|
|
Post by jr on Apr 23, 2007 10:47:50 GMT -5
I attended the fight between Mia St. John and Brooke Dierdorff at the Star Plaza Theater in Merrillville, Indiana on April 20th.
In My Opinion:
St. John started slowly for the first two rounds (as she usually does) and Dierdorff hit St. John’s left eye with several right hands, causing it to swell. This is the same eye injured in the Jaime Clampitt bout last February, requiring stitches. St. John looked concerned a cut would resurface. Dierdorff also landed a few uppercuts in these and later rounds but they did not appear to hurt St. John.
Round three saw St. John getting her rhythm for an even round.
St. John controlled the remainder of the fight. Although both traded big punches, St. John’s experience helped her land more effectively. Dierdorff faded in the sixth round.
St. John did not appear hurt or in trouble in the fight. At the end of the fight. St. John’s eye was swollen and Dierdorff’s face was reddened, especially her forehead. Reports of other injuries or trouble in the bout are exaggerations by local press and Dierdorff herself.
The judges scored the fight 59-55 for St. John (she did not do that well), and 59-55 and 58-56 for Dierdorff . I scored the fight 58-57 for St. John with Dierdorff winning rounds one and two, round three even, and St. John winning rounds four through six. The judges scored the fight with emotion, influenced by the crowd. (And speaking of the crowd, the audience was racially charged. A group of about eight white males were chanting racist phrases at St. John. I don’t know if she heard these chants but they were disturbing – a note for other Hispanic fighters considering this venue. I know I won’t be returning.)
The referee did a good job with the bout. Both fighters held and punched a few times. St. John did get hit in the face twice by Dierdorff’s right forearm but the referee issued no warning.
The press called Dierdorff a “novice” fighter. While her professional record consists of three wins and no loses with three TKOs against light competition, her amateur background includes Golden Gloves titles. Calling Dierdorff a novice is a gross misrepresentation of her record.
For some reason, St. John has abandoned her defensive techniques of head movement and footwork, choosing instead to trade punches with her opponents. When she used this strategy, she would walk away from bouts unmarked (Holly Holm, Jelena Mrdjenovich). Now she is experiencing injuries from both legal and illegal tactics.
Based on the scoring of this bout and the fights since her last victory (a TKO against the late Shelby Walker), St. John is unable to get honest scoring of her bouts. She had the Promoter’s Advantage in this bout but the scoring was still biased in favor of Dierdorff. She has no hometown venue to retreat to so her fights are on the road.
St. John is, in effect, a marked fighter and promoters, managers, and teams are employing every tactic and trick to defeat her. I doubt St. John can win by decision again.
|
|
|
|
Post by TD on Apr 23, 2007 19:50:34 GMT -5
JR...wow, an unbiased review! Thanks! That was refreshing! Hey what about the knockdown(s)? You didn't speak of those.
When has st. john had trouble getting "honest scoring of her bouts"?
And if BERNIE reads this, "business acumen" and "taking your clothes off" are two different things.
If St. John had a shred of decency, she would have accepted any one of Deborah Nichols 30 or so challenges.
TD
|
|
|
|
Post by jr on Apr 23, 2007 20:10:46 GMT -5
JR...wow, an unbiased review! Thanks! That was refreshing! Hey what about the knockdown(s)? You didn't speak of those. When has st. john had trouble getting "honest scoring of her bouts"? And if BERNIE reads this, "business acumen" and "taking your clothes off" are two different things. If St. John had a shred of decency, she would have accepted any one of Deborah Nichols 30 or so challenges. TD TD, There was no knockdown. The referee ruled it a slip. The WBAN article writer and Brooke Dierdorff have made statements about the fight that don't match the action. Catch her post-fight interview on youtube. Maybe the promoter will release a video of the fight. |
|
|
|
Post by jr on Apr 24, 2007 7:04:29 GMT -5
JR...wow, an unbiased review! Thanks! That was refreshing! Hey what about the knockdown(s)? You didn't speak of those. When has st. john had trouble getting "honest scoring of her bouts"? And if BERNIE reads this, "business acumen" and "taking your clothes off" are two different things. If St. John had a shred of decency, she would have accepted any one of Deborah Nichols 30 or so challenges. TD TD, There was no knockdown. The referee ruled it a slip. The WBAN article writer and Brooke Dierdorff have made statements about the fight that don't match the action. Catch her post-fight interview on youtube. Maybe the promoter will release a video of the fight. Post-fight interview with Brooke Dierdorff including disrespectful trash talk about Mia St. John. |
|
|
|
Post by jr on Apr 24, 2007 13:35:39 GMT -5
womenboxing.com/NEWS2007/news042307mia.htmBernie McCoy suggests a rematch between Mia St. John and Brooke Dierdorff. In my opinion, this would be a mistake for St. John. First, she won the first fight, unofficially. To rematch would be admitting to a loss. Second, a rematch would yield the same outcome. St. John does not have stopping power so the victory would be awarded by decision. And this would be an opportunity for another stolen victory. Mia St. John is too intelligent to accept a rematch.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dee Williams on Apr 24, 2007 17:08:58 GMT -5
St. John is unable to get honest scoring of her bouts. She had the Promoter’s Advantage in this bout but the scoring was still biased in favor of Dierdorff. What does that say about the "Promoter's Advantage", I wonder? |
|
|
|
Post by jr on Apr 24, 2007 17:46:00 GMT -5
St. John is unable to get honest scoring of her bouts. She had the Promoter’s Advantage in this bout but the scoring was still biased in favor of Dierdorff. What does that say about the "Promoter's Advantage", I wonder? The Promoter's Advantage is 90 percent accurate in the three year's of data I examined. Remember this same promoter recruited Dierdorff as a replacement fighter when Rita Figueroa was injured in training. |
|
|
|
Post by Dee Williams on Apr 24, 2007 21:14:15 GMT -5
Remember this same promoter recruited Dierdorff as a replacement fighter when Rita Figueroa was injured in training. Yes, there are normally two fighters in every fight. So who do you think had the "promoter's advantage", and why? I'm interested to know how you decide who has the "promoter's advantage". |
|
|
|
Post by jr on Apr 24, 2007 21:51:31 GMT -5
Remember this same promoter recruited Dierdorff as a replacement fighter when Rita Figueroa was injured in training. Yes, there are normally two fighters in every fight. So who do you think had the "promoter's advantage", and why? I'm interested to know how you decide who has the "promoter's advantage". Mia St. John had the Promoter's Advantage. One In A Million used her celebrity in their PR campaign for two months before the fight. I don't know if St. John had any contractual agreements beyond the fight, but fighters who sign with a promoter (e.g. Holly Holm) get the Advantage. |
|
|
|
Post by Dee Williams on Apr 24, 2007 22:31:47 GMT -5
I don't know if St. John had any contractual agreements beyond the fight, but fighters who sign with a promoter (e.g. Holly Holm) get the Advantage. So what was the point of your comment about the promoter "recruiting" Dierdorff? Did that in some way nullify St.John's advantage (which didn't do her much good, apparently) and how was it different from what promoters normally do? How you decide who has been "recruited" by the promoter and who has not is key to your claim of a correlation. On the one hand you are saying that St.John had the promoter's advantage, and on the other you have said that Dierdorff, who was "recruited" by the same promoter, benefitted from biased scoring. Your message is becoming unclear. |
|
|
|
Post by Rick Scharmberg on Apr 25, 2007 8:50:12 GMT -5
I believe there can be a promoter's advantage, but it doesn't have anything to do with the judging. A promoter can dictate things like the size of the ring. Imaginary example, the promoter, since he supplies the ring, can make a "fast" ring or a larger ring to help a mover who might be facing a slugger (or vice versa), or provide other logistical advantages that may be present. But if the judges can't score a fight, or the same judges consistently score fights wrong, well that problem resides with the commission providing the judges, and not with the promoter. A fighter's handler should negotiate the logistical stuff on behalf of her fighter, before accepting the fight .
|
|
|
|
Post by TD on Apr 25, 2007 12:00:33 GMT -5
A promoters advantage can be a slant on the outcome...ie- better terms ( as in ideal ring size or glove weights)...where it gets far more devious is judging. Teddy Atlas has pointed out that judges getten wined and dined while informed as to how hard "a" fighter hits or "how busy" a fighter is. Its well known that "a" fighter has signed a multi -fight promotional contract.
Judge against the promoter's fighter and the promoter can make sure you are not judging many of his fights. The promoter has huge amount of leverage if he is creating major cards for titles.
I can't help but think of all of a certain fighters fights that were judged on "how busy she is", even though she missed 90% of those punches, it gave the judges cover to give her the round. And it happened alot. But because there were so FEW fans in the seats at the time, it was not a big thing.
Nothing was more telling than when MIA went from being a "promoters girl" to getting whacked out as an "indie" by Rolanda. Would Mr. Arum have allowed that to happen?
Final 2 questions to JR, why wouldn't Mia want a rematch IF she felt she had been"robbed" as you state? Are you on Mia's payroll?
TD
|
|
|
|
Post by jr on Apr 25, 2007 15:39:57 GMT -5
A promoters advantage can be a slant on the outcome...ie- better terms ( as in ideal ring size or glove weights)...where it gets far more devious is judging. Teddy Atlas has pointed out that judges getten wined and dined while informed as to how hard "a" fighter hits or "how busy" a fighter is. Its well known that "a" fighter has signed a multi -fight promotional contract. Judge against the promoter's fighter and the promoter can make sure you are not judging many of his fights. The promoter has huge amount of leverage if he is creating major cards for titles. I can't help but think of all of a certain fighters fights that were judged on "how busy she is", even though she missed 90% of those punches, it gave the judges cover to give her the round. And it happened alot. But because there were so FEW fans in the seats at the time, it was not a big thing. Nothing was more telling than when MIA went from being a "promoters girl" to getting whacked out as an "indie" by Rolanda. Would Mr. Arum have allowed that to happen? Final 2 questions to JR, why wouldn't Mia want a rematch IF she felt she had been"robbed" as you state? Are you on Mia's payroll? TD TD, In reference to Teddy Atlas' comments about entertaining the officials before a card, I call this influence "lobster dinner" judging. No, I'm not on Mia St. John's payroll. I've never met her and this fight was the first time I saw her compete in person. As I stated, a rematch would yield another "robbery" using your term. St. John does not have knock-out power and she can't get a decision anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by jr on Apr 28, 2007 13:15:48 GMT -5
womenboxing.com/NEWS2007/news042307mia.htmBernie McCoy, As a charter member of the Mia Haters Club, you have been critical of Mia St. John from the beginning of her career. The web is littered with your op-ed articles attacking her. So for you to write that you would cheer for St. John in a rematch with Brooke Dierdorff is disingenuous. I attended the bout between St. John and Dierdorff, and the scoring was a farce. There is no reason to believe a rematch would not be scored the same. St. John is surely aware of this. I expect St. John will retire around her 40th birthday as she has stated. She is lending her celebrity to regional, local, and now backwater venues where honest scoring is a thing of the past. And when she retires, you will have an opportunity to retire your personal disdain for St. John as well. I hope you take it. JR
|
|
