Open Scoring in Boxing: Yes or No? Part Two of a TSS Survey

Published

6 years ago

October 3, 2018

Ted Sares

(PART TWO: M-W): We asked 48 noted boxing buffs how they felt about open scoring. Specifically we asked, “Are you in favor of open scoring whereby the scores of the judges would be revealed after each round or at one or more intervals during the fight? If so, why? If not, why not?”

The respondents are listed alphabetically. Part One (A-L) ran yesterday (Tuesday, Oct. 2). Here’s the concluding segment. A hearty thanks to all that took the time to share their thoughts.

ADEYINKA MAKINDE—U.K. barrister, writer and contributor to the forthcoming Cambridge Companion to Boxing. Open scoring would detract from the drama of what the final decision will be should the fight endure to the allocated distance. So entertainment wise, it is not of particular value. Neither is its value enhanced in so far as the notion that it might improve the quality of judging. After all, the idea surely is not to put pressure on a judge whose scoring appears off base to a section of the crowd, or to substitute judges mid-fight for “getting things wrong.” This is a non-issue. Instead the focus should be on determining the professional competence of judges as well as their integrity.

JOHN McKALE–prominent boxing judge: No, 100% not in favor. The mind through the eyes of each judge should not be compromised by anything, including what the other judges may be determining.

PAUL MAGNO–author, writer and boxing official in Mexico: I don’t like open scoring. It does absolutely nothing to help the integrity of judging, but it ruins some key elements of intrigue and suspense when it comes to the fight and the announcing of a winner. If boxing is serious about judging reform, then they need to do the only thing that matters– overhaul the entire incestuous system and create more of a separation between the promoters and the selection of officials.

SCOOP MALINOWSKI—boxing writer, author, “Mr. Biofile”: Open scoring is just another system that can be corrupted and surely will be corrupted. I’d rather see former pro boxers and champions in the role as judges, but they can be corrupted too.

LARRY MERCHANT—HBO boxing commentator emeritus; 2009 IBHOF inductee: I’m opposed to open scoring because I witnessed a couple of such experiments that fell flat. Either the winning fighter, knowing the score, coasted through the late rounds and/or the losing fighter failed to respond, accepting defeat. The drama of uncertainty works best in prize fighting.

ROBERT MLADINICH — former NYPD police detective, author and boxing writer: I am not in favor of open scoring because awaiting a close decision is much of the fun of a good, close fight. Unfortunately the judges often get it wrong, which ruins the entire experience. That does not justify the open scoring. There should just be better judges.

HARRY OTTY—author, historian, part-time boxing coach: Absolutely in favor of ‘open scoring.’ How many close fights may have had a different result if the corner that felt they were ahead knew, without doubt, that they were actually behind with a couple of rounds left in the fight? I have coached amateur boxers for over 30 years and the closed scoring sucks – corruption is also rife. The best period we had was when the computer scoring (a button-push for each punch landed – not an ideal set up) was revealed at the end of each round. If you lost the first of three you at least had the option to alter tactics. Boxers/coaches who can adapt to what is happening as a result of the known score would also be proving their skill/superiority in the ring. TACTICS! From an open and transparent perspective it may have the side effect of making all judges (promoters/governing bodies) more accountable.

MARY ANN LURIE OWEN–boxing photojournalist extraordinaire: In 12-round title fights, scores should be announced after the 4th and 8th rounds.

JOE PASQUALE – prominent judge and recent NJ Boxing Hall of Fame inductee: As a fan, my thoughts are that this is the one sport that holds the suspense of the outcome until the third judge’s score is read by the ring announcer. Also, I have worked a few of these score progressions announced throughout the fight. The fighter with the big lead going into the later rounds just stopped engaging and coasted the last few rounds, taking the edge off a good fight with the possibility of a stoppage going into that tough 12th round.

DAVID PAYNE—U.K. boxing writer: I’m not in favor. Open scoring impacts intent of fighters and crowd reaction impacts officials.

J. RUSSELL PELTZ—venerable Philadelphia boxing promoter and 2004 IBHOF inductee: Terrible idea. A boxer with a big lead avoids contact down the stretch. Takes away suspense. Better solution is to get better judges.

ADAM POLLACK–author, publisher, and boxing official: There are pros and cons. The pro is it would allow the fighter who was behind to make adjustments and potentially fight harder, because it would make him realize that what he was doing was not as effective in the judges’ minds as he thought it was. On the other hand, it can allow one fighter to coast if he realizes he is well ahead, which can cause fights to become boring, and it eliminates the drama. When neither knows whether or not they are ahead, they fight harder, fearing the unknown. But what boxing really should do is stop using incompetent judges, and bring back the 15-round championship fight. Open scoring simply shows the fighters and the world how terrible the judging is as it is happening. It doesn’t change the fact of bad judging.

BRIAN POWERS–former fighter: Show them so the fighter knows and can turn it up if he’s behind.

JACQUIE RICHARDSON–Executive Director, Retired Boxers Foundation: I fail to see what difference that would make. Good judges will be good judges and bad judges will remain bad judges. The only positive outcome would be if the corners know, and the boxers come out and make adjustments to more convincingly win rounds. Another positive thing would be to see if the judges know what ring generalship is and the real difference between power shots and pity-pats.

CLIFF ROLD—boxing writer; founding member of the Transnational Boxing Rankings Board: I’m not in favor of open scoring of any kind/time. I think it changes the approach of fighters and those with leads have an impetus to disengage. That’s bad for the entertainment factor. The second Bell-Mormeck fight at cruiserweight soured me on it. It went from eight rounds of all-out war to a chase scene.

FREDERICK ROMANO–former ESPN researcher and author: My general feeling is I don’t believe it is necessary. It cuts both ways. Knowing a fight is dead even going into the last round could lead to some supreme efforts. It also might result in over-caution. However, I would like to hear from the fighters themselves as to whether they are in favor of it. Would they find it beneficial from a strategic standpoint? If they do, maybe we need to depart from tradition. I think what might be more important is that we improve the quality of judging. With quality judging the need for open scoring is mitigated. Also, using five judges for championship bouts might be helpful to reduce the potential impact of corruption and would overcome even two poor scorecards, saving some bouts from the wrong result.

DANA ROSENBLATT–former world middleweight champion; inspirational speaker: I am not in favor of open scoring. Although potential corruption is shrouded in part by allowing scoring to be done in a way that no one knows until the fight is over, I am not in favor of it. Instead, how about mandating that judges for all boxing matches are selected exclusively by the state boxing commissions of the states where the matches take place and not the promoters? I think this would make a difference.

LEE SAMUELS–veteran Top Rank publicist: We wouldn’t change it. There is always suspense how a fight is being scored. And in today’s world of Twitter, the top ringside writers tweet how they are scoring – that is good enough for me and for the fans who are watching.

TED SARES–TSS writer: In general, I dislike the concept but I’d be willing to see how allowing the scores to be read at the end of three rounds in ten-round fights and at the end of four in 12-round fights would work out—on a six-month trial basis.

ICEMAN JOHN SCULLY—former boxer, trainer, commentator, he’s done it all: There is no way open scoring should be allowed. It would kill all the potential for great drama in the sport of boxing. If it were implemented, it would backfire catastrophically.

MICHAEL SILVER–author, historian: I think it warrants an experiment for several months and in all fights to see how open scoring affects the fighters, corner men and fans in the arena. Mixed feelings about it but worth a try and then evaluate.

ALLAN SWYER–documentary filmmaker, writer, and producer of the acclaimed El Boxeo:Remember Oscar dancing away rounds because he knew he was far ahead in points? We’ll see far more of that kind of behavior with open scoring. My answer is a resounding NO!

DONALD L. TRELLA–prominent boxing judge: I am not a proponent of open scoring. I think part of the excitement that is generated by boxing is the announcement of the winner at the end of the fight. Everyone is on edge and anxious to hear the scores. There are also many ways a fighter can use open scoring to their advantage and diminish the action. For example, if a fighter is way ahead after seven rounds and has a shutout going, what’s the benefit of mixing it up the rest of the way? The fighter in the lead could just dance and stay out of the fray for the remaining five rounds leading to a very boring bout. Another example might be where a fighter is injured by an accidental foul. After four rounds are completed and he knows he’s ahead, he may say he can’t continue due to the injury and win the fight knowing what the score is after 4 rounds. What if a judge realizes he is wide compared to the other judges, does he start to score rounds differently to bring his or her scoring more in line with the other two judges? Very little upside… lots of down side. I actually could go on and on with a lot of examples.

GARY “DIGITAL” WILLIAMS— the voice of “Boxing on the Beltway”: I am totally against open scoring. This takes the excitement of wondering what the final judge’s score will be. Back in April of 1999, there was the Triple Jeopardy card in DC where they tried three types of open scoring — announcing the score after four rounds, after six rounds and after every round. Mark Johnson’s bout was the one tried after every round. After the bout, Mark told me that he knew after about eight rounds that he was well ahead on points so he just coasted to the win. Fans did not get a chance to see his true greatness. Open scoring just does not work on any level.

BEAU WILLIFORD–former trainer and the glue of boxing in Cajun Country: I favor open scoring either way. I think open scoring would provide better boxing matches!

PETER WOOD–former fighter, writer,author: I’m all for the transparency of open scoring, but it wouldn’t work the way we would like. A boxing match’s emotionally-charged environment can be dangerous—and VERY dangerous to a judge who doesn’t score a round like the crowd wants it to be scored. The masses are asses and judges would be too easily influenced and swayed for their own safety

OBSERVATIONS:

Those opposed to Open Scoring overwhelmed those for it by a margin of 40-9. Jim Lampley said he was against it because it kills suspense for fans, places fighters at risk if they fall behind and then take risks not warranted by their abilities, while conversely encouraging a leading fighter to take fewer risks — and risk is at the heart of the sport. Larry Merchant added that he had witnessed a couple of such experiments that fell flat. Either the winning fighter, knowing the score, coasted through the late rounds and/or the losing fighter failed to respond, accepting defeat. The drama of uncertainty works best in prize fighting. J. Russell Peltz, in common with several other respondents, said a better solution is to get better judges. Another frequently-heard comment was pinpointed colorfully by Peter Wood: “A boxing match’s emotionally-charged environment can be dangerous—and VERY dangerous to a judge who doesn’t score a round like the crowd wants it to be scored.” And Steve Farhood summed things up nicely by stating, “..it places undue pressure on the judges and eliminates one of the most dramatic moments in boxing–when the ring announcer reads the final scores in a close fight.”

Some of those in favor, such as Bill Caplan and Mary Ann Owen, favored the WBC plan of open scoring during intervals, rather than after every round. And others thought there would be value in trying it for a trial period.

Ted Sares is one of the oldest active power lifters and is the oldest Strongman competitor in the United States. He recently won the Maine State Championship in his class. He is a member of Ring 4 and its Boxing Hall of Fame.

Photo: Julio Cesar Chavez and Pernell Whitaker battle to a controversial draw in San Antonio.

Check out more boxing news on video at The Boxing Channel

To comment on this article at The Fight Forum, CLICK HERE.

Post Views: 1,817

Share The Sweet Science experience!

Ted Sares

Up Next

Giant Heavyweights Wilder and Fury Start a Rumpus at L.A. Press Confab

Don't Miss

Are You in Favor or Against Open Scoring in Boxing? Results of a TSS Survey

Boxing Odds and Ends: Mikaela Mayer on Jonas vs. Price and More

Published

4 hours ago

March 4, 2025

Arne K. Lang

Boxing-Odds-and-Ends-Mikaela-Mayer-on-Jonas-vs-Price-and-More

The marquee match on this week’s fight docket takes place on Friday at London’s historic Royal Albert Hall where Natasha Jonas (16-2-1, 9 KOs) meets Lauren Price (9-0, 2 KOs). At stake are three of the four meaningful pieces of the female world welterweight title.

Price, an Olympic gold medalist in Tokyo and arguably the best all-around female athlete ever from Wales, holds the WBC and IBF versions of the title. Liverpool’s Jonas, unbeaten in her last seven since losing a narrow decision to Katie Taylor, holds the WBA belt.

Southern California native Mikaela Mayer owns the other piece of the 147-pound puzzle. If Mayer can get over her next hump – a rematch with Sandy Ryan – she would be in line to fight the Price-Jonas winner for the undisputed title. She and Ryan will collide on the 29^th of this month on a Top Rank card at the Fontainebleau in Las Vegas.

We caught up with Mikaela yesterday (Monday, Feb. 3) after she had finished a strenuous workout at the DLX Gym in Las Vegas to get her thoughts on the Jonas-Price encounter. Mikaela has a history with Jonas. They fought in January of last year on Jonas’s turf in Liverpool and Mayer came out on the short end of a very close and somewhat controversial decision.

Price is favored in the 4/1 range. To the oddsmakers, it matters greatly that there is a 10-year gap in their ages. Natasha Jonas turned 40 last year. However, Mayer, who would tell you that female boxers as a rule peak later than men (they take less damage because they don’t hit as hard and they absorb fewer punches fighting two-minute rounds) believes that the odds are askew.

“In my mind, this is a 50/50 fight,” she says. “Price’s former opponents were right there to be hit. Jonas doesn’t have a lot of wear and tear and I believe she has better spatial awareness inside the ring. The key will be if she can handle Price’s movement. I can see Price winning but, in my mind, she is no shoo-in. I think it will be a close fight.”

Carson Jones

Bobby Dobbs, the former manager of Carson Jones, has set up a Go Fund Me page in the name of Jones’ mother to defray the boxer’s funeral expenses. The Oklahoma City journeyman, active as recently as 2023, passed away on Feb. 28 at age 38 following an operation for achalasia, a rare swallowing disorder.

We are reminded that among Jones’ 38 wins was a match that originally went into the books as a “no-decision.” Nowadays, it’s no big surprise when a victory is amended to a “no-decision” – the adjudication usually comes after the fact because of a failed drug test – but the opposite is very uncommon.

The bout in question happened on May 5, 2011 in a hotel ballroom in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Jones was defending his USBA welterweight title against Ohio campaigner Michael Clark.

In the second round, Jones landed a punch that hit Clark in the family jewels and Clark wasn’t able to continue. The Oklahoma commission overturned the “no-decision” upon learning that Clark had forgot to bring his groin protector.

Fighter of the Month

The TSS Fighter of the Month for February is Keyshawn Davis who unseated WBO lightweight champion Denys Berinchyk on Bob Arum’s Valentine’s Day card before a sold-out crowd at Madison Square Garden’s Hulu Theater. It was the first world title for Davis, the former Olympic silver medalist who had the noted trainer Brian “Bomac” McIntyre in his corner.

Davis was a solid favorite. At age 36, his Ukrainian opponent had a lot of mileage on his odometer (Berinchyk purportedly had in the vicinity of 400 amateur fights). However, Berinchyk was also undefeated (19-0) and wasn’t expected to be such an easy mark.

Davis decked Berinchyk with a left hook to the liver in the third round and ended the contest with the same punch, only harder, in the next frame.

A pre-fight story in Forbes called Keyshawn Davis a mega-star on the cusp. It remains to be seen if he has the personality to transcend the sport, but one thing that’s certain is that he has made great gains since his Oct. 14, 2023 bout in Rosenberg, Texas with Nahir Albright. That fight went the full “10” and although Davis won, it transmuted into a “no-decision” after he tested positive for marijuana, a substance banned by the hidebound Texas commission.

Ketchel

A note from matchmaker, booking agent, and boxing historian Bruce Kielty informs us that the Polish Historical Society of Grand Rapids, Michigan, is $1,025 short of the $2,000 required to produce a new concrete base at the tombstone of Stanley Ketchel at Grand Rapids Holy Cross Cemetery.

Ketchel, the fabled “Michigan Assassin,” was born Stanislaw Kiecel in Grand Rapids in 1886. A two-time world middleweight champion, he was the premier knockout artist of his era, scoring 46 of his 49 wins inside the distance.

Ketchel was murdered in 1910 while staying at the ranch of a wealthy friend near Springfield, Missouri. The great sportswriter John Lardner revisited the incident and Ketchel’s tumultuous career in a widely anthologized 1954 story for True magazine. Lardner’s opening sentence is considered by some aficionados to be the best lede ever in a sports story: “Stanley Ketchel was twenty-four years old when he was fatally shot in the back by the common-law husband of the lady who was cooking his breakfast.”

The collar of Ketchel’s tombstone is cracked, weather-damaged, and falling apart. Any donation, however small, is welcomed. Contributions made by check should include the note “Ketchel Monument.” The address is Polish Historical Society, P.O. Box 1844, Grand Rapids, MI 49501.

To comment on this story in the Fight Forum CLICK HERE

Post Views: 179

Share The Sweet Science experience!

Lamont Roach holds Tank Davis to a Draw in Brooklyn

Published

2 days ago

March 2, 2025

David A. Avila

Lamont Roach holds Tank Davis to a Draw in Brooklyn

They just know each other, too well.

Longtime neighborhood rivals Gervonta “Tank” Davis and Lamont Roach met on the biggest stage and despite 12 rounds of back-and-forth action could not determine a winner as the WBA lightweight title fight was ruled a majority draw on Saturday.

The title does not change hands.

Davis (30-0-1, 28 KOs) and Roach (25-1-2, 10 KOs) no longer live and train in the same Washington D.C. hood, but even in front of a large crowd at Barclays Center in Brooklyn, they could not distinguish a clear winner.

“We grew up in the sport together,” explained Davis who warned fans of Roach’s abilities.

Davis entered the ring defending the WBA lightweight title and Roach entered as a WBA super featherweight titlist moving up a weight division. Davis was a large 10-1 favorite according to oddsmakers.

The first several rounds were filled with feints and stance reshuffling for a tactical advantage. Both tested each other’s reflexes and counter measures to determine if either had picked up any new moves or gained new power.

Neither champion wanted to make a grave error.

“I was catching him with some clean shots. But he kept coming so I didn’t want to make no mistakes,” said Davis of his cautionary approach.

By the third round Davis opened-up with a more aggressive approach, especially with rocket lefts. Though some connected, Roach retaliated with counters to offset Davis’s speedy work. It was a theme repeated round after round.

Roach had never been knocked out and showed a very strong chin even against his old pal. He also seemed to know exactly where Davis would be after unloading one of his patented combinations and would counter almost every time with precise blows.

It must have been unnerving for Davis.

Back and forth they exchanged and during one lightning burst by Davis, his rival countered perfectly with a right that shook and surprised Davis.

Davis connected often with shots to the body and head, but Roach never seemed rattled or stunned. Instead, he immediately countered with his own blows and connected often.

It was bewildering.

In a strange moment at the beginning of the ninth round, after a light exchange of blows Davis took a knee and headed to his corner to get his face wiped. It was only after the fight completed that he revealed hair product was stinging his eye. That knee gesture was not called a knockdown by the referee Steve Willis.

“It should be a knockdown. But I’m not banking on that knockdown to win,” said Roach.

The final three rounds saw each fighter erupt with blinding combinations only to be countered. Both fighters connected but remained staunchly upright.

“For sure Lamont is a great fighter, he got the skills, punching power it was a learned lesson,” said Davis after the fight.

Both felt they had won the fight but are willing to meet again.

“I definitely thought I won, but we can run it back,” said Roach who beforehand told fans and experts he could win the fight. “I got the opportunity to show everybody.”

He also showed a stunned crowd he was capable of at least a majority draw after 12 back-and-forth rounds against rival Davis. One judge saw Davis the winner 115-113 but two others saw it 114-114 for the majority draw.

“Let’s have a rematch in New York City. Let’s bring it back,” said Davis.

Imagine, after 20 years or so neighborhood rivals Davis and Roach still can’t determine who is better.

Other Bouts

Gary Antuanne Russell (18-1, 17 KOs) surprised Jose “Rayo” Valenzuela (14-3, 9 KOs) with a more strategic attack and dominated the WBC super lightweight championship fight between southpaws to win by unanimous decision after 12 rounds.

If Valenzuela expected Russell to telegraph his punches like Isaac Cruz did when they fought in Los Angeles, he was greatly surprised. The Maryland fighter known for his power rarely loaded up but simply kept his fists in Valenzuela’s face with short blows and seldom left openings for counters.

It was a heady battle plan.

It wasn’t until the final round that Valenzuela was able to connect solidly and by then it was too late. Russell’s chin withstood the attack and he walked away with the WBC title by unanimous decision.

Despite no knockdowns Russell was deemed the winner 119-109 twice and 120-108.

“This is a small stepping stone. I’m coming for the rest of the belts,” said Russell. “In this sport you got to have a type of mentality and he (Valenzuela) brought it out of me.”

Dominican Republic’s Alberto Puello (24-0, 10 KOs) won the battle between slick southpaws against Spain’s Sandor Martin (42-4,15 KOs) by split decision to keep the WBC super lightweight in a back-and-forth struggle that saw neither able to pull away.

Though Puello seemed to have the faster hands Martin’s defense and inside fighting abilities gave the champion problems. It was only when Puello began using his right jab as a counter-punch did he give the Spanish fighter pause.

Still, Martin got his licks in and showed a very good chin when smacked by Puello. Once he even shook his head as if to say those power shots can’t hurt me.

Neither fighter ever came close to going down as one judge saw Martin the winner 115-113, but two others favored Puello 115-113, 116-112 who retains the world title by split decision.

Cuba’s Yoenis Tellez (10-0, 7 KOs) showed that his lack of an extensive pro resume could not keep him from handling former champion Julian “J-Rock” Williams (29-5-1) by unanimous decision to win an interim super welterweight title.

Tellez had better speed and sharp punches especially with the uppercuts. But he ran out of ideas when trying to press and end the fight against the experienced Williams. After 12 rounds and no knockdowns all three judges saw Tellez the winner 119-109, 118-110, 117-111.

Ro comment on this story in the Fight Forum CLICK HERE

Post Views: 1,572

Share The Sweet Science experience!

Dueling Cards in the U.K. where Crocker Controversially Upended Donovan in Belfast

Published

3 days ago

March 1, 2025

Arne K. Lang

Dueling-Cards-in-the-UK-where-Crocker-Upended-Donovan-Controversially-in-Belfast

Great Britain’s Top Promoters, Eddie Hearn and Frank Warren, went head-to-head today on DAZN with fight cards in Belfast, Northern Ireland (Hearn) and Bournemouth, England (Warren). Hearn’s show, topped by an all-Ireland affair between undefeated welterweights Lewis Crocker (Belfast) and Paddy Donovan (Limerick) was more compelling and produced more drama.

Those who wagered on Donovan, who could have been procured at “even money,” suffered a bad beat when he was disqualified after the eighth frame. To that point, Donovan was well ahead on the cards despite having two points deducted from his score for roughhousing, more specially leading with his head and scraping Crocker’s damaged eye with his elbow.

Fighting behind a high guard, Crocker was more economical. But Donovan landed more punches and the more damaging punches. A welt developed under Crocker’s left eye in round four and had closed completely when the bout was finished. By then, Donovan had scored two knockdowns, both in the eighth round. The first was a sweeping right hook followed by a left to the body. The second, another sweeping right hook, clearly landed a second after the bell and referee Michael McConnell disqualified him.

Donovan, who was fit to be tied, said, “I thought I won every round. I beat him up. I was going to knock him out.”

It was the first loss for Paddy Donovan (14-1), a 26-year-old southpaw trained by fellow Irish Traveler Andy Lee. By winning, the 28-year-old Crocker (21-0, 11 KOs) became the mandatory challenger for the winner of the April 12 IBF welterweight title fight between Boots Ennis and Eimantas Stanionis.

Co-Feature

In a light heavyweight contest between two boxers in their mid-30’s, London’s Craig Richards scored an eighth-round stoppage of Belfast’s Padraig McCrory. Richards, who had faster hands and was more fluid, ended the contest with a counter left hook to the body. Referee Howard Foster counted the Irishman out at the 1:58 mark of round 10.

Richards, who improved to 19-4-1 (12 KOs) was a consensus 9/5 favorite in large part because he had fought much stiffer competition. All four of his losses had come in 12-round fights including a match with Dmitry Bivol.

Also

In a female bout slated for “10,” Turkish campaigner Elif Nur Turhan (10-0, 6 KOs) blasted out heavily favored Shauna Browne (5-1) in the opening round. “Remember the name,” said Eddie Hearn who envisions a fight between the Turk and WBC world lightweight title-holder Caroline Dubois who defends her title on Friday against South Korean veteran Bo Mi Re Shin at Prince Albert Hall.

Bournemouth

Ryan Garner, who hails from the nearby coastal city of Southampton and reportedly sold 1,500 tickets, improved to 17-0 (8) while successfully defending his European 130-pound title with a 12-round shutout of sturdy but limited Salvador Jiminez (14-0-1) who was making his first start outside his native Spain.

Garner has a style reminiscent of former IBF world flyweight title-holder Sunny Edwards. He puts his punches together well, has good footwork and great stamina, but his lack of punching power may prevent him from going beyond the domestic level.

Co-Feature

In a ho-hum light heavyweight fight, Southampton’s Lewis Edmondson won a lopsided 12-round decision over Oluwatosin Kejawa. The judges had it 120-110, 119-109, and 118-110.

A consensus 10/1 favorite, Edmondson, managed by Billy Joe Saunders, improved to 11-0 (8) while successfully defending the Commonwealth title he won with an upset of Dan Azeez. Kejawa was undefeated in 11 starts heading in, but those 11 wins were fashioned against palookas who were collectively 54-347-9 at the time that he fought them.

An 8-rounder between Joe Joyce and 40-year-old trial horse Patrick Korte was scratched as a safety precaution. The 39-year-old Joyce, coming off a bruising tiff with Derek Chisora, has a date in Manchester in five weeks with rugged Dillian Whyte in the opposite corner.

Photo credit: Mark Robinson / Matchroom

To comment on this story in the Fight Forum CLICK HERE

Post Views: 679

Share The Sweet Science experience!