|
|
Post by jr on Mar 23, 2007 0:35:42 GMT -5
Holly Holm was awarded the decision over Ann Marie Saccurato with scores of 98-91 (twice) and 97-92.
I scored the fight with rounds 1,7, and 10 even; rounds 3,6, and 9 for Holm; and rounds 2,4,5, and 8 for Saccurato for a score of 96-95 for Saccurato.
Even with a point deduction in round 7 against Saccurato, the round was even at 9-9. The referee ignored Holm's holding the back of Saccurato's head in round 8.
The expressions on the faces of the fighters told the story. Saccurato was understandably upset at the decision. Holm looked stunned and relieved that she won the decision by the ridiculous scores. The broadcasters scored the fight much closer to my scoring. Saccurato won the fight, lost the decision.
Welcome to Albuquerque.
|
|
|
|
Post by TD on Mar 23, 2007 0:56:42 GMT -5
Holly Holm was awarded the decision over Ann Marie Saccurato with scores of 98-91 (twice) and 97-92. I scored the fight with rounds 1,7, and 10 even; rounds 3,6, and 9 for Holm; and rounds 2,4,5, and 8 for Saccurato for a score of 96-95 for Saccurato. Even with a point deduction in round 7 against Saccurato, the round was even at 9-9. The referee ignored Holm's holding the back of Saccurato's head in round 8. The expressions on the faces of the fighters told the story. Saccurato was understandably upset at the decision. Holm looked stunned and relieved that she won the decision by the ridiculous scores. The broadcasters scored the fight much closer to my scoring. Saccurato won the fight, lost the decision. Welcome to Albuquerque. JR, I scored it 96 - 95 for Saccurato. The judges scores of 98-91 and 97-92 for Holm are an outrage. While Ann looked clumsey bull rushing Holm, she made the fight and had no choice as Holm is a runner. Holm threw more than a few very effective counter right hooks ( she's a lefty) which are hard to do, and Ann scored with plenty of lead right hands, which is esay to do. The 8 th round where Ann was penalized I scored 10-10 before the penalty making it a Holm round. What I could not believe is how few straight lefts Holm threw, very strange. On two occasions Holm actually had Ann trapped in the corner and she backed away. Not the stuff a winner does and definetly NOT the stuff a champion does. FOX, being nice to their hosts, scored the fight for Hom by a point ( I think a point). They went out of their way to praise Holm, point out her infrequent scores and generally give everything they could to Holm. In any other city, Holm loses that fight. While I heard plenty of cheering for Holm at the end, there were a few BOOs. At least somebody in the audience was fair. It once again brings up the HOMER EFFECT, THE PROMOTERS GIRL SCHEME and really questions what kind of fighter Holm is in that she has fought EVERY boxing match at home or holm, how ever you like. Hats off to Ms Saccurato, you fought great, you made the fight, you landed more shots and more powerful ones, you took a few too. What was especially galling was to watch Holm RUN the entire 10th round. It was as if she was told, WE GOT IT IN THE BAG. I would be interested in hearing Ryan's take. He was there wrapping a belt around Holm. I do like both ladies energy, just that Ann channeled hers into fighting, Holm spent more of hers running. TD |
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Wissow on Mar 23, 2007 1:15:02 GMT -5
i thought Holly deserved to win the decision, but it was closer then what the scores were.
i had it 97-94 for Holly Holm, but Ann Marie Saccurato made it a very interesting and entertaining fight.
i look forward to seeing how the fight looked on TV, unfortunately the main event ran overtime and my VCR will have cut off at around the 7th or 8th round. hopefully i will find someone who taped the whole show, preferably on DVD.
RYAN
|
|
|
|
Post by Bernie McCoy on Mar 23, 2007 6:04:29 GMT -5
Holm/Saccurato is the prima facie case for the problem with hometown venues. Yes, Holm won, by the slimmest of margins, but to give Saccurato one round (8-1-1 with a point deducted) is beyond absurd.
The fault lies not inside the ring but with the doorknobs posing as boxing judges at ringside. However, this is proof positive that Holly Holm, if she wishes to be considered a force in the sport of Women's boxing, has to emerge from New Mexico for future bouts. The alternative is that the top fighters refuse to go to Albuquerque, where it is fast becoming apparent they are two rounds behind before the first bell.
A great night at the fights tarnished.
Bernie
|
|
|
|
Post by jr on Mar 23, 2007 7:05:09 GMT -5
Holm/Saccurato is the prima facie case for the problem with hometown venues. Yes, Holm won, by the slimmest of margins, but to give Saccurato one round (8-1-1 with a point deducted) is beyond absurd. The fault lies not inside the ring but with the doorknobs posing as boxing judges at ringside. However, this is proof positive that Holly Holm, if she wishes to be considered a force in the sport of Women's boxing, has to emerge from New Mexico for future bouts. The alternative is that the top fighters refuse to go to Albuquerque, where it is fast becoming apparent they are two rounds behind before the first bell. A great night at the fights tarnished. Bernie With this bout, Holm's last seven opponents have reason to complain about Albuquerque judging. I hope Ann Marie Saccurato demonstrates her courage outside the ring and "tells it like it is" in post-fight interviews. I think Holm's opponents are behind more than two rounds at the start of the bouts. Predicting a winner in a Holm contest is about 100 percent accurate with her Promoter's Advantage. Without this advantage, Saccurato would be the titleholder today. |
|
|
|
Post by B. Singh on Mar 23, 2007 7:34:40 GMT -5
i thought Holly deserved to win the decision, but it was closer then what the scores were. i had it 97-94 for Holly Holm, but Ann Marie Saccurato made it a very interesting and entertaining fight. RYAN Ryan, Its no surprise to me that you always think the LOSER is the WINNER. The scoring was messed up. Tough luck for Saccurato, but I would think by now that any fighter that goes to Holly's hometown should know that they have to walk with a 'big stick' to knock the crap out of Holly to win. |
|
|
|
Post by Bobby Dobbs on Mar 23, 2007 8:59:59 GMT -5
Mia St. John is the worst announcer ever. She thought Chavez won and was the "more skilled boxer" that is so goofy. I wish she would go away.
BD
|
|
|
|
Post by TD on Mar 23, 2007 10:36:39 GMT -5
i thought Holly deserved to win the decision, but it was closer then what the scores were. i had it 97-94 for Holly Holm, but Ann Marie Saccurato made it a very interesting and entertaining fight. i look forward to seeing how the fight looked on TV, unfortunately the main event ran overtime and my VCR will have cut off at around the 7th or 8th round. hopefully i will find someone who taped the whole show, preferably on DVD. RYAN Ryan, Really 97-94 HOLM?!?!?!? You need glasses, er, NEW glasses. Were you writing down your numbers between rounds? To hear the "judges" score it 98 -91 and 97-92...they should get hauled before a real judge for robbery. IT HURTS WOMEN'S BOXING TO SEE THAT KIND OF SCORING. ANN MARIE WAS MUGGED IN ALBQ. ( plenty of other women wear the same t-shirt with their name in place of ann's). TO ANN MARIE- YOU FOUGHT YOUR ASS OFF AND YOU WON! TD |
|
|
|
Post by TD on Mar 23, 2007 10:40:06 GMT -5
Mia St. John is the worst announcer ever. She thought Chavez won and was the "more skilled boxer" that is so goofy. I wish she would go away. BD Bobby...but she's such a GREAT "fighter". So of course she makes a great commentator. Who throws the best left arm swipe in the world of women's boxing...? TD |
|
|
|
Post by Rick Scharmberg on Mar 24, 2007 5:53:58 GMT -5
HOLY HEIDI BOWL BATMAN! Fox sports cut the d*amn main event off after 7 rounds to show their sports recap show! I had Holm ahead at that point.
(maybe it was one of those live updates-I better go back and check)
|
|
|
|
Post by Rick Scharmberg on Mar 24, 2007 5:57:12 GMT -5
Mia St. John is the worst announcer ever. She thought Chavez won and was the "more skilled boxer" that is so goofy. I wish she would go away. BD Bobby...but she's such a GREAT "fighter". So of course she makes a great commentator. Who throws the best left arm swipe in the world of women's boxing...? TD Correction: Who throws the best left D*AMN arm swipe in the world |
|
|
|
Post by Bernie McCoy on Mar 24, 2007 15:34:09 GMT -5
Terrific stuff, Rick, "A" material. You forgot to add: "I'm here all week and be sure to tip your waitress."
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Wissow on Mar 24, 2007 20:32:14 GMT -5
i thought Holly deserved to win the decision, but it was closer then what the scores were. i had it 97-94 for Holly Holm, but Ann Marie Saccurato made it a very interesting and entertaining fight. RYAN Ryan, Its no surprise to me that you always think the LOSER is the WINNER. The scoring was messed up. Tough luck for Saccurato, but I would think by now that any fighter that goes to Holly's hometown should know that they have to walk with a 'big stick' to knock the crap out of Holly to win. ==Dude, did you even see this fight? you are in Trinidad so i seriously doubt it. for what its worth, i thought Yvonne Caples beat Ria in their fight, but i am not a judge and my opinion doesnt effect the judges scoring of a fight.== RYAN |
|
|
|
Post by Christian Brown on Mar 24, 2007 20:37:50 GMT -5
Ann won the fight. The decision was total BS. But the entire show seemed headed in that direction. Holm held, she ran, but she did fight in spots and she threw combinations. The fight was very exciting, but Ann won this fight convincingly and that's the bottom line. And I agree with Bobby, Mia needs to go away and so does John Salley. I turned the television off the second I heard the scores. It's upsetting because titles mean something and this woman got hers taken away because of some BS hometown crap.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dee Williams on Mar 25, 2007 7:50:36 GMT -5
Ann Marie Saccurato's own take on the fight was: "“I thought it was a close fight, but I felt I did not perform at my usual high caliber. I wasn’t getting my shots off right and I caught myself thinking too much. “It wasn’t my night—but the bottom line is, the show was a step forward for women’s boxing. Let’s do it again.” www.newmexicoboxing.com/fights2007/03-isleta.htmlI think this is a well worded and gracious statement from Ann Marie who indeed fought a good but not great fight. Holly Holm is very frustrating - to watch and to fight - because she uses a lot of sideways movement and avoids long exchanges with dangerous opponents. When you get a straight ahead slugger against a fast tactical boxer and both are as capable of lasting 10 close rounds in their own style as Holly and Ann Marie then you get a fight that can be decided by judges' style preferences or even a little home town lean. I think this fight would have been a split decision or draw on neutral ground, scores could legitimately differ depending on whether you reward persistent aggression or punching effectiveness. I waited for a truly decisive round by either fighter to tip the balance their way, but that never came. It WAS a close fight and it left a bad taste that the scorecards did not show it. The RESULT (win for Holm) was not a total robbery but the scoring was way lop-sided on all three cards so you suspect thieves were in the house. It also made me want to see three-minute rounds to make endurance more of a factor. Ann Marie was never able to corral Holly for long, Holly rarely stood and dished it back for long. Although both had their good moments neither was able to push the other close to a limit inside the 2x10 format. 3x10 or 3x12 might have produced a clear outcome. Holm wastes a lot of energy but she can keep up her movement and "flurry fighting" for ten two minute rounds at altitude because she has abundant energy to spare. I kept expecting a round where Ann Marie would really get to her and take the fight for sure. but that round never came And if you leave almost every round "up for for grabs" that way then even a little lean by local judges towards the home girl can make a lop-sided score that does not reflect the action AT ALL. If you score Japanese style and don't award a round unless its clear this would have been a draw. If you score any CLOSE round for the home girl then you get what we saw, which leaves a bad taste especially with so many belts on the line. If you rewarded the aggressor in every close round, this was no contest the other way, it was almost always Ann Marie coming forward and Holly even backed out of some exchanges she was clearly winning ... but if you reward effectiveness of hard punches landed it was close enough for Holm to get given rounds legitimately by a slim margin eaxh time. Holm will have to change up her style a lot - stand and trade more - to win fights like that on the road. But the franchise they have built around her was the reason a lot of fans got to see three pretty good fights on live network TV (at least in some areas). It's too bad that some markets didn't see all of Jeffries-Luna and some didn't see all of Holm-Saccurato. as those were the closest fights in the ring if not on the scorecards. |
|
|
|
Post by jr on Mar 25, 2007 8:09:09 GMT -5
Ann Marie Saccurato's own take on the fight was: "“I thought it was a close fight, but I felt I did not perform at my usual high caliber. I wasn’t getting my shots off right and I caught myself thinking too much. “It wasn’t my night—but the bottom line is, the show was a step forward for women’s boxing. Let’s do it again.” www.newmexicoboxing.com/fights2007/03-isleta.htmlI think this is a well worded and gracious statement from Ann Marie who indeed fought a good but not great fight. Holly Holm is very frustrating - to watch and to fight - because she uses a lot of sideways movement and avoids long exchanges with dangerous opponents. When you get a straight ahead slugger against a fast tactical boxer and both are as capable of lasting 10 close rounds in their own style as Holly and Ann Marie then you get a fight that can be decided by judges' style preferences or even a little home town lean. I think this fight would have been a split decision or draw on neutral ground, scores could legitimately differ depending on whether you reward persistent aggression or punching effectiveness. I waited for a truly decisive round by either fighter to tip the balance their way, but that never came. It WAS a close fight and it left a bad taste that the scorecards did not show it. The RESULT (win for Holm) was not a total robbery but the scoring was way lop-sided on all three cards so you suspect thieves were in the house. It also made me want to see three-minute rounds to make endurance more of a factor. Ann Marie was never able to corral Holly for long, Holly rarely stood and dished it back for long. Although both had their good moments neither was able to push the other close to a limit inside the 2x10 format. 3x10 or 3x12 might have produced a clear outcome. Holm wastes a lot of energy but she can keep up her movement and "flurry fighting" for ten two minute rounds at altitude because she has abundant energy to spare. I kept expecting a round where Ann Marie would really get to her and take the fight for sure. but that round never came And if you leave almost every round "up for for grabs" that way then even a little lean by local judges towards the home girl can make a lop-sided score that does not reflect the action AT ALL. If you score Japanese style and don't award a round unless its clear this would have been a draw. If you score any CLOSE round for the home girl then you get what we saw, which leaves a bad taste especially with so many belts on the line. If you rewarded the aggressor in every close round, this was no contest the other way, it was almost always Ann Marie coming forward and Holly even backed out of some exchanges she was clearly winning ... but if you reward effectiveness of hard punches landed it was close enough for Holm to get given rounds legitimately by a slim margin eaxh time. Holm will have to change up her style a lot - stand and trade more - to win fights like that on the road. But the franchise they have built around her was the reason a lot of fans got to see three pretty good fights on live network TV (at least in some areas). It's too bad that some markets didn't see all of Jeffries-Luna and some didn't see all of Holm-Saccurato. as those were the closest fights in the ring if not on the scorecards. No article by Chris Cozzone involving Holly Holm can be considered fair or impartial. The photos in this piece show only Holm punches; no photos of Succurato wobbling Holm in rounds 2 and 7. Holm is Cozzone's meal card. An interview with Saccurato without the New Mexico influence is needed. |
|
|
|
Post by Dee Williams on Mar 25, 2007 13:16:55 GMT -5
Holm is Cozzone's meal card. That is B.S. Chris Cozzone was covering boxing in New Mexico long before Holly Holm came along and he is an independent photo-journalist who covers ALL of boxing in New Mexico and Colorado on-line. Don't impute financial motives to people you don't know that kind of information about. I agree with your scoring of the fight by the way - but not with your sour grapes about those who may differ from it. People can and will differ honestly about their "read" on fights like that without money being involved. |
|
|
|
Post by TD on Mar 25, 2007 13:52:02 GMT -5
<insult removed> ..even Cozzone will tell you he likes HOLM and likes N MEX boxers.
I've never read a Cozzone report that did NOT play/pay tribute to his hometowners.
TD
I was quoting what Ann-Marie said about the fight, NOT what Chris Cozzone said about it - Dee.
|
|
|
|
Post by TD on Mar 25, 2007 13:54:38 GMT -5
By the way, there is NO way to give HOLM the fight...she landed a few counters and that was surprising. She actually turned Ann around a few times having her cornered- and then HOLM moved away.
Hard Punches landed - SACC.
Effective Agression- SACC
Ring General Ship- SACC
Punches thrown- had to be SACC but I would defer to punch count.
No way in the world HOLM won this fight.
TD
|
|
|
|
Post by Dee Williams on Mar 25, 2007 14:57:05 GMT -5
I disagree with some of TD's assesments of the fight. Ring generalship was a close call because Ann Marie should have put a lot more pressure on Holly, Holm looked like she moved like she wanted to most of the time and landed her share of hard punches in bunches. You can't always give credit to Ann-Marie for backing Holm up, Holm backs herself up and goes sideways a lot BY CHOICE. Where Ann Marie won clearly is on aggression, Holly showed too little. And that's why I would agree with both TD and JR that Ann-MArie deserved a narrow win. It was a close fight on everything but aggression, because Ann Marie didn't win any round big and Holly didn't win any round big either. On Holly's turf that's a recipe for letting a decision get away the other way. It's the landslide score that suggests that the judges weren't being fair.
|
|
|
|
Post by voayer on Mar 25, 2007 15:50:01 GMT -5
Well...if anybody is interested at all...i uploaded this fight already on rapidshare. Standard procedure........files splitted with HJsplit program....etc....Just PM me.
|
|
|
|
Post by len on Mar 25, 2007 15:56:41 GMT -5
I had Holly winning seven rounds and with a point deduction for Ann's holding and hitting, I scored it 97-92. In fact, I thought all the fights were exceptionally well judged including Brown's win over the home town favorite Chavez.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark Ferguson on Mar 25, 2007 19:23:47 GMT -5
Let me toss in my two cents. I think the scores were atrocious, but I don't think the decision is bad. I had her winning by a point. even with the point deducted. I was kinda disappointed in ann. it looked to me she more lunging and brawling than boxing and Holly was catching her coming in. If every round is up for grabs, you know the favorite will get a majority of them. Congrats holly and ann's turn will come.
|
|
|
|
Post by jr on Mar 25, 2007 20:31:46 GMT -5
womenboxing.com/NEWS2007/news032507foxsports.htm“It was in that Fox studio that the weakest element of the telecast resided, in the personages of John Salley, a regular on Fox's "Best d**n Sports Show," Andrew Sicliano, a Fox Sports announcer, previously unknown to me, and Mia St. John, a seeming ubiquitous presence, in the sport, both in and out of the ring. Salley is a sometimes gregarious talent, who can be quite interesting when he wraps himself around a subject he knows something about. Boxing, most specifically Women's boxing, does not fall into that category. Salley didn't seem even remotely familiar with female boxing and his evening of one generic remark after another confirmed that impression. St. John, when rousing herself towards commentary, brought to mind a line about "only opening your mouth to change feet." Mia hit the low point of the evening when she insisted that "Jackie (Chavez) had thrown enough punches to win the fight" when, even the least discerning fan had just watched Jackie Chavez absorb the lone one-sided loss of the evening. The evening might not be a total loss, however, since St. John is now properly positioned to eliminate commentary from her list of "what to do after boxing" options.”[/color] Bernie McCoy, The combination of John Salley and Mia St. John was awkward and St. John was unable to speak without Salley stepping on her words. Jackie Chavez, an outsider, was fighting Lisa Brown, represented by one of the two promoters of the card. While not as accomplished as Brown, Chavez was the agressor throughout most of the fight. As I promised last January, I forwarded to Mia St. John an initial thirteen links to your body of work documenting your disdain for her along with an outline and two working titles for a chapter in her upcoming book. I don’t know if she reads them so you’ll have to read the book. I’ve accumulated several more links and will send them to her in batches of ten.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christian Brown on Mar 25, 2007 20:34:25 GMT -5
I don't know Cozzone, and I don't know anything about payment for him or non-payment, but his bias is quite obvious. Maybe it's not necessarily a Holm bias as it is a NM bias, but I won't forget that when Anani lost to Blair, he posted that "Anani is no longer on Holly Holm's radar" crap. Then he or someone else on that site claimed that Laila Ali ducked Holly Holm. How silly can this be? I had Holm losing the fight, but the whole show was about Holm showcasing her skills. Now, if this helps Holm become the face of women's boxing, then that is a good thing, because more girls will get exposure. I'm happy that the card was as good as it was, what we are talking about is the decision and I didn't have Holly winning. If Ann Marie had a point deducted for holding and hitting, Holm should've had one deducted for repeatedly holding.
It reminded me of a Toughwoman Championship pay per view I saw years ago. Shannon "Dallas" Hall got her butt kicked by Mona "The Turnip" Nelson, and the commentators and judges gave the fight to Hall. The whole production seemed centered around the former American Gladiator, and she darn near got herself knocked out. They wanted to pump up a rematch of the final from the previous year, with Hall winning a decision over Becky Levi, but a fighter named Tiffany Logan ended that when she knocked Levi out in the finals. Tiffany Logan was really good and I wish she had kept fighting.
Now watch what happens, Holm will probably fight Mia St. John again at some point, or maybe Christy Martin will come back and FOX will grab that rematch. But I don't see Sanders coming from ESPN or Detroit and I don't see Holm leaving NM.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark Ferguson on Mar 25, 2007 20:45:00 GMT -5
Just an intresting note. I just got through running the holm saccurato bout again. figuring in holly's hometown favorites with random judges and using the favorite tag as random as well. The rounds were pretty close with holly winning just one or two outright. She ran out of gas before succarato late in the fight, but finished. The game's unofficial judge gave ann the bout 96-95. The official judges scored it 98-93 holm, 96-95 succarato, 97-95 holm. I know it don't mean a whole lot, but poor ann couldn't catch a break there either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dee Williams on Mar 25, 2007 22:36:41 GMT -5
I don't know Cozzone, and I don't know anything about payment for him or non-payment ... Enough said, then. JR said that Holm is Chris's "meal ticket" and THAT is what I was complaining about, as it's both inaccurate and a cheap shot in my opinion. Chris has covered NM and CO boxers, male and female, from all promoters and all gyms, for years - and of course he does his best to get local fans interested in them. He was covering women's boxing in NM well before Holm was a significant factor, he wrote about Trina Ortegon, Brenda Burnside, Delia Gonzalez and also some of the action across the border in Juarez well before Holm was the big draw. I EXPECT local media to talk up their local fighters, not to dump all over them. Women's boxing NEEDS more local coverage in most markets and you help to create local interest by talking up the good local fighters. I don't see that as some sort of conspiracy. |
|
|
|
Post by Dee Williams on Mar 25, 2007 23:22:14 GMT -5
Jackie Chavez, an outsider, was fighting Lisa Brown, represented by one of the two promoters of the card. While not as accomplished as Brown, Chavez was the agressor throughout most of the fight. Jackie is from Los Lunas, New Mexico, the first small town south of Isleta where they fought! That's why she had so many supporters in the crowd cheering her on, the casino is practically in her back yard. Lisa was born in Trinidad and fights out of the Toronto suburbs up in Ontario. She's been on AROTO cards in Canada, that's all ... it's a stretch to say Lisa was the "insider" just a few miles from Jackie Chavez' own home. I thought Jackie looked more limited in her skills and ring craft and showed less power than Lisa, who's also got a lot more 10-round experience against top boxers than her. (Lisa was also a top Canadian amateur with a 26-6 record, while Jackie is a converted kickboxer who was (I think) a New Mexico amateur kickboxing champ and still tends to fight a little too vertical. Lisa won that fight fair and square despite Jackie getting some lift from all her fans at ringside and while this was a disappointing result for those fans I don't hear people saying Chavez got short shrifted by the judges. Lisa was ranked #5 by WBAN and Chavez #10 before the fight, and I think you you saw why. No conspiracy needed to produce that result or scoring, in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by jr on Mar 26, 2007 4:55:14 GMT -5
I don't know Cozzone, and I don't know anything about payment for him or non-payment ... Enough said, then. JR said that Holm is Chris's "meal ticket" and THAT is what I was complaining about, as it's both inaccurate and a cheap shot in my opinion. Chris has covered NM and CO boxers, male and female, from all promoters and all gyms, for years - and of course he does his best to get local fans interested in them. He was covering women's boxing in NM well before Holm was a significant factor, he wrote about Trina Ortegon, Brenda Burnside, Delia Gonzalez and also some of the action across the border in Juarez well before Holm was the big draw. I EXPECT local media to talk up their local fighters, not to dump all over them. Women's boxing NEEDS more local coverage in most markets and you help to create local interest by talking up the good local fighters. I don't see that as some sort of conspiracy. Holly Holm is the number one draw, male or female, of boxing in New Mexico. Without her, Cozzone will have little boxing to write about, hence the "meal card" statement. There are other sports writers in that state but his articles are the ones featured on Fresquez Productions and Holm's website. |
|
|
|
Post by jr on Mar 26, 2007 5:00:02 GMT -5
Jackie Chavez, an outsider, was fighting Lisa Brown, represented by one of the two promoters of the card. While not as accomplished as Brown, Chavez was the agressor throughout most of the fight. Jackie is from Los Lunas, New Mexico, the first small town south of Isleta where they fought! That's why she had so many supporters in the crowd cheering her on, the casino is practically in her back yard. Lisa was born in Trinidad and fights out of the Toronto suburbs up in Ontario. She's been on AROTO cards in Canada, that's all ... it's a stretch to say Lisa was the "insider" just a few miles from Jackie Chavez' own home. I thought Jackie looked more limited in her skills and ring craft and showed less power than Lisa, who's also got a lot more 10-round experience against top boxers than her. (Lisa was also a top Canadian amateur with a 26-6 record, while Jackie is a converted kickboxer who was (I think) a New Mexico amateur kickboxing champ and still tends to fight a little too vertical. Lisa won that fight fair and square despite Jackie getting some lift from all her fans at ringside and while this was a disappointing result for those fans I don't hear people saying Chavez got short shrifted by the judges. Lisa was ranked #5 by WBAN and Chavez #10 before the fight, and I think you you saw why. No conspiracy needed to produce that result or scoring, in my opinion. Jackie Chavez is an outsider to the two promoters of the card so the Promoter's Advantage worked against her. |
|
