Boxing Forum - Boxing Discussion Forums banner
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
25,672 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
i think HBO are showing bias towards there fighters, its been done a lot the past few years and it really gets anoying when we know a fighters behind on the cards and HBO have them winning by say 5 rounds.

anyone else noticed this crap?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
424 Posts
i don't quite know what you mean (not disagreeing i just don't know what you mean by "there fighters" and "HBo") can you explain a little more?
 

·
Team Mayweather
Joined
·
24,365 Posts
no matter who you are, if you are broadcasting an event, you are going to be a little biased towards the fighter you like more. Ledermans card is hardly ever off that much at all. he usually the best judge out of the four, so i see no nonsensed bias. just your usually lamply merchant entertainment.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
25,672 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 · (Edited)
TysonJones said:
no matter who you are, if you are broadcasting an event, you are going to be a little biased towards the fighter you like more. Ledermans card is hardly ever off that much at all. he usually the best judge out of the four, so i see no nonsensed bias. just your usually lamply merchant entertainment.
its lamps, kellerman and merchant that i mean, ledermans scorring is bang on 99.9% of the time, just for instance merchant had taylor winning the fight at the weekend when it was stopped, thats terrible judging on my part. the 3 blind mice at ringside were no better.

they 3 should stick to comentating like they've been told in the past, lampley is excellant at that, larrys gone though the drink got the better of him and kellerman aint really what they need IMO.

teddy atlas would be a dream team with lampley, he calls the fights perfectly and would not be influenced by the bosses at HBO.

lennox lewis was a great champion but he sucks in the studio.
 

·
Team Mayweather
Joined
·
24,365 Posts
I personally hate atlas more than any announcer in the world , except for the gusy on shobox. I think he's a knowledge guy bu tlikes to be in demand on the hole fight and sticks to one point and one point only. I had taylor ahead in that fight but only because of the knockdown and I gave him the first becasue i felt he dictated the pace and started off so strong. so at one point i had taylor 3 rounds ahead. But that didnt even matter. so if you call that bias, let it be, but you just called me a bad judge as well.

All in All, judging is opinion based. You score what you want to score but, in a close round, benefit of the doubt goes to the champ, you guys just dont like jermain taylor. ( if that was hopkins in there and the rounds were close, you guys gave them to hopkins because he was the champ )
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
424 Posts
I dont think there biased... i just think that scoring Fights is so damned hard. We definitely need a better way (though i have no idea how you would score fights differently) The problem is, if its a close fight you will have 3 judges, and each judge can have a completely different score. I had Pavlik up by the time of the TKO, BUT i can see how others would have Taylor up, which is a problem. because since the scoring is so vague I can score it where a Guy is 9 rounds to 3... and a guy next to me can have it 9 to 3 the oppposite way. Which one of us is wrong? neither!

-melty
 

·
Team Mayweather
Joined
·
24,365 Posts
very well put, its just boxing i guess. YOu better win convincingly or get the ko. They really should emphasize on getting that knockout, either that or make them fight until someone gives up haha.
 

·
Mental Midget
Joined
·
4,170 Posts
I think that sometimes you see it a bit, but its not that bad. I think its more that they are talking up "their" fighter more than anything. Maybe they emphasize the 1 or 2 good punches they lande din the round over the sevral that the opponent did, and that makes viewers think "wow, he won that round".
Commentators can have absolutely have an effect on who the general viewing audience thinks is winning. If you really know what your watching and your a knowledgeable boxing person than that may not apply. But by and large, it is the case. And HBO, Showtime, etc. will many times show bias to the fighters they have signed and in that respect, I agree.
 

·
Team Mayweather
Joined
·
24,365 Posts
we all do it, simple as that. were all bias, just like you are with hatton and just we are with mayweather. its all good man. but you cant argue with the winner of the fight or the outcome because that is writeen in stone.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
25,672 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
TysonJones said:
we all do it, simple as that. were all bias, just like you are with hatton and just we are with mayweather. its all good man. but you cant argue with the winner of the fight or the outcome because that is writeen in stone.
the main reason i like hatton is because of his come forward exciting style. he also shows a will to win i havent seen since roberto duran was around.

do i think he's unbeatable? hell no!
do i think he beats floyd? hell yes!

i think paul williams would be to big for him and i see margarito probably being to strong although id still say hatton would have a good chance if he could take his punches.

this notion that some have though that floyd is unbeatable and is going to be a great gets on my nerves though, its beeen showen in the past that fighters who come onto floyd with pressure can outwork him, castillo proved this and so did oscar.

hatton is better than both, although prime oscar beats both hatton and floyd.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,272 Posts
TommyGunn said:
the main reason i like hatton is because of his come forward exciting style. he also shows a will to win i havent seen since roberto duran was around.

do i think he's unbeatable? hell no!
do i think he beats floyd? hell yes!

i think paul williams would be to big for him and i see margarito probably being to strong although id still say hatton would have a good chance if he could take his punches.

this notion that some have though that floyd is unbeatable and is going to be a great gets on my nerves though, its beeen showen in the past that fighters who come onto floyd with pressure can outwork him, castillo proved this and so did oscar.

hatton is better than both, although prime oscar beats both hatton and floyd.
Tell us how you really feel Tommy!:laugh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
424 Posts
Tommy, that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. does it? did i miss something?(i say this with a more funny joking tone of voice, not a harsh mean tone)


Yeah i dont think you can blame commentators for being biased, though i think it starts to become a problem when Judge's are biased. Commentators are more there for the people who dont know anything about boxing. I dont need Larry Merchant to tell me that "The man that came to win tonight, has found that winning is a lot like fishing. Its hard, but in the ends the winner wins" or some crazy drunken rampage like always. I mean, the commentators do much much better then somebody that has no idea what boxing is can do. and thats who they are there for.

-Melty
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,312 Posts
TysonJones said:
I had taylor ahead in that fight but only because of the knockdown and I gave him the first becasue i felt he dictated the pace and started off so strong. so at one point i had taylor 3 rounds ahead. But that didnt even matter. so if you call that bias, let it be, but you just called me a bad judge as well.

All in All, judging is opinion based. You score what you want to score but, in a close round, benefit of the doubt goes to the champ, you guys just dont like jermain taylor. ( if that was hopkins in there and the rounds were close, you guys gave them to hopkins because he was the champ )
You know I can't get on the judges too hard for having Taylor ahead before the stoppage. I had a good view of the fight from where I was sitting, and I honestly thought Taylor was winning the fight before the stoppage.With Taylor's fast spurts of punches and what seemed like tremendous "snap" that came along with them, it really persuaded the viewer in to giving some of those close rounds to him. It wasn't till I came home and watched the HBO telecast that I switched my opinion and thought Pavlik was indeed winning the fight. Especually the 1st round, I swear it looked like Taylor took that round with relative ease until I watched it at home and realized it was much closer then I thought. Granted my chin wasn't on the ring apron but I was still pretty close. Rayman sat like 10 feet away he prob will tell you guys the same thing.
 

·
Team Mayweather
Joined
·
24,365 Posts
floyd is the hardest fighter to beat, its easy to say your going to do something then actually do it, once your in the ring, he frustrates you to death. once again, i think mayweather pilled up an early enough lead against castillo to get the W in the end. Plus he was cheated with the point taken awawy and castillo should have had more than 1 tooken away, either way floyd beat him even easier the second time around. It'll be a good fight, now back on the subject at hand. were all bias.
 

·
Boxings Own Living Legend
Joined
·
8,579 Posts
TommyGunn said:
its lamps, kellerman and merchant that i mean, ledermans scorring is bang on 99.9% of the time, just for instance merchant had taylor winning the fight at the weekend when it was stopped, thats terrible judging on my part. the 3 blind mice at ringside were no better.

they 3 should stick to comentating like they've been told in the past, lampley is excellant at that, larrys gone though the drink got the better of him and kellerman aint really what they need IMO.

teddy atlas would be a dream team with lampley, he calls the fights perfectly and would not be influenced by the bosses at HBO.

lennox lewis was a great champion but he sucks in the studio.
Agree with ya about the taylor shennanikins if Pavlik hadnt knocked his ass out Taylor would have been handed yet another gift decision.
when the drinks take effect larry hasnt got a clue he just rambles.
Lampley is just a cheerleader for the house fighters he's blind to reality. Ole Max is just a self opinionated blowhard overdoses on caffein or somethin lol. Lennox is a very shy guy not the type to be in front of the cameras calling fights give him time he'll be ok
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,123 Posts
I liked Roy too, he didn't sound rehearsed and was very insightful. Lennox is real bad about that he's too careful and states the obvious too much. Merchant takes too long to get to the point and you have to hang on every word. I don't have a problem with Lamply. These guys really do have their own opinion though in spite of what they say on TV.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
25,672 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Meltdown50 said:
Tommy, that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. does it? did i miss something?(i say this with a more funny joking tone of voice, not a harsh mean tone)


Yeah i dont think you can blame commentators for being biased, though i think it starts to become a problem when Judge's are biased. Commentators are more there for the people who dont know anything about boxing. I dont need Larry Merchant to tell me that "The man that came to win tonight, has found that winning is a lot like fishing. Its hard, but in the ends the winner wins" or some crazy drunken rampage like always. I mean, the commentators do much much better then somebody that has no idea what boxing is can do. and thats who they are there for.

-Melty
my rants are legendary in these parts ive been told. :laugh:
 

·
Boxings Own Living Legend
Joined
·
8,579 Posts
TysonJones said:
I personally hate atlas more than any announcer in the world , except for the gusy on shobox. I think he's a knowledge guy bu tlikes to be in demand on the hole fight and sticks to one point and one point only. I had taylor ahead in that fight but only because of the knockdown and I gave him the first becasue i felt he dictated the pace and started off so strong. so at one point i had taylor 3 rounds ahead. But that didnt even matter. so if you call that bias, let it be, but you just called me a bad judge as well.

All in All, judging is opinion based. You score what you want to score but, in a close round, benefit of the doubt goes to the champ, you guys just dont like jermain taylor. ( if that was hopkins in there and the rounds were close, you guys gave them to hopkins because he was the champ )
Hopkins was royally screwed twice by taylor getting gift decisions if pavlik hadnt ko'd him he was heading for another one here
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
25,672 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
C.J.Rock said:
Hopkins was royally screwed twice by taylor getting gift decisions if pavlik hadnt ko'd him he was heading for another one here
i thought the first fight was close cj but if i remember correct i still scored it to nard by 1 or 2 rounds, the second fight looked to me to be a robbery, i thought hopkins won by about 4 rounds.

i had both stinxs and winky beating taylor to.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top