More on McDonnell v Kameda

Good evening gents. I'm a new poster here, though I have been reading posts on this board quite regularly since the old BBC days. (Our late friend Windy was always my favourite contributor to this forum.) I did think about signing up and posting a few articles of my own in the past, but I never bothered, for my knowledge of the sport is quite limited compared to that of many regular contributors here.

However, this recent debate on McDonnell and Kameda II made me think that I may have something to contribute here. I have lived in this country for quite a while, and I tend to follow and support British fighters more than the fighters from other countries (not always though, I can't wait to see Tyson Fury getting humbled and humiliated by the iron fists of Wlad, I was rooting for Kessler against Froch in both fights, and there are quite a few other guys such as Tony Bellow, Scott Harrison and so on whom I could never force myself
to be on their side), and yet I happen to have some Japanese heritage. I watched McDonnell v Kameda II (with a moderate level of interest), and while I agree with a view that there were several close rounds, I thought Jamie won it quite comfortably by at least 3 or 4
rounds. In the light of the debates which followed, and all this pro-Kameda view which many of our transatlantic friends expressed, I
took the liberty of checking up a few Japanese opinions on the matter. (Kameda, let us not forget, is not American, he is Japanese.)
I was pleasantly surprised to discover that the predominant view over there (of ex and current boxers, trainers, journalists, and the
public) is very similar to what you guys have been saying on this forum. Kameda started well, but Jamie took over after round 3, and
there was no question as to who the victor was that night. Kameda himself expressed his view that he could not complain about the
outcome, and he felt that he let down the other fighters whom he had previously beaten by getting beaten by McDonnell twice. (I don't think he was trying to belittle Jamie. He sounded as if he had felt - quite rightly - that McDonnell is not Mayweather, Pacquiao, Rigo or Donaire, meaning that he probably felt that he could have done a little better with the right game plan on his good night.)    

Isn't it odd? A Brit and a Japanese fought, all three judges gave it to the Brit, and a vast majority of the people in those two countries agree with the decision. And yet the Americans - both so called experts and the public - are claiming that it was a robbery... The only explanation which I could come up with is that the American television stations had an interest in Kamedas (there are 3 of them, all brothers) for financial reasons, which made their commentators to be heavily biased in favour of a Kameda, and the
average clueless viewers were influenced by the commentary. This is nothing new in boxing, of course, but I thought it is worthwhile sharing this with you lads.

Have a lovely weekend!

Thanks for the contribution and new angle.

Sadly, I've not even seen the second fight but have read the different threads, both USA and UK.

Somebody in the USA appears to have had plans for Kameda, as you say. The first fight was close and I thought Jamie did enough, although I wouldn't have been surprised if the result went the other way. But the second sounds like it was clear.

Thanks again for a good first contribution!

Very good first contribution, i really don't understand what the guys in the USA saw

Great first post!

As for why they thought it was a robbery, I'm convinced that after talking to some of them online, they just believe what the commentators described, I really didn't think it was that hard to score.

McDonnell just landed more punches and he also landed as clean, he also pushed the action the whole fight and controlled the ring (I have even had some people try to claim Kameda was the ring general!!! :|)

I just don't get it, nice to see a fresh perspective.

He was the ring general in the italian sense.... running backwards with a white flag.

Chris, whilst this was in many respects a commendable first post, I think you'll find this kind of thread - providing additional insight and new angles on a debate and presenting them in a measured and balanced manner - really has no place on this board.

Expect a banning order shortly.

Respected US reporter had Kameda winning handily in yesterday's BN. He wasn't privy to commentary (obviously).

There wasn't much in it in terms of quality scoring punches landed - however McDonnell just looked the boss and controlling the action - very difficult to have Kameda out in front from what I seen on the TV, may have been different in the arena.

Cheers, Rodders

I watched it. And I scored it, before I get to that thpugh, I want to make clear that the Amercian commentators that were used on Sky on Sunday night had McDonnell the clear winner. Now onto my scoring....

Its no secret on these boards, about my thoughts behind certain British fighters/hype jobs.

I scored the fight on an app on my phone (its called Fight Score - I recommend you download it, if you have already, it allows you to score any fight round by round and share your overall scores globally)

I scored it 117-111 in favour of McDonnell.

Anyone who said Kameda won that fight has lost the plot, he wasnt even the aggressor for a majority of rounds it was the defending champ that was the aggressor, and the knockdown in the 12th really cemented an easy points victory for Jamie.

I'm just glad level headed judges gave the fight to the right and worthy winner.

And as an aside on Fight Score the global consensus was 118-110 (average of people registered with Fight Score around the world).

Malignaggi and hunter are respected by many too. I personally have never seen such an uncontroversial fight (in my eyes) be seen as controversial.

Kameda and his trainer said after the fight, they thought he'd won. Their demeanour towards the end of the fight suggested otherwise.

The only possible explanation could be that guys at ringside saw punches miss that looked like they landed on TV. But really with so few shots from kameda landing at all, I still can't see how McDonnell wouldn't be getting the rounds on workrate, generalship whatever. He absolutely controlled the tempo of the fight and was the guy pressing the action.

Its also very rare you get such a unified view on a fight on these boards

hazharrison wrote:Respected US reporter had Kameda winning handily in yesterday's BN. He wasn't privy to commentary (obviously).

Ditto Fat Dan.

so a respected US reporter... and fat dan

They get paid to have an opinion Milky so must know what they're talking about.

Another spin is haymon has invested in kameda and a influenced them

Dunno I tried discussing it and got the general spiel of you are a casual fan

I'll have to download that app for the weekend

milkyboy wrote:He was the ring general in the italian sense.... running backwards with a white flag.

Chris, whilst this was in many respects a commendable first post, I think you'll find this kind of thread -  providing additional insight and new angles on a debate and presenting them in a measured and balanced manner - really has no place on this board.

Expect a banning order shortly.

Making jokes that only you yourself would find funny is a wise course, then sometimes you luck out and crack someone else up