So, how did the rest of the press score Beltran vs Burns?

I know, another post about it, thought this one deserves its own thread...

I think the proof is in the pudding and with scores like this from around the boxing world, maybe it's safe to say having terrible scoring is something we have to live with.

Source of scores: fightscorecollector.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

PRESS SCORES

Andy Paterson (Boxing Asylum) : 115-112 Beltran

Danny Flexen (Boxing News) : 114-113 Beltran

Dan Rafael (ESPN) : 115-112 Beltran

Kurt Ward (Boxing Asylum) : 115-112 Beltran

Ryan Bivins (Sweet Boxing) : 117-110 Beltran

Ciaran Shanks (Irvine Times) : 116-112 Beltran

Danny Winterbottom (Secondsout) : 115-113 Beltran

Boxing Opinions : 115-114 Beltran

Phil D Jay (World Boxing News) : 115-112 Beltran

Jake Donovan (BoxingScene) : 116-111 Beltran

ATR Boxing Tipster : 115-112 Beltran

Paul Daly (Top Class Boxing) : 115-112 Beltran

Adam Abramowitz ( SN Boxing) : 115-112 Beltran

Terry Dooley (ESPN) : 115-112 Beltran

Alex Morris (KTC Boxing) : 116-111 Beltran

Corey Quincy (BL Boxing) : 116-111 Beltran

Matt Christie (Boxing News) : 115-112 Beltran

Victor M Salazar (Tha Boxing Voice) : 116-111 Beltran

Fighters Rated : 116-113 Beltran

Kieran Mulvaney (ESPN) : 115-112 Beltran

No Holds Barred : 115-112 Beltran

Tom Gray (Ring Magazine) : 115-112 Beltran

Gabriel Montoya (Maxboxing) : 114-113 Beltran

Beau Denison (The Boxing Truth) : 116-111 Beltran

Roe (Checkhookboxing) : 116-111 Beltran

Tommy Allan ( Boxing Asylum) : 114-113 Beltran

Jim Watt (Sky Sports TV) : 115-113 Beltran

Eric Raskin (Boxing Monthly) : 116-111 Beltran

Paul Wheeler ( Boxing News) : 114-113 Beltran

Shaun Brown (LiveFight) : 115-112 Beltran

Lunny (CheckHookBoxing) : 116-111 Beltran

LiveFight.com : 115-113 Beltran

Rob Day (Ringnews24) : 115-113 Beltran

James Tonks (Ringnews24) : 116-111 Beltran

Clive Bernath (Secondsout) : 115-113 Beltran

John J Raspanti (Doghouseboxing) : 115-113 Beltran

Ramon Aranda ( 3Morerounds) : 116-111 Beltran

Paddy Cronan (Onthegrindboxing) : 115-113 Beltran

Mario Muniga (Tha Boxing Voice) : 115-112 Beltran

Wolfgang Schiffbauer (Sturm Promotions) : 116-111 Beltran

John A MacDonald (Tha Boxing Voice) : 115-112 Beltran

Ryan Burton (The Boxing Lab) : 116-111 Beltran

Jeff Powell (Daily Mail) : 117-113 Beltran

Bob Mee ( Sky Sports TV) : 116-112 beltran

Have to be careful here because the most popular score is 115-113 by the look of it......

Which isn't a huge margin.........

Boxing I'm afraid is full of judges and referees looking to impress promoters..

Not only getting paid per job but getting expenses and decent hotels too...

The Captain made the statement he wanted to see proper training and ex-fighters doing it I believe.....nothing wrong with that!!

I'm more sceptical.......We all saw Beltran won and I believe the main problem is integrity..

Not competency

Got to agree. This was politics and, as Beltran said, a protected investment. The scores are impossible to defend I'm afraid and, for me at least, a lot of goodwill has been lost.

How do they sell the next Burns fight? I wouldn't buy tickets, not after that scandal. Doubt I'll even bother watching. I'd rather Burns lost after fighting on with that jaw and his next fight was his way back.

Fwiw I had Beltran by two rounds. 115-113

115-113 is a scandal ??

As a stand alone statement it is not a scandal but when you look at the facts it is.

The scandal is Beltran didn't get the nod when we all saw him win. Three judges should not get that wrong, so why did they?

I think 115 -113 is about right, maybe a bit generous due to the knock down.. Nut there were a few close rounds. to be fair while Beltran won the fight and was on the front foot, he was hitting Burns gloves allot as well. Its not as if he was giving him a pasting.... just had him under pressure.

I'd like to know who these three publications were at ringside who apparently scored in favour of Burns (or so Hearn told iFilm London).

I appreciate that Hearn isn't going to come out and say that the decision was a bad'un and that he has to try and blur the edges to half-justify it as best he can. He was doing a decent enough job at first, but then he totally lost me and riled me up when he started saying how, if you're the foreign fighter travelling to a champion's backyard, "one or two rounds just isn't enough" and you have to totally dominate because, apparently, the rules of scoring change when a champion defends at home!

I detest that old myth and I wish Hearn had left it out.

I had it 115-112 to Beltran, so basically wide enough for me to say that the decision was a really bad one rather than just a questionable one, but (and it's a big but) I felt that a three point margin was just about as kind as I could possibly be to Ricky, and even if I was looking to edge close rounds his way or give him the benefit of the doubt wherever it existed, I still don't think I could have it any closer than that. I can totally see why some others had it as wide as four or five points.

Shouldn't you guys be glad Burns kept his title...He is British....

I've seen worse..........115-113 comes under contentious rather than robbery.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Shouldn't you guys be glad Burns kept his title...He is British....

I've seen worse..........115-113 comes under contentious rather than robbery.

It was a robbery on the basis that Burns clearly did not win 7 rounds. The fact you could award him 5 isn't the point here, he has no case to win the fight because the rounds he lost were not even close.

Your picking 115-113 due to it being the "popular score" but that due to giving the champ the close rounds. To be honest after the first two rounds I found it hard to give Burns a single round up until the 12th and I was praying that he could could it around.

This fight for me was in no way close. Burns for a start should have had multiple points deducted for his spoiling tactics. Why should that be combed over just because his jaw was broke. These things happen, but the ref was far to generous by just seperating and saying nothin. Towards the end I was wanting Ricky to retire or the fight be stopped because my gut feeling was that something like this was gonna happen and the outcome would have a massive negetive impact on Burns. If the fight had of went Belrans way then Burns could dust himself down and go for a rematch, another belt and still have support. But the decision has now left him like a sitting duck to people who love nothing more than to have a go at a fighter.

115-113 may be contentious when but in no way shape or form was this fight even in the area code for that kind of score. 116-111 is more like it.

Beltran didn't just win, he taught Burns a lesson and made him look like an amatuer

Thing is Truss, you can't make a case (unless you didn't watch) for Burns winning. He was down, he was hurt, he was all over the place. Beltran at no point showed he was going to lose, Burns did and was spoiling, holding and just terrible. I had Beltran by 4 rounds and that was being generous to Ricky.

I'd be in the 116-111 camp. I didn't think the fight was close. 8-4 to Beltran with Burns dropping another point for hitting the deck.

Beltran was completely dominant and Burns had no answer getting continually punched back onto the ropes from which he could not escape from without holding and fouling which he did all night.

115-113 is very generous to Burns. and even if Burns won 5 rounds it gives him no right to be given another couple he didn't win

115-112 felt about right, though, as others have mentioned, the closeness of the score doesn't do justice to how clearly Beltran won the fight overall.

Burns basically showed what a handicap it is to not have sufficient power to keep a fighter off you.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Have to be careful here because the most popular score is 115-113 by the look of it......

Which isn't a huge margin.........

Boxing I'm afraid is full of judges and referees looking to impress promoters..

Not only getting paid per job but getting expenses and decent hotels too...

The Captain made the statement he wanted to see proper training and ex-fighters doing it I believe.....nothing wrong with that!!
I'm more sceptical.......We all saw Beltran won and I believe the main problem is integrity..

Not competency

It's a strange time when I disagree with the Captain but the idea of having ex-fighters scoring fights is not going to get rid of poor decisions. In fact, I'd wager it will make things worse. Pressure fighters are always going to be swayed by other pressure fighters and score rounds for them despite having done nothing effective and the defensive fighters will favour their counterparts.

Like you say, it's currently filled with guys looking for a free lunch and as many gimmes from the promotors as possible and the chances of finding someone who is completely objective are disappearing fast it seems. I know we've discussed in the past on these boards, having judges locked away from the ring watching the fight on the same live feed that the home audience get so they can get a more accurate view of a fight as opposed to what they saw from their side of the ring but again, if a judge wants to curry favour with the promotor then that's what he'll do.

Poor night for Burns, Hearn and boxing in general. Makes me hope Floyd/Alvarez ends in a KO to avoid any further claims of incompetence.

Valid point, Dave. I'm slightly less wine-influenced now and recognise that there can't ever be a properly harmonious system. I still prefer to believe that it is man sausage-up rather than conspiracy, though - look at Ian John-Lewis as an example. No doubt a paragon of honesty, but basically hopeless as judge or referee.

A close fight can still give a definite winner i.e. Someone could clearly win 7 rounds without any doubt and be the clear winner but close on the scorecards.

Froch/Kessler was close in scoring IMO but Froch still clearly won.

I think all judges' scorecards should be published by the governing body with a short note on each round why it was scored the way it was. If scorecards are open to scrutiny this may help.

Valero's Conscience wrote:A close fight can still give a definite winner i.e. Someone could clearly win 7 rounds without any doubt and be the clear winner but close on the scorecards.

Froch/Kessler was close in scoring IMO but Froch still clearly won.

I think all judges' scorecards should be published by the governing body with a short note on each round why it was scored the way it was.  If scorecards are open to scrutiny this may help.

But there is always the excuse that he was looking at the fight from a different angle....The good work of the victim was obscured....

Maybe best to have a committee to award no decisions after the fact...for blatant scams........

I think they should be forced to wear earphones too...to stop crowd or perspective crowd influence..

earphones is a great idea, crowd noise can have a serious influence.