The Official Scorecard Thread

Morales-Maidana. One of the very best fights in recent memory IMO. In fact, I'd even go out on a limb and say it's the best fight of the 21st century so far. Like a WW version of Holyfield-Bowe, it featured constant and drastic shifts in momentum from round to round and even minute to minute. Both fighters showed MASSIVE heart as they repeatedly rallied from seemingly the brink of defeat and turned the tables on their opponent. In a similar vein as Duran against Hagler and Eubank against Thompson, Morales also earned respect and enhanced his legacy with a gallant losing effort against a much naturally larger opponent.

In the 1st round, Morales looked like the "shot" and overmatched fighter that most people expected him to be - his right eye swelled up badly just halfway through the round, he had trouble pulling the trigger with his right, and what punches he did land appeared to lack power. But Morales began to look stronger in the 2nd round, and in the 3rd he rocked Maidana. The fight generally pitted Maidana's relentless, swarming pressure against Morales' slightly less frequent, but often more effective spurts. Morales stung Maidana again in the 5th, but Maidana's swarming attack gave him the 4th, 6th, and 7th rounds on my card. The 8th was reminiscent of Holyfield-Bowe round 10, as Morales hurt Maidana BADLY with a hook early in the round, but Maidana rallied to put some hurt on Morales later in the round. The 9th was one of the best rounds ever IMO, as both fighters took turns rocking each other throughout the round. I scored the round even. Morales had Maidana in trouble again in the 10th, but Maidana came on strong in the closing seconds, foreshadowing what was to come. Entering the championship rounds, I had Maidana slightly ahead 5-4-1 in rounds. In the final 6 minutes, Maidana relentlessly swarmed Morales, and Erik was never able to muster a counter offensive. Maidana's closing finish secured him a victory on my card.

The official scorecards gave Maidana a majority decision, winning 116-112 on two cards.

My final tally:
-Maidana won rounds 1,2,4,6,7,11,12.
-Morales won rounds 3,5,8,10.
-9th round even.

Maidana 7-4-1.

 

You've not sold it to me in this and the other thread, George! This may have to occupy place 100+ on my watchlist.

 

I'll score Lujan-Davila if George uploads it in next few days. I won't have time to score anything in the next 3 days given i have a preschooler and its Xmas weekend in the States, but in about 4 days I'll have plenty of time.

 

Buster Drayton v Davey Moore

Round 1: 10-9 Moore
Round 2: 10-10 Even (was leaning to Moore but Drayton lands a haymaker at the last second of the round to pull this one Even)
Round 3: 10-9 Drayton
Round 4: 10-10 Even
Round 5: 10-9 Moore
Round 6: 10-9 Moore
Round 7: 10-9 Moore
Round 8: 10-9 Drayton
Round 9: 10-9 Drayton
Round 10: Drayton stops Moore

Total through 9 completed rounds: 87-86 Moore (actual scores: 87-86 Moore, 87-85 Drayton and 86-86 Even)

Amazingly, there were no knockdowns in this fight between two bangers. Drayton with his wide-arc haymakers and Moore, with his refined punching down the middle and to the body. This fight was anybody's as one can see by my score and that of the officials. But poor Davey, he got cornered and was trying to fight back, but should have been squirming and grabbing Drayton to get out of that corner. Because with Drayton throwing those bombs from left field, even the perception of someone getting hurt is going to get a fight stopped. Clearly, when the ref stopped it one could see he was in no distress. But he was pinned, and again - perception.

 

I rarely sit down and watch a fight with the sole intent of scoring as i find it distracts from the enjoyment.

Years ago i remember all this talk about how Winky Wright was robbed against Vargas. As i had never saw the fight or even highlights i decided to watch it for the first time just to do my own score. I don't have the card any longer but i had it 6 rounds each. In other words a draw. Could an argument be made that Winky won? Sure. Robbery? No. Another one of those cases where revisionist history comes out to over correct a perceived wrong.

 

Yeah, it's like those who claim that Mayweather had no issues with an old DLH. Went from people saying DLH won, to people acting like DLH didn't win more than three rounds.

 

Haha yep. Whitaker-Chavez was a robbery however people can't seem to help themselves from making exaggerations. Pernell won every second of every round and put on complete and total "schooling" like the world has never seen before.

If it was initially scored something like 116-112 x3 the above narrative wouldn't exist. It would be simply Whitaker outboxed Chavez and won the fight. (which is what actually happened)

 

I think I had it 117-111, enough for me to say Whitaker beats any Chavez, but certainly not wide enough to say Chavez didn't have any success at all.

 

I think at absolute best Chavez could maybe earn a legitimate 6-6 draw against Whitaker. I don't think he ever beats him either.

 

I never knew this fight was out there. British scoring in effect.

Herol Graham v Rod Douglas

Round 1: Even
Round 2: Graham
Round 3: Graham
Round 4: Graham
Round 5: Graham
Round 6: Douglas
Round 7: Graham
Round 8: Even
Round 9: Graham drops Douglas 3 times and the ref stops the fight

Total through 8 completed rounds: 79 1/2 - 77 1/2 for Graham

We can all sit here in hindsight and say this was a disgraceful matchup with a 40 bout veteran against this 13 fight novice, and we'd be right. But what was amazing about this fight was that everyone was going along with it. There was no outcry at all. I remember reading the pre-fight writeup from Boxing News and they were lauding Mickey Duff's ability to judge when to move a fighter and when another is ready to be taken. They were harkening in a new era of Rod Douglas. We know now it was a bridge too far. But it seemed like they had cast the die already. Regarding the fight, the unorthodox Graham really delivered patty-cake punches for most of the fight, which was his style. But it was noticeable in the 7th and 8th rounds how fatigued Douglas suddenly became. And why not? He didn't learn much bowling over his opponents and now he was at the deep end of the pool with nothing left. I don't know the extent of the damage Douglas suffered, but he was retired. The punches that dropped him didn't look that awesome. Clearly exhaustion was the main factor here. But I wonder now after seeing it if Douglas had any other underlying issues that went undetected before this bout.

 

Drayton's war with Matt Hilton is a classic.

 

I watched that only recently and I don't know why, but wasn't that bowled over by it. Good fight, obviously, but I found the pace to be surprisingly slow for a jnr middleweight fight. I mean, there was action but both fighters seemed slow. Of course, I may just have watched it in the wrong sort of mood so should probably go back and watch it again.

 

I won't lie, we're talking damn near 20 years since I watched Hilton-Drayton. Sometime in the early 2000s. I had it on VHS.

There's a very good chance its not as good as I remember it.

 

Actually, I first saw Hilton-Drayton by accident.

I had ordered a VHS with Chavez-Rosario on it, and the guy I ordered from (who's sadly since passed) threw on Hilton-Drayton to fill the extra space on the tape.

 

That's a pretty good bonus fight I'll admit! I'd say I miss the days of tapes but waiting weeks for a handful of fights on a three hour VHS tape just doesn't hold the same appeal now...

 

And I would get so excited when they finally came in the mail.

Ahh, it was a different world pre-YouTube.

 

It really was. The anticipation was amazing!

 

Tony Sibson v Mark Kaylor

This had all the earmarks of one great all-British showdown, but marred by a lot of clinching. Nevertheless, here we go.

Round 1: 10-10 Even
Round 2: 10-9 Sibson
Round 3: 10-9 Kaylor
Round 4: 10-10 Even
Round 5: 10-9 Sibson
Round 6: 10-9 Sibson
Round 7: 10-9 Sibson
Round 8: 10-9 Sibson
Round 9: 10-9 Sibson
Round 10: 10-9 Kaylor
Round 11: 10-9 Kaylor
Round 12: 10-9 Kaylor

Total: 116-114 Sibson (actual scores: 116-114 and 2 scores of 117-115 all for Sibson)

Sibson simply outhustled Kaylor throughout most of this fight. I don't know what Kaylor's corner were telling him but keeping Sibson on the end of his jab and sharp-shooting with the right worked, but then repeatedly fell into clinches where Sibbo was the stronger and busier. Late in the fight - possibly out of urgency - Kaylor started turning it on and was now the stronger of the two in the clinches and he really started letting the punches fly. Just a bit late though. Rounds 11 and 12 were the best of the fight, which again, was marred by clinches.

 

Kid Gavilan v Johnny Bratton II (10 rounds non-title)

This was a fun fight with a lot of exaggerated moves by a couple of real technicians, who knew how to play to the audience. Clearly a couple of crowd-pleasers who came up in the era where the live gate meant everything. For me it reminded me of Leonard v Benitez or Napoles v Lewis in that you had one very highly skilled fighter on one hand, and in the other, another who was just that much better.

Round 1: Bratton
Round 2: Gavilan
Round 3: Gavilan
Round 4: Even
Round 5: Gavilan
Round 6: Even
Round 7: Bratton (Gavilan penalized)
Round 8: Gavilan
Round 9: Gavilan
Round 10: Bratton

Total: 5-3-2 Gavilan (actual scores: 52-48 Gavilan, 52-48 Bratton and 50-50 for a draw)

For one, I have no idea how the Illinois scoring system worked in the 1950s. The nearest I can come up with is they might be using the 10 point system where they divide it up amongst the combatants such as a 6-4 score for the winner of the round. I know the 11 point scoring system was used in Australia and the west coast at this time where the winner of the round receives a 6-5 score. I suppose that could be the case, but then one has to think how the 7th round penalization comes into play. I had already given Bratton the 7th round when the commentator mentions at the top of the 8th that they penalized Gavilan for holding and hitting and a rabbit punch in the 7th round. So I'm simply unclear now how this works. Suffice to say I thought Gavilan deserved the verdict. I felt he won his rounds fairly clear, whereas, anything Bratton won was very close. But it was a very good fight at high level.

 

A lot of points systems were wonky prior to the implementation of today's 10-point system. I know some states used a 5-point system that granted judges the leeway to award anywhere from 1-5 points to each combatant per round. Not coincidentally, Chicago was the site of a LOT of controversial decisions back when it was a boxing hub - although rampant corruption and mob power in the city was surely just as much a factor in that.

As for the fight itself, I remember thinking Gavilan won enough rounds to get no less than a draw, but Bratton may have "stolen" a few of the closer early and later rounds to potentially make it a close fight. 5-3-2 is about how I remember it.

 

RL, the fact that 2 of the officials had points of 52-48 suggests this could not be the 5 point must system as a score could only top out at 50 points using that system. The fact that two of the scores were over that really suggests an 11 point must system that was used in Australia and in California. Illinois must have adopted this at some point in time. And you're right, there was a lot of shady stuff going on in Chicago at the time. This telecast even pointed out Jim Norris at ringside who was president of the IBC. It was judicially disbanded in the late 50s-early 60s due to rampant anti-trust illegalities.

 

I used to order fights by mail all the time, but I got fed up when whenever I'd order a fight, it would show up on YT a few days later.

I have to think the proliferation of YT vids has really hurt these old fight sellers.

 

This was mainly the pre-YouTube days I'm talking about - like the Chavez-Rosario fight, I think I ordered that in 2000 - that was the first time I had really viewed film of peak Chavez.

But I was still ordering fights in the early YouTube days, cause all fights didn't start getting uploaded overnight.

I feel it wasn't until the 2010s that YT really started to amass a comprehensive library of fights.

 

YouTube I'm sure has played a big role in helping a guy like George in less than five years build more boxing knowledge than damn near all of us.

Gaining that much knowledge on that many fighters in the late 90s/early 00s would be fucking impossible . We just didn't have as much access to old fighters/fights, and had to pay an arm & leg to get it.

 

Yes - this is definitely the case in terms of having all those fights available at your fingertips. Obviously, George is an exception though in that having the availability of all of this boxing history still requires you to spend the hours watching the fights. Had I been 16-17 (as I was when I first started following boxing) would I have seen as many fights as George has managed to? I'm not sure I would have.

But I remember a three-hour VHS being about 15 quid when I was 16 - that was a lot of money so I couldn't just order a dozen of them. You could fit half a dozen or so fights depending on the ones you chose so I would choose a mix of longer fights and some short ones, including the odd blowout. One of my tapes had Arguello-Pryor, Gomez-Pintor and Chacon-Limon 4 on it, plus I think the guy put Mancini-Frias on it just to fill in the remaining space. I was pretty convinced when I had it that that was the best 3 hours of boxing I could possibly have on tape. Along with the tapes I'd be on the lookout for any boxing on TV and there was some back then, both British stuff and American shows that I think ITV were showing in the UK. That was when Don King was no. 1 and his cards were actually very good, with multiple champions defending their titles on the same card - Chavez, Norris, Trinidad. I'd record those as they were all late night ones and then watch them the next day.

I'm not sure how many fights I would have seen in a year but can't imagine it was more than 50 or 60. I've probably watched more in the last couple of years since I returned to the sport after a few years away than I watched back then when I was young and had more time on my hands. That's why the magazines back then were so important (KO, Boxing Monthly, Boxing News, The Ring when it was still good) as they were the real life line to knowing what was going on in the sport at the time. I got most of my knowledge fron them.

 

Roman Gonzalez v Juan Estrada 1

Watched and scored this one when I was way too tired so can't vouch for my scorecard but Gonzalez won, of that I'm sure. Cracking fight with Estrada showing good movement and combinations while Chocolatito tried to close distance and work the body. I hadn't seen Estrada before but he impressed me. Good fundamentals, good skills and an excellent chin. Gonzalez has all of those too and got stronger as he went on.

Some oustanding action in this one and it was just a high quality contest all the way through. It's whet my appetite for the rematch in March - really looking forward to that one now like I haven't looked forward to a fight in a long time.

1 9-10
(Estrada busier over first couple of minutes; Gonzalez sizing him up and got going in the last minute)
2 9-10
(Estrada boxing very well on the move; Gonzalez stalking)
3 10-9
(Gonzalez starting to land more combos)
4 10-10
(terrific round - momentum kept changing. Estrada deserved a share of it for his last seconds rally)
5 10-9
(Gonzalez controlled the action)
6 10-9
(Gonzalez on top now)
7 10-9
8 9-10 (close)
9 9-10
10 10-9
11 10-9 (good action)
12 10-10 (terrific finale)

Gonzalez 116-114 Estrada

 

Here's my card:
Marcos Maidana v Erik Morales

Wicked fight which I had deceptively wide for Maidana but this was really competitive - rounds 7 and 8 you could quite conceivably give to Morales but I didn't - had I done so it would be a lot tighter on the scorecards - though I think Maidana was the rightful winner. He closed the show in the 11th and 12th as Morales finally ran out of steam but it was a hell of a gutsy showing from Morales, who fought with one functioning eye from round 2 on.

@Ring Leader - totally agree with you on the shifts of momentum. There were often several in the same round, which made it hard to score those ones.

1 10-9 (really aggressive start by Maidana)
2 10-9 (better round from Morales but thought Maidana edged it)
3 9-10 (close)
4 10-9 (close)
5 9-10 (great round)
6 10-9
7 10-10 (either way type of round, more great action)
8 10-9 (close again)
9 10-9
10 9-10
11 10-9
12 10-9

Maidana 117-112 Morales

 

Iran Barkley v Mike Tinley

Round 1: 10-9 Barkley
Round 2: 10-9 Tinley
Round 3: 10-10 Even
Round 4: 10-9 Barkley
Round 5: 10-9 Tinley
Round 6: 10-9 Barkley
Round 7: 10-9 Barkley
Round 8: 10-9 Barkley
Round 9: 10-9 Barkley
Round 10: 10-9 Tinley
Round 11: 10-9 Tinley
Round 12: 10-9 Tinley

Total: 115-114 Barkley (actual scores: 116-111 and 116-112 both for Barkley and 117-112 for Tinley for a split win for Barkley)

This is the first time I've seen a Mike Tinley fight. I remember when he was fighting - coming up in an era of some real hotshot middles who all turned pro at the same time and were all regarded as hot prospects. I remember many of his results, but the first time I'm laying eyes on him. A real nice boxer with a sharp edge on his shots but really lacking any real pop to them. Then you had Barkley whose badly swollen eyes plagued him his entire career (met him once when his career was over and he was working a fighter's corner - man, you should've seen those eyes!). But it was Barkley's big pop to his shots that won this fight for him. Good fight among real hot prospects.

 

Griffith-Rodriguez I

The first in a legendary quadrilogy that's as (in)famous for its display of skill as it is for the controversy surrounding its decisions.

Although not an entirely easy fight to score, I felt Griffith deserved this one. The fight generally pitted Griffith's explosive powerpunching vs. Rodriguez's flurrying primarily to the body. I thought Griffith won the first 3 rounds fairly decisively as he charged through Rodriguez's punches and rocked him several times. Griffith slowed a bit in the 4th (possibly as a result of Rodriguez's body shots), allowing Luis to step up the pace and win the round. I thought Rodriguez edged the 5th with his workrate and Griffith possibly edged the 6th by landing some big bombs late in the round. I felt the 7th was Griffith's best round since the 3rd as he again laid into Rodriguez and scored a number of big bombs. The pace slowed again over the last 3 rounds, and they were close. I scored the 8th even as it was largely indecisive and uneventful (Griffith landed the lone memorable punch of the round IMO), I thought Emile scored well enough to edge the 9th, and Rodriguez won the 10th.

My final tally:
Griffith wins rounds 1,2,3,6,7,9.
Rodriguez wins rounds 4,5,10.
Round 8 even.

Griffith 6-3-1.

A few takeaways from the fight:
-Although Griffith was less active than Rodriguez, his punches had much more obvious impact and effect. He rocked Rodriguez several times throughout the fight, whereas I don't recall Griffith ever being rocked the same way. IMO, a few well-placed bombs by Griffith could negate the worth of multiple Rodriguez flurries on the cards.
-Rodriguez's work throughout the fight (which primarily targeted the body) was more subtle and less likely to provide eye-catching moments, even if it did succeed in its ultimate goal of slowing Griffith down.
-Rodriguez succeeded in stifling Griffith's attack throughout much of the fight by constantly smothering him and tying him up at close quarters, but he simultaneously stifled his own attack by reducing much of his own output to quick "shoeshine" flurries in the clinches that often didn't land cleanly.

Here's the full fight, for anyone else who wishes to score it:

 

Vuyani Bungu vs Kennedy McKinney I

Interesting fight this, that's for sure. Kennedy working a nice jab in the first, but having to eat a few solid body shots. Bungu crowding McKinney in the second, and landing the overhand. It's weird watching how Bungu sets himself up. Good head-movement, but poor at staying above his hips. He also seemed like his arms were too long his style, as he couldn't get that shoulder-to-elbow range very often, and so his shots could be quite ugly. Good side-to-side movement from Bungu in the third. Dominant jab. Impressive head-movement from both here, too. In the fourth, brilliant defence from both again. Only Bungu with regularity, though.

McKinney countering and slipping beautifully in the fifth. Technically should've scored a KD, too. Bungu was doing well too, but he was coming off worse in most exchanges. Bungu back to working behind the jab in the sixth. Effective cross-counter and jab from McKinney in the seventh. Extremely aggresive eighth round from Bungu, he's really tagging McKinney here.

Underwhelming ninth, McKinney a bit more impressive. Much better in the tenth. Bungu working behind the jab again, using it to set up that long whipping left hook. McKinney's uppercut landing. McKinney jabbing with authority in the eleventh, working the body well, but not enough to make up for Bungu's fantastic combinations. Beautiful counters from Bungu in the twelfth.

Bungu - McKinney
9 : 10
10 : 9
10 : 9
10 : 9 (39/37)
9 : 10
10 : 9
9 : 10
10 : 9 (77/75)
9 : 10
10 : 9
10 : 9
10 : 9 (116/112)

Both guys are very entertaining, and I wish they'd have fought others from that time. Imagine if we got both of these vs Morales or Zaragoza? That'd have been awesome.

I also really like the idea of McKinney fighting from 2005 to 2015. Fights with Vazquez, Rafa, Gonzalez, De Leon, Juanma, etc; he'd win all of them in one offs, but he'd be right in the mix there IMO. Would absolutely make for some wars. Bungu really was one of the SBWs ever, it's a shame he didn't get a chance to prove it vs a Morales or Barrera. Not that he'd have beaten them, but he'd have been a wortgy opponent for sure.