Dougie’s Monday mailbag
THE TRAGIC EVENTS IN PARIS
this is chris from france.
i was in your mailbag last monday for the second time and i did not plan to write any mail about boxing this week as in view of the tragic events which occurred in paris my mind was quite away from boxing.
so it was quite with a distracted mind that i watched the very good fight between edwin rodriguez and seals and when the first round ended with rodriguez knocked down twice and michael seals knocked down once. i was wondering how the round should be scored? for me seals had won the round so the first scoring would be 10-9 then seals should be deducted a point for his knockdown and rodriguez 2 points for his 2 knockdowns so at the end this round should be scored 9-7 for seals? would you agree that this is the correct way to score this round?
and on another case scenario, if a fighter is knocked down but you think that despite his knockdown he otherwise really dominated the said round and should still win it despite he was floored then should this round be scored 9-9? (i.e. the guy won the round but is deducted a point because he was knocked down?)
i would be pleased to have your views / clarifications about same.
as earlier mentioned in view of what happened in paris i did not expect to write you an email, however, while watching french tv – which has been talking about the terrorists attacks all the time since Friday – i also saw the wonderful warm support we received from abroad, and in particular from the usa.
i can tell you that french people have been very moved from the various messages and great sympathy we have received from your country since the killings happened. i dont know if you are aware of it but the opera of new york even played the full french hymn on saturday. this was shown many times on french tv and this was really a nice gesture from the american people which really meant a lot to us.
the only american site i am writing to is yours (when i write mails about my boxing opinions.) so at the end i decided to write this mail to tell american people via you that we french people are very grateful for your support which means to us probably more than you even think.
obviously you american people have already experienced such dreadful times on 9/11 (with even much more people killed) and it really means a lot to us to have your support in such terrible times.
i do not also expect that because of what has happened you will automatically publish my email and maybe it is not the right place for such message. (i would not be offended one bit if you don’t).
but for some reason i felt the urge to somehow thank american people for the support they have shown since friday and so i decided to use your mailbag to do so. thanks again to all american people who have shown their sympathy to france since last friday. all the best. – chris
Thanks for sharing with us, Chris. I usually don’t like to include emails about non-boxing related events or issues in the mailbag, but I think yours is more about human connection and support during times of tragedy and crises than news or politics.
I think it’s wonderful that one of your connections to America and to Americans (and I presume folks from other parts of the world as well) is the sport boxing. And I’m proud that you’d use this boxing column – which I like to think “belongs” to all fans of the Sweet Science – as a forum to share your gratitude for the recent emotional/moral support from this side of the world.
I remember being pleasantly surprised and deeply touched by all of the heartfelt supportive messages for New York City and America that I received from boxing fans living in other parts of the world following the events of 9/11. It’s good to know that people care.
Regarding the scoring of the opening round of Rodriguez-Seals (what a shootout, by the way!), I would not have scored it 9-7 for Seals, and I don’t think many official judges would have either. That’s not how the 10-point must system is supposed to work. It’s called the “must system” because the winner of each round must be awarded 10 points. If a round is deemed even or a draw, it’s scored 10-10. (The only time the winner of a round does not receive 10 points is if he or she is penalized a point for a foul.)
The loser of a round receives 9 points. If a fighter is knocked down he or she typically loses the round and loses 1 point (giving the winner a 10-8 score for that round). (A fighter that scores two knockdowns in one round wins it 10-7; if he can score three knockdowns he’ll typically win it by 10-6 margin – and the fight is usually stopped if the same fighter goes down more than three times in the same round.)
However, if both fighters are dropped in the same round the knockdowns cancel each other out. You won’t see an 8-8 score for that round. You’ll either see a 10-10 score if the fighters dished out equal punishment, or a 10-9 round in favor of the fighter who scored the “harder” knockdown, landed more punches or simply out-boxed his opponent (despite being dropped).
So in the case of Round 1 of Rodriguez-Seals, the winner of that wild stanza was Seals – who scored two knockdowns (hard ones). I can see him winning the round by a 10-9 or 10-8 score. If a judge thought the fight was even after they traded knockdowns, he or she would’ve scored it 10-9 for Seals after the unheralded light heavyweight scored the second knockdown just before the bell. However, I think a 10-8 score for Seals is more appropriate because he didn’t suffer a very hard knockdown early in the round. Rodriguez, on the other hand, was shaky after he was dropped for the first time. The former super middleweight title challenger was discombobulated after the second knockdown, and I think he was saved by the bell. So I think Seals clearly won the round and was able to dock E-Rod an extra point by scoring the second knockdown. The point (no pun intended) is moot, though, because Rodriguez got it together and stopped Seals in Round 3, but I’m glad you asked this question because I think a lot of boxing fans aren’t aware that the winner of the round is supposed to receive 10 points (barring deductions for fouls or special circumstances).
if a fighter is knocked down but you think that despite his knockdown he otherwise really dominated the said round and should still win it despite he was floored then should this round be scored 9-9? Generally speaking, when a fighter is dropped but was winning the round prior to the knockdown and wins the rest of the round after getting up, he or she still loses the round but by a 10-9 score instead of 10-8. On rare occasions I’ve seen the fighter who was dropped dominate enough to salvage an even round, but the judges scored those rounds 10-10, not 9-9.
That’s what she gets! The cover of Ring Magazine and a Kick to the face! By a accomplished Boxing Champ! First L …. By the way I like her. Damn shakespearean! – Alfonso
I don’t know why I was surprised by the over-the-top reaction to Rousey’s knockout loss to Holm, but I was.
(And even though I expected a negative reaction to Rousey being on the cover the January 2016 issue of THE RING by hardcore/purist/a__hole boxing fans, I was put off by the amount of outrage and indignation that spouted from general sports media and pundits – most of whom have never read a single issue of RING or any other boxing publication in their lives.)
I wasn’t shocked that the loss was major news. Rousey’s a crossover star and was viewed as invincible, so the upset in a big event sent shockwaves through the sports and entertainment worlds.
However, the unbridled elation over the loss caught me off guard. It’s like an international holiday to large segments sports fandom, particularly boxing fans. And I guess I could almost understand that if those same fans were supportive of Holm during her boxing career or at least during her foray into MMA but I get the impression that most of them were not. They just can’t stand Rousey.
Some have told me on Twitter that she’s arrogant, but I never got that impression from what I’ve seen or heard from her. Then again, I have a very casual interest in MMA and I’ve never closely followed Rousey’s career, so it’s quite possible that I could be unaware that she’s a total jerk-face.
Anyway, if Rousey pissed you off or if you’re one of those boxing fans who likes to argue with MMA fans over which combat sport is “superior,” I guess it was an awesome weekend for you.
Me, I’m still looking forward to Cotto-Canelo.
Had a few weeks of very little boxing (and may I add, no mailbag either – which is disgraceful :)) but now finally am watching a good fight Rosas vs. Pucheta and it’s great, it reminds you just how much you love the sport!
So I’m sitting here smoking, looking guiltily at my e-cigarette and thinking about Canelo vs Cotto and I wanted to get your take. Do you genuinely feel that Cotto has a chance against Canelo? Or is he just being used as a huge stepping stone to catapult Canelo to mega stardom? I mean, there’s about 10 years age difference between them. And Cotto’s been in some wars, Canelo hasn’t really. I mean age is probably the biggest factor in boxing, so does he really have a chance? And finally, think it could really be fight of the year? I just don’t see it.
Pff that Rosas/Pucheta fight was really good! Cheers mate, hope all’s well 🙂
Kind Regards. – Alastair
I gotta check it out online when I get the time. (I did, for the record, watch the Spike TV and ShoBox cards this past weekend – and I enjoyed both.)
Regarding Cotto-Canelo, I think Cotto is both a stepping stone for Alvarez and a threat to the younger man. Cotto is a respected future hall of famer with the perfect mix of age (i.e. wear and tear), style (aggressive), nationality/ethnicity (Puerto Rican and hardware (holder of the RING and WBC middleweight titles) to engage Canelo in an entertaining fight but ultimately fail in spectacular fashion that instantly enhances the respect and star power of the red-headed Mexican.
However, I also think Cotto has the right mix of experience, boxing versatility, technique and punching power to upset the 25-year-old boxer-puncher.
Put simply, Canelo can’t afford to overlook Cotto or f__k up at any point during Saturday’s showdown. If he does, Cotto will punish him.
In fact, I think Canelo’s gonna have to absorb some punishment even if he fights the perfect fight. And that’s a good thing! I know he asked for this fight, but I need to know how badly he WANTS the victory and those middleweight titles. Cotto’s not going to just hand them over to him. If Canelo wants Cotto’s scalp and those belts he’s going to have to TAKE them, and I think he’s going to have to spill some blood (Cotto’s and his own) to do so.
HOLLY HOLM & COTTO-CANELO
I’m sure you’re getting a lot of emails from fans about Holly Holm winning over Ronda Rousey, I streamed the fight to see if Holly would prove my theory to my brother and friends who watch both sports that if a Boxer with even a little foot speed and decent foot work would be able to stay away from a grappler relatively easily. They always said no but she did. Great win for her. She deserves The Ring magazine cover spot over Ronda for being the first fighter to claim a world title in Boxing and in MMA like the Greats that came from Muay Thai to win a title in boxing. (I had no problem with Rousey on the cover because, as you said, other non-fighters have been on it. Waiting to see Al Haymon on the cover – lol.)
Now back to the Sweet Science. Read an article about how Erik Morales said that beating Alvarez doesn’t add anything to Cotto’s legacy. I found myself agreeing with this statement on the basis that if Cotto wins against Alvarez as I believe he will by KO, Alvarez will now have a loss against an old battle worn smaller Cotto that he was supposed to beat. Can’t keep using the “he’s young” excuse and if Alvarez goes on to lose any more when we look at the first ballot HoF’er Alvarez’s name will amount to little.
The problem I have now is that 1 of my closest childhood friends has been slowly succeeding in me hoping that Alvarez beats Cotto just so the new generation of fighters take over mainstream boxing. If Cotto suffers a loss to Alvarez I believe he should retire and that would only leave Pacquiao & Klitschko at the top of mainstream boxing. I still have an issue with Alvarez though and that is that he is a great fighter but only for 4 rounds 5 tops.
Would love to know your thoughts on what would be better for boxing depending on which fighter wins.
Sandy Saddler Vs Salvador Sanchez
Roberto Duran Vs Felix Trinidad P4P (if they were in the same weight) Guillermo Rigondeaux Vs Roy Jones Jr (Prime)
— Ivan, NYC
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Ivan.
Regarding Holm’s KO of Rousey, I’m glad she was able to prove your theory correct to your brother and his friends.
Regarding Holm gracing the cover of THE RING, I think it’s possible. These decisions are often out of my hands (honestly folks, if it were up to me Floyd Mayweather wouldn’t have been on the cover of the August and November issues), but if Holm is interested in being on the front of the Bible of Boxing I don’t see why not. Same goes for Haymon. In fact, I think he will make the cover of RING before the end of 2017 (but he might not like the feature story that accompanies it).
Regarding your thoughts on Canelo, I kind of side with your childhood friend in that I’m ready for a new generation of boxing stars and being as young and popular as he is, the red-headed Mexican is obviously a prime candidate to lead the charge. However, I want the emerging talents (such as Alvarez, Deontay Wilder, Terence Crawford, Keith Thurman, Kell Brook and Sadam Ali) to prove that they are worthy of commanding the spotlight.
Canelo’s got to beat Cotto (and then he’s gotta face GGG). Wilder’s got to beat Povetkin (and then he’s gotta face Klitschko). Crawford’s got to beat Manny Pacquiao or Tim Bradley. Same deal with Brook, Ali and Thurmy.
Regarding El Terrible’s comments on Alvarez not adding anything to Cotto’s legacy, I think it all depends on what Canelo would do after losing to the future hall of famer. If Alvarez never has a significant victory, his name won’t mean much. But if he goes on to kick ass against respected fighters at 154 and 160 pounds, I think he can become one of the bigger feathers in Cotto’s cap. (Think about it: the biggest victories on Cotto’s 15-year pro resume are faded versions of Shane Mosley, Sergio Martinez and Antonio Margarito. So a victory over a young, fresh former champ would likely stand out – especially if that young gun went on to win more titles and big fights.)
I still have an issue with Alvarez though and that is that he is a great fighter but only for 4 rounds 5 tops. Just one man’s opinion, but I think Canelo’s stamina issues will be resolved once he allows himself to weigh-in as a real middleweight and stops f__king around with this 154-155 pound bulls__t.
Your mythical matchups:
Sandy Saddler Vs Salvador Sanchez – Sanchez by decision in a close, hard fight.
Roberto Duran Vs Felix Trinidad – Duran by close but clear unanimous decision at 147 and 160, and by hard-fought, bloody split decision at 154 pounds.
P4P (if they were in the same weight) Guillermo Rigondeaux Vs Roy Jones Jr (Prime) – Jones by mid-rounds KO.
UPCOMING BIG FIGHTS
Lots of excitement on the horizon. I think Cotto-Canelo will be pretty one sided, regardless of the hype. I think it will come down to youth over age.
Speaking of which, I just watched the Wladimir Klitschko v Tyson Fury Face Off. I have to say it was one of the better ones I’ve ever seen.
I’m not sure how much you can read into these things? Both guys believe in themselves 100% but I kind of got the impression that Fury is a bit deluded. That whole sauna competition was purely in his own head, I felt embarrassed for him when he brought it up.
And then there’s Frampton-Quigg to look forward to next year. That should be very entertaining. Maybe things are looking up after all?
I know you’re picking Quigg but I don’t know how much of a punch he can take? We know Frampton can take a smack after the Martinez fight. We haven’t really seen Quigg hurt yet. At least I haven’t.
Anyways, all the best and enjoy the fight next weekend.
Oh – and well done with the Freddy Roach interview. I could see you guys really bonded. It was very good. Are we going to see the winner of Canelo v Cotto fight Mayweather? Jesus man. That’s getting me depressed again. – John
Thanks for the kind words about the Roach episode of In The Ring. I do go back some years (more than 15) with Freddie. He was very good during that interview, and very candid at times. Some of the stuff we talked about didn’t make it to the final cut, but I’m going to try to get the RingTV Live producers to put out some of the outtakes after Cotto-Canelo.
I doubt that Mayweather figures in the immediate future of the Cotto-Canelo winner. If you’re wrong about the fight and it turns out to be competitive (as I believe it will) I think a rematch is more feasible than the B-side role to Mayweather’s comeback.
If Canelo smashes Cotto, as you (and a lot of media members believe), I think there will be considerable pressure for the Mexican star to fight Gennady Golovkin, not Mayweather. And I think Canelo is one of those rare stars who actually listens to the public.
The link you provide is to Klitschko-Fury: The Gloves Are Off.
[springboard type=”video” id=”1581553″ player=”ring003″ width=”648″ height=”511″ ]
It’s the British equivalent to HBO’s Face Off with Max Kellerman. I think TGAO is a better series. It’s longer but not overly produced and I think Johnny Nelson does an excellent job as moderator. It doesn’t hurt that UK fighters are generally articulate and thoughtful interviews. Fury’s got a whacky personality to go with his loquacious nature.
I haven’t watched this episode in its entirety but I’ve seen bits and pieces of it and it looks interesting. I just don’t want to get ahead of myself with my anticipation for Klitschko-Fury. I’ve got Cotto-Canelo ahead of me and that’s pretty much all that I can think about (aside from a Golden Boy/RingTV Live show from the Hard Rock Casino on Friday). As soon as Cotto-Canelo is over, and the smoke has cleared, I’ll shift my full attention to the big men and watch the TGAO, because I am definitely looking forward to the Nov. 28 showdown.
And once the holiday season is over, I’ll be obsessing over Frampton-Quigg. I’m still backing my man Scotty. I don’t know if his chin is any better or worse than Frampton’s but maybe the reason we haven’t seen him hurt yet after 33 pro bouts is because the Englishman does take a decent shot.
What’s good man? How was The Peanuts movie? Me and my kids are dying to see it but we’re waiting for it to come on free, illegal streaming. Don’t judge k, I save my hard earned dollars for boxing PPV’s. Couple two, three questions, here goes:
1) How about De La Hoya’s open letter to Mayweather in Playboy Mag? No doubt the egomaniac had to have read it, yet he remains suspiciously quiet, what? No retorts. That’s because everything Oscar wrote was spot on. Money can’t say jack because it was the Truth. All boxing fans should read that letter. What was your take on it? I even liked Oscar’s little plug of his upcoming Golden Boy event, ever the promoter there.
2) Max Kellerman suggested after Desert Storm’s destruction of Rios that Timothy should take another fight similar to that one before moving on to face a legit heavy like Pacquiao, Crawford or Postol. Funny seeing as how Bradley doesn’t do “gimme fights”, like EVER. But who might he meet in a tune-up bout? Surely not poor ol’ Malignaggi or Mosley, the Magic Man and Sugar are a little long in the tooth. So how about Jean or Matthysse? Who else do you think he could face who is considered a B-side guy before Atlas makes a MegaFight for Tim?
3) Speaking of Bradley/Atlas, the “We are FIREMEN” speech got not only me riled up but the whole of social media too man. I was looking for similar inspirational trainer speeches but found very little. I know Emanuel Steward (R.I.P.) dropped f-bombs like they were his second language and that Norman Stone was quite the hilarious character but I was curious if you have an anecdote about a verbally boisterous cornerman laying into his guy between rounds or something like that, surely you must.
Okay that’s all I wanted to say. Enjoy next weekend! I always enjoy the mailbag. Steve, Toronto ON
Thanks Steve. The Peanuts Movie was just OK, but my 7-year-old daughter and her friend from school enjoyed themselves, so that’s all that mattered. It was nice seeing Charlie Brown and the gang on a big screen again, but I prefer the Peanuts in comic form.
Anyway, I’ll respond to your questions in order:
1) It should come as no surprise that I loved De La Hoya’s letter to Mayweather (and no, I did not ghost write it and neither did Steve Kim). The best part about it was when Oscar listed out the new – and more entertaining – generation of up-and-coming stars and made sure to mention non-Golden Boy-promoted fighters, such as GGG, Chocolatito, Sergey Kovalev, Crawford and Thurman.
2) If Bradley wants to hold on to that WBO title his “gimme” fight might have to come against No. 1 contender Sadam Ali, who might not be a “gimme” at all despite his relative inexperience.
3) I don’t have many anecdotes about dramatic corner performances other than the classics (Angelo Dundee’s “You’re blowin’ it, son” speech to Sugar Ray Leonard during the late rounds of the first Thomas Hearns fight, and the late great Manny Steward’s best F-bombings – his imploring Lennox Lewis to “drop that m__ther f____ing right hand and let’s go home!” between rounds of the Tyson fight is my fave) but one closet classic comes to mind and that’s Phil Borgia’s corner work with Kevin Kelley during the former featherweight champ’s up-from-the-canvas one-punch KO of Derrick Gainer in 1996. Kelley’s right eye was completely swollen shut (probably from an accidental thumb) by the end of Round 4. To make matters worse Kelley was dropped (while reacting to the irritation of the eye injury) just before the bell. Borgia grabs Kelley and sits him down on the stool and yells: “Kevin, look at me. Look at me! Do we train to fight with no eyes or not? Look at me! You got one good eye! We train to fight with no God-damn eyes!”
[springboard type=”video” id=”1581555″ player=”ring003″ width=”648″ height=”511″ ]
Somehow, Kelley survived with one eye for another four rounds (with Borgia giving him the most impassioned pep talks you’ve heard since Atlas between rounds) before he landed a miraculous one-hitter quitter near the end of Round 8.
[springboard type=”video” id=”1581557″ player=”ring003″ width=”648″ height=”511″ ]
KOSTYA IS NOT KING
Sorry Dougie, I’ve never wrote in before but now I can’t stop!!!! I’m hoping that my first Email might make the Monday mailbag and convince you to publish a Daily Mailbag for the week. However, could you please reply to me to confirm why you are so high on Kostya Tsyzu? I believe you have him stopping May Jr but he got stopped by the Hitman. I know that styles make fights but can’t see how he can get beat by Hatton but then beat Floyd? – Cheers, Kieran (Bolton, England)
Why am I high on Kostya? What are you high on, man? It’s obvious why. Tszyu was, is and always will be AWESOME! The world amateur champ version was just as incredible as the pro who unified major 140-pound titles in 2001. And it’s the rough-and-rugged but powerfully precise version of Tszyu that fought from late ’99 to mid-2002 that I envision when asked about mythical matchups, not the inactive 35-year-old version that lost to Hatton in 2005.
However, Hatton would have always troubled Tszyu because the Englishman smothered his opponents, and only a relentless bastard willing to take a sick amount of punishment (like Vince Phillips) had a prayer of beating Tsyzu in my mind. Classic stand-up boxers who rely on speed and reflexes and need distance to operate (such as Vernon Forrest in the amateurs, or Zab Judah and Sharmba Mitchell in the pros) were picked apart by the Russian.
Regarding the mailbag, I know I won’t have time to do a daily column but I think I can manage a mid-week mailbag in honor of the exciting weekend we have ahead of us.
Email Fischer at [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter at @dougiefischer