Devon Alexander run off opponents

[fightfan2007]

This right here show you know nothing about the science of judging fights. The only people who discredit Lederman are internet tough guy fools who know little about boxing.

He is a knowledgeable man, who would run circles around anyone on here when it comes to knowledge of the sweet science.



I think your missing the point, just because you don't believe the argument doesn't mean one can't be made. Lederman made an educated argument for why Devon was winning the fight, thus one could be made for Devon winning.

Now, like any educated argument you don't have to believe it. Like I said different judges like different things, thus the differences in scoring amongst professional judges.

I really think people on here should study the science of scoring a fight because it's clear most of you don't get it, let alone understand the difference between judging a fight ring side and judging a fight at home.

While i take your point

As a fan I've felt that sense of robbery when a guy you know did something special gets bumped out of his win, boxing is brutal so when the underdog doesnt lay down and gives us something unexpected then I like to see him get his due... maybe thats just me.

On judging - I agree that judging is often very subjective.... But I DONT believe this is a good thing... we need the fans, the crowd to keep these things in check.... terms like effective agression, and cleaner crisper punches should mean something in ALL fights if the sport is too have any credibility. Although a close fight is what it is... I've seen some of socrecards afterwards and I wonder WTF some of them were thinking.

[Juanma9]

Stepping up in competition is nice and all but robbing those fighters doesn't command much respect.

[turkas]

His only argument for absurdly scoring so many rounds for Alexander was that Alexander was a lot more punches. Throwing a lot of punches doesn't win a fight, and no credible judge would ever say a guy is winning because he is throwing more punches. Defending Lederman's scorecard for that fight is wrong.

There is no argument for scoring Kotelnik-Alexander for Alexander.

Disagree completely, Lederman said Devon was the busier fighter who controlled the pace of the fight, and had more ring generalship. He also said he was landing more cleaner punches. You may disagree with this statement, but myself and a lot of other people (including all 3 ringside judges) did. Thus not a robbery.

Are you gonna tell me Lederman was roped into it being Alexander's home town? Something he has proven time and time again not to be the case?

Beyond this argument people on here need to realize scoring a fight at home is much different than scoring a fight from ringside. Judges only see so much from ringside, that's why there's always 3 judges at 3 different sides of the ring.

Also different judges like different things. Different judges score different types of punches. Some judges like ring generalship more, some like defense more, some want something else entirely, the list goes on and on. IT'S A SUBJECTIVE SCIENCE, there is no fact only guiding criteria.

[turkas]

While i take your point

As a fan I've felt that sense of robbery when a guy you know did something special gets bumped out of his win, boxing is brutal so when the underdog doesnt lay down and gives us something unexpected then I like to see him get his due... maybe thats just me.

On judging - I agree that judging is often very subjective.... But I DONT believe this is a good thing... we need the fans, the crowd to keep these things in check.... terms like effective agression, and cleaner crisper punches should mean something in ALL fights if the sport is too have any credibility. Although a close fight is what it is... I've seen some of socrecards afterwards and I wonder WTF some of them were thinking.

I understand completely, and really this has been the sports biggest problem since they decided to shorten the amount of rounds in a fight for safety reasons.

I'm not trying to say judging in boxing is perfect, because it's not and IMO it needs to be changed. However, I am just making the argument for what scoring in boxing is right now. We can hate it all we want, but it is what it is. The problem we run into is judging in itself is always gray, while fans like things to be black and white, so in reality as long as there is some kind of judging in the sport people will always find ways to be upset.

As for your first point, I think that's a good assessment and I really think this is why people on here feel so strongly about the Kotelnik fight in particular. I think a lot of thinking is "The underdog showed up and the favorite looked less then stellar so clearly the favorite lost". Hell, Max Kellerman even made this point ringside on the broadcast following the decision.

It's crazy how much of our psyche affects how we see things, especially in boxing.

[TOBYLEE1]

Devon has been facing top fighters in his decisions but has look far from impressive. The Bradley fight was an embarassment and Mathysse won that fight. Im in the minority that gave him a slight edge in the Kotelnik fight cause of the body punching tru-out the fight.

I favor Maidana in this fight