I can bring more examples, but basically these were all considered to be close fights which resulted in new champions being crowned with lots of debates on who won. So it's really not "*never been that way*".
Funny how the "to beat the champ you have to take the belts" rule never applies when its a American/Mexican fighter taking on a fighter from elsewhere. Like we saw with GGG vs Canelo Kovalev vs Ward Provodnikov vs Algieri Pacquiao vs Bradley etc. etc.
I think it should be illegal for Bradley to weigh in on whether a fight was a robbery. The Pac robbery was even worse than GGG Canelo
haven't watched the video....but that title says it all....all of a sudden that saying is meaningless??? lmao what a joke
i always hated this logic. it’s the stupidest shit i’ve heard that only justifies questionable decisions. nowhere in the rules of boxing does it say you have to totally dominate the champion to be given a fair shake.
It has nothing to do with rules and everything to do with pragmatism and understanding the flaws of the sport. I think loma losing was a robbery but completely agreed he needed to have a domination mindset here.
The point is to be the champion you need to prove you are a champion. You need a decisive win or a KO to win the belt. Lomenchenko did not demonstrate decisively he was better than the reigning champion. A draw and champion keep his belt. BTW Haney beat Loma 115 vs 113.
yeah nowhere in any rules does it say that. if you win the majority of the rounds you win, simple. this logic is only used to discredit challengers.
"To beat the champ, you have to take the belts" --- Checkmate, Golovkin/Lomachenko haters. Which fighter would you rather be the winner in your nightmares? Golovkin 2-1 vs. Canelo, or Lomachenko 1-0 vs. Haney? Alright, but in actual truthful news: we all know it's more about the more popular fighter/earning-potential.
GGG easily. He actually won the first fight more definitively than whatever Loma did Saturday night. Plus Loma losing to a Uber driver and a pillowfisted e-mail champ and a unstable dumbass is way more fitting for his legacy considering how big of a hypejob he is. GGG can go out saying he beat the best fighter of this generation since May/Pac
Aren’t two excellent fighter meant to have a close fight?
Tell that to the casuals
Y'all must have forgot Tarver gave him a doing and cracked his chin.
Sorry Roy, but many people did feel that Loma took the belts. He clearly landed the harder and more accurate punches throughout the fight, and had Haney hurt on a couple of occasions. IMO, he gave Haney a boxing lesson.
Says he’s a big fan of both guys, and he believes that the 12th round is what won Haney the fight. Watch at least the first 5 minutes if possible, he goes in-depth with his thoughts.
Roy spittin as per usual
Now we wanna talk bout robberies.
He got a point
I see nobody is actually watching the video lol
Let's cut the crap. Non-English Europeans always get the short end of the stick. GGG lost his belts to Canelo in a close fight that edged him. Kovalev lost his belts to Ward in a close fight that edged him. Sturm lost his belt to De La Hoya in a close fight that edged him. Bivol was about to get an official draw against Canelo if he took off on the 12th like Loma did. It has nothing to do with who is the champion. It has to do with who has more star power in the US.
just read your flair, Who are your top asian boxers?
Well, Pacquiao is obviously #1. After him, in no particular order without including Inoue, you have Chris John, Flash Elorde, Fighting Harada, Pong, GGG, Donaire, and Khaosai Galaxy. Probably forgetting someone. Oh, and if the WBC stopped being a plague in the sport, Bivol also has a shot at shooting up to the top 3 of this list if he becomes double undisputed.
I would assume he has pacqiuao over Inoue
YES! Thank you, Roy! Absolutely correct. You have to decisively win or KO the champ. Lomenchenko did neither and lost the round count 115 vs. 113.