now all Lampley and Lederman and Merchant can talk about is how the more aggressive fighter, the guy making the fight, should be awarded the rounds and the fight? Does their scoring criteria vary according to who is on that week or what's the deal?
Please don't try to tell me your comparing Mayweathers performance to Spinks.......
i'm just saying, that their point was that any close round should go to the aggressor, and that wasn't their view in the DLH/Mayweather fight, in which they gave all the close rounds to Mayweather, including one round that DLH outlanded Mayweather
they feel the round should goto who they want to keep to make more $$$
before it started, i was confused as to who's nuts the announcers would hang from in the dlh/mayweather fight.
"they feel the round should goto who they want to keep to make more $$$"
that's the fucking truth right there. its just so crazy to watch them do a complete 180 from one show to the next and show no awareness of it
"i'm just saying, that their point was that any close round should go to the aggressor,"
I think their point was when you have a guy running for the hills like Spinks was all night long he shouldn't win the rounds. It was not the same situation with ODH/Mayweather. ODH was the aggressor and Floyd was the counterpuncher, but in no way was Floyd anywhere near as ineffective as Spinks was.
Merchant said the exact same thing about the aggressor winning the close rounds at the start of the broadcast before either of the fights
I agree Mayweather was more effective than Spinks, but there were plenty of rounds where he was doing just as little, especially in the first half of the fight