Comments Thread For: Charlo-Castano Was A Great Fight. It's A Shame Nelson Vazquez Missed It

[Liondw]

What happens to judges that turn up horrendous scorecards though? Not much it seems, in the way of a suspension or something.

Excellent fight, pretty close. Most seem to say Castano could've got the nod, less say Charlo.

In a rematch, probably Charlo would be expected to be more aggressive and go for the knockout, and likely win. Castano is a fine fighter who finally got noticed.

Would like to see a rematch, and then Tim Tszyu fighting the winner in future.

[Get em up]

Only saw the final part of the fight, and then some highlights.

what is the honest assessment of this scorecard. We’re there a lot of swing rounds in which this judge gave them all to charlo?
were there tougher rounds to score?

could it be he favoured a certain “style”?

Or did this look like a crooked judge being caught out

My opinion is Charlo would have lost if not for the 9th - 12th round. He dug deep to get the draw. I wouldve gave Castano a 7-5 win but a draw isnt hard to fathom. The 117-111 card is straight bull****. No matter how you see it there wasnt 9 rounds Charlo won even if you hate Castano and desperately love Charlo.

[The Big Dunn]

I personally don’t think a draw was a good scorecard. I had Castano winning the fight as I scored in real time. Many solid posters had it a draw that night as the one judge did.

I just thought Charlo needed a ko to win after the 10th round as I had castano up 7-3 at that point.

obviously Nelson Vazquez card is shameful. I just don’t see how anyone could give charlo 9 rounds.

[PBR Streetgang]

How did one judge come up with 114-113? Did he deduct a point from Castano for not reading the script?

Steve Weisfeld scored the fight 7 rounds for Castano and 5 for Charlo. That would normally be 115-113 but he gave Charlo a 10-8 round in the 10th.

In a vacuum I don't have a problem with handing out 10-8s for dominant rounds with no KDs. The judges have 10 points of variance to score a round but only ever use 3 of them. My problem is that a 10-8 without any knockdowns is so rarely used, why did Weisfeld use it then?

It's a sad state of affairs that Weisfeld is regarded as one of the best judges in the business but he has routinely given the promotional favorite fighter the benefit on his score cards.

[PBR Streetgang]

In a rematch, probably Charlo would be expected to be more aggressive and go for the knockout, and likely win. Castano is a fine fighter who finally got noticed.

I've seen others echo this opinion but I'm not so sure. In his rematch against Harrison, he didn't really up the aggression or punch output. I'm fact, I thought Harrison was the one who increased the aggression and tempo and should have been winning the fight on the cards (judges at the time disagreed). Harrison got complacent and gassed and Charlo took his man out.

I think there are reasons why his output is low. He doesn't want to leave himself open to get caught with a shot. Harrison, for all his flaws, can crack and he buzzed Charlo early in that first fight. Castano looked to punch harder than I thought and he also buzzed Charlo in that third. If they fight again, I don't expect to see much more aggression from Charlo and I don't think you will see h box more. At this stage, he is who he is as a fighter.

[jockpunk]

I had it a draw but thought to myself that I could very easily see someone giving charlo a 10-8 round. I never score 10-8 unless there is a knockdown but i don't have a problem with someone giving one in this case.

The 117-111 scorecard is another thing.

[TheClap]

Castano remained on his feet while buzzed. Also, it's not like Charlo was chasing the guy and pummeling him for 90 seconds or something.

Why then give a 10 - 8 round? Just because the American commentary said so? Here you all are, also justifying a draw.

A shame.

[FLY TY]

I personally don’t think a draw was a good scorecard. I had Castano winning the fight as I scored in real time. Many solid posters had it a draw that night as the one judge did.

I just thought Charlo needed a ko to win after the 10th round as I had castano up 7-3 at that point.

obviously Nelson Vazquez card is shameful. I just don’t see how anyone could give charlo 9 rounds.

How did you score the 11th and 12th?

[Lefty0616]

Castano remained on his feet while buzzed. Also, it's not like Charlo was chasing the guy and pummeling him for 90 seconds or something.

Why then give a 10 - 8 round? Just because the American commentary said so? Here you all are, also justifying a draw.

A shame.

There were no 10-8 rounds in that fight. I will deduct a point only if a fighter goes down or if a referee deducts a point. I never give 10-10 rounds; I always try to give the nod and a 10 to one fighter.

I disagree with unofficial commentary scoring at times as well. I'm my own man. I totally disagreed with Steve's scorecard during Saturdays fight. I remember how often I would disagree with Harold Lederman when he worked for HBO (his daughter inherited his inabilities to judge accurately as well). I try to score the fight how I see it. If I start letting these cornballs influence my interpretations of what I'm seeing/scoring, then I'll also become a part of the problem. I choose not to.

[NachoMan]

Only saw the final part of the fight, and then some highlights.

what is the honest assessment of this scorecard. We’re there a lot of swing rounds in which this judge gave them all to charlo?
were there tougher rounds to score?

could it be he favoured a certain “style”?

Or did this look like a crooked judge being caught out

As with most controversial decisions, the variance in scoring is directly attributable to the fact that boxing judges are irrationally averse to calling even rounds, even when the rounds clearly were fought evenly. When there are super close rounds; either when both guys are landing back and forth or neither guy is doing ****, it should be called a 10-10 round. Forcing one's self to pick a winner, usually based on something like "ineffective aggression" throws off the whole score card. Problem is that judges and fans all think its somehow wishy-washy and indecisive to not be able to discern a winner of every single round. So they pick someone, generally their favorite or the guy with the style they prefer, and that guy ends up with the lop-sided win when everybody else who wasn't scoring saw an extremely close contest. If two guys fight 11 rounds back and forth, neck and neck, landing with roughly the same accuracy and effectiveness, then one guy clearly wins the last round, why wouldn't the score be 120-119? The fight was razor close and the scorecard reflects that. Who could complain?