QUOTE (Franchize @ Sep 17 2013, 09:47 AM)
I'm surprised Bill Brady acknowledged she was basically batshit lol I didn't even think they'd have the guts to go that far.
I just read an article that says he defends her as a person and said that several rounds were very close:http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more-spo...ticle-1.1457958
(Credit: New York Daily News.)
Unfortunately, based on what I saw of the stream of the fight, there were about six close rounds and six totally dominant rounds for Floyd. It seems that I was right there in-between the two judges, scoring Floyd as an easy 117-113 winner. Metcalif and I would have had the same 117-111 card. However, Nevada hates even rounds, which I think is stupid, and I contacted the WBC about the no even rounds policy. We agree there should be more 10-10 rounds in boxing for close rounds, and 10-8 rounds for very dominent rounds. However, I think in Mayweather-Canelo the use of the 10-8 round, based on how many people say Floyd dominated the fight, may be going too far. I use even rounds because I don't think it's fair to assign a 10-9 round to either fighter when almost nothing happened. Watch the fist three rounds of Mayweather-Canelo, almost nothing happened between them. So I could see a judge in those fist three rounds going:
3.) 9-10 F (Or just switch the winners of round 1 and 2, same score.)
1.) 10-9 F
2.) 10-9 F
3.) 10-9 F
Or maybe a push, but you might go
1.) 9-10 C
2.) 9-10 C
3.) 9-10 C
This is why in boxing the use of the 10-9 round does not do justice to a round that is close without a knockdown and a round that is widely won without a knockdown. Look at rounds 5-8. CJ Ross was TOTALLY FUCKED for giving Canelo round 8. That was a CLEAR Mayweather round. In fact, look at rounds 6-9, there's no doubt they were all 10-9 rounds for Floyd, but because of the slow tactical action, if you apply a more liberal use of the 10-point must, is it justice to go like this?
6) 10-8 F
7.) 10-8 F
8..) 10-8 F
9.) 10-8 F
Does that take injustice to such an extreme with the more liberal use of the 10-point must system? There are a lot of very respected people who had this fight a shutout. But to me a shutout is something like Calzaghe-Lacy, or Holmes-Cobb, or maybe Mayweather-Marquez. I honestly did not see this fight as being in the category of those matches. It seemed that CJ Ross gave Canelo rounds just for coming forward, and you could say, "Well Floyd did a little more to win all close rounds, and he did a lot more to win the dominant rounds, so 12-0." CJ Ross and a few others, gave Canelo credit for several close rounds with almost no action on either side. And this is why we have strong defenders of a 120-108 card for Floyd up to and including four-point win swings for Floyd at 116-112 from Dave Moretti, and 117-113 Mayweather from me. I have found two other people with 115-113 Mayweather cards and a possible 114-114 draw card, although I do agree that a draw in this fight is awful. I would not accept Floyd taking any LESS than a four point win in this fight.
However, with all due respect, I don't think 120-108 for Floyd is right either. The above examples show how the liberal use of the 10-point must system can create such polarized results.