Linares over priced tomorrow?

First topic message reminder :

8/5 for the win, Crolla at 1/2. Linares 5/1 on points is good value surely?!

milkyboy wrote:No need for a rematch other than $ and a contract.... Which according to Eddie was part of the deal

Contract means very little as Linares simply vacate the WBA title. Whilst keeping hold of the Ring championship.

I'm not sure the victory was that comprehensive.

Linares won but if Crolla had more in the home stretch it could have been different.

I'm not saying Linares want a joy to watch at times but it wasn't a one sided beat down.

Good fight. It would be great is Sky and Matchroom put on more of these kind of cards. Linares is great value.

Crolla plugged away admirably and made the fight competitive, but I thought Linares was the classier fighter almost all of the way through and deserved a competitive but clear decision.

As was touched on in another, it seems to bit of a theme with Gallagher fighters that they come unstuck againt the top guys and follow the same kind of limited strategy. Cant say on the action from the first fight that I would have much confidence in Crolla winning a return. It doesnt look like hes enough power to really knock Linares out and Linares actually finished the fight stronger.

I agree on Gallagher fighters, but sometimes it's just making the best of what you have. Crolla has become a tough nights work for anyone, and probably his tactics last night were the ones that gave him the best chance. Linares just a bit too good.

Always liked linares, classy boxer, but prepared to let his hands go and mix it. Remember watching him dish out a lesson to di marco and then get stopped. He then get stopped early next time out in what was meant to be a tune-up. Like most I assumed he was finished. Have to credit the guy with turning his career around. Seems like a good guy too.

Jermaine2015 wrote:

milkyboy wrote:No need for a rematch other than $ and a contract.... Which according to Eddie was part of the deal

Contract means very little as Linares simply vacate the WBA title. Whilst keeping hold of the Ring championship.

I guess that depends on exactly what was stipulated in the contract... And seems to assume linares would want to drop the belt and not take the fight. They seemed keen to come back last night... Which suggests they'd be expecting to get well paid for a fight they think they'd win

Jermaine2015 wrote:Magnificent victory for the Golden Boy Jorge Linares. He was far too skilled and talented for a one dimensional plodder like Anthony Crolla. The gulf in class and ability was easy to see. Linares a classy slickster picked his shots/angles which left Crolla bamboozled. Crolla couldn't put a dent Linares(dispute the Venezuelan's well documented chin/cut issues) and Linares power hurt Crolla time and again. After Linares meltdown against DeMarco it's somewhat fitting he's now won the WBC, WBA and Ring Lightweight titles. Icing on the cake for a Stella career for the ultimate road warrior. There's really no need for a rematch Linares won, no controversy. He was too good. I'd like to see Linares move up and face Ricky Burns.

Stella career? He's done well for himself if he's made a living out of sinking beers.

Scored 117-112 for Linares. Had it 5-1 after six. Scoring was very odd (one judge only gave Linares two rounds through seven!).

I don't see any logic in putting Crolla back in with him - he can't beat Linares. They should go for Flanagan.

Watched the fight and thought Linares won at a canter. Crolla had virtually no head movement and just continued to walk forward in straight lines, occasionally dipping the knees and bobbing but there wasn't one occasion I could see him weave or sway side to side to give Linares a moving target. Really, really poor from Gallagher/Crolla.

No rematch required and even die hard Crolla fans must know their man gets taken to the cleaners again.

Not been a great few weeks for British fighters and can see Cleverley coming unstuck next week

Didn't get taken to the cleaners.....

Good fight.....

Do all Gallagher's fighters fight the exact same way?

Hands high trying to take damage early on the gloves, then come on strong late?

Think Callum may be the only one that doesn't

The issue for Crolla is that Linares didn't fade like he usually does and was strong from start to finish, don't think Crolla could really hurt him either

Really good fight, but Linares was better, wasn't a domination, but Linares won clearly enough 8-4, even 9-3

Crolla got as far as his ability could take him, Perez and Barossa in reality were beyond what he should have achieved.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Didn't get taken to the cleaners.....

Good fight.....

But not remotely close...Linares seemed to slow down after about three rounds allowing Crolla to come back in but for all the shots he landed, Linares landed two, three and four. He won wide on my cards.

It was close.......He was twenty seconds away from winning the 6th comfortably until he got caught....

That would have been 1-1-1 on the Judges cards....

Linares didn't "allow" Crolla to do anything.......Give Crolla some credit.

If there was a schooling I didn't see one.....Can I see Crolla winning a rematch .....Sure why not ??? (Mitchell slapped this guy around until Linares won the lottery)....

People learn from their mistakes....117-111 was a joke.

I disagree (apparently it's all about opinions) and I can't see Crolla adapting enough to win a rematch. His head and lateral movement is/was virtually non-existent and it's not something he' going to learn in a couple of months. It should be part of his boxing DNA by now.

mitchell slapped him around until he won the lottery? didn't see that... cracking fight though

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:
Can I see Crolla winning a rematch .....Sure why not ??? (Mitchell slapped this guy around until Linares won the lottery)....

Are you forgetting the truss rematch rule, whereby the winner of fight 1, wins fight 2?

117-111 was a bit wide
115-113 was a bit close

not joke cards though... a lot of close rounds in the middle. Linares won the early ones and the late ones.

Trussman watching his own version of the Linares/ Mitchell fight. Yes Mitchell started quickly and was up on the cards but he was fading down the stretch with his suspect stamina. Linares, despite getting dropped, didn't fall apart like he did against DeMarco. Mitchell gassed and Linares finished him.

There isn't any need or demand for a rematch. Linares won 116-112 for my money, therefore he won 66% of the fight. Crolla isn't world class and was exposed by a really classy elite fighter. In the rematch Linares probably KOs Crolla.

I'm on the fence about wether we need to see a rematch. I had been looking forward to this one since it was announced, and it was a decent fight for the most part.

Linares was clearly the classier boxer from the out set, he was always going to be. At one point in the 6th round I clearly remember thinking Crolla was going to get the stoppage and to hold off as I had a bet on Crolla in rounds 7-9

Wether I was watching through rose tinted specs at the point I'm not sure but I clearly remember getting the feeling Crolla was getting on top. And then Linares landed that right hand and it was pretty much game over for Crolla from then. Yes he wasn't completely finished but it took something out of him for the rest of the fight and Linares confidence was sky high from that point.

Would it have been different if Crolla hadn't been caught with that punch in the 6th? That's the question. I'm not so sure Crolla has what it takes to beat a classy boxer like Linares. Would I watch the rematch? Absolutely. For a non PPV fight it was a very good watch and as mancunian it had a good build up and Hatton-esque atmosphere.

Crolla has brought us some good nights in the last 12 months and he deserves another crack at it. Not sure how he wins the fight though. Doesn't have much power and relies on his fitness more than anything. The only way he wins a rematch for me is pure relentless pressure for 12 rounds, cutting off the ring and going hard to the body at every opportunity. Doubtful though as he can't take Linares power so he'll have to be careful the whole fight.

I only gave Crolla the 4th over the first six rounds (I agree he was winning the sixth until caught - the round then went to Linares).

I had Crolla pulling it back to 5-3, couldn't split them in the 9th (and I watched that round twice) and Linares clearly took the last two rounds. You could have given Crolla the 9th (if you were being generous) but 116-112 was the absolute closest you could score it in my view.

The referreeing was pretty poor in the opening third (when Crolla effectively showed out in order to kid Terry O'Connor). Had that not occurred, Linares may not have abandoned the body attack he had started with (to good effect). Thankfully Malignaggi was on hand to call it out and put the dampners on Smith who was desperate to stick to the narrative that Linares would fold and Crolla would get him late (which didn't look like happening).

It was a true veteran's performance from JL. He did as he pleased and was always in control. I know you can't pass up title fights but if I was in Crolla's ear, I'd persuade him to fight Flanagan rather than take the rematch.

Jermaine2015 wrote:Trussman watching his own version of the Linares/ Mitchell fight. Yes Mitchell started quickly and was up on the cards but he was fading down the stretch with his suspect stamina. Linares, despite getting dropped, didn't fall apart like he did against DeMarco. Mitchell gassed and Linares finished him.

I thought Linares was always in control of the Mitchell fight, too.

Worryingly, Crolla was up on the official cards after eight rounds. That's absolutely shocking.

hazharrison wrote:I only gave Crolla the 4th over the first six rounds (I agree he was winning the sixth until caught - the round then went to Linares).

I had Crolla pulling it back to 5-3, couldn't split them in the 9th (and I watched that round twice) and Linares clearly took the last two rounds. You could have given Crolla the 9th (if you were being generous) but 116-112 was the absolute closest you could score it in my view.

The referreeing was pretty poor in the opening third (when Crolla effectively showed out in order to kid Terry O'Connor). Had that not occurred, Linares may not have abandoned the body attack he had started with (to good effect). Thankfully Malignaggi was on hand to call it out and put the dampners on Smith who was desperate to stick to the narrative that Linares would fold and Crolla would get him late (which didn't look like happening).

It was a true veteran's performance from JL. He did as he pleased and was always in control. I know you can't pass up title fights but if I was in Crolla's ear, I'd persuade him to fight Flanagan rather than take the rematch.

Really? Cos TRUSS reliably informed me that Linares didn't let Crolla DO anything and that I was watching the fight incorrectly (using my eyes and forming an opinion based on what I'd seen...novice tactics clearly). Glad I'm not alone in being wrong about what I'd watched though!!!

He did what he pleased.......ok...

DAVE667 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:I only gave Crolla the 4th over the first six rounds (I agree he was winning the sixth until caught - the round then went to Linares).

I had Crolla pulling it back to 5-3, couldn't split them in the 9th (and I watched that round twice) and Linares clearly took the last two rounds. You could have given Crolla the 9th (if you were being generous) but 116-112 was the absolute closest you could score it in my view.

The referreeing was pretty poor in the opening third (when Crolla effectively showed out in order to kid Terry O'Connor). Had that not occurred, Linares may not have abandoned the body attack he had started with (to good effect). Thankfully Malignaggi was on hand to call it out and put the dampners on Smith who was desperate to stick to the narrative that Linares would fold and Crolla would get him late (which didn't look like happening).

It was a true veteran's performance from JL. He did as he pleased and was always in control. I know you can't pass up title fights but if I was in Crolla's ear, I'd persuade him to fight Flanagan rather than take the rematch.

Really? Cos TRUSS reliably informed me that Linares didn't let Crolla DO anything and that I was watching the fight incorrectly (using my eyes and forming an opinion based on what I'd seen...novice tactics clearly). Glad I'm not alone in being wrong about what I'd watched though!!!

Maybe it was the Sky commentary that influenced him. According to Hearn afterwards, Crolla lost by a round, is a great champion and this was the fight of the year!

Sand to the Arabs, that fella.

hazharrison wrote:

Jermaine2015 wrote:Trussman watching his own version of the Linares/ Mitchell fight. Yes Mitchell started quickly and was up on the cards but he was fading down the stretch with his suspect stamina. Linares, despite getting dropped, didn't fall apart like he did against DeMarco. Mitchell gassed and Linares finished him.

I thought Linares was always in control of the Mitchell fight, too.

Worryingly, Crolla was up on the official cards after eight rounds. That's absolutely shocking.

Jaysus!!! Some of the UK fights are now being scored worse than German fights.

hazharrison wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:I only gave Crolla the 4th over the first six rounds (I agree he was winning the sixth until caught - the round then went to Linares).

I had Crolla pulling it back to 5-3, couldn't split them in the 9th (and I watched that round twice) and Linares clearly took the last two rounds. You could have given Crolla the 9th (if you were being generous) but 116-112 was the absolute closest you could score it in my view.

The referreeing was pretty poor in the opening third (when Crolla effectively showed out in order to kid Terry O'Connor). Had that not occurred, Linares may not have abandoned the body attack he had started with (to good effect). Thankfully Malignaggi was on hand to call it out and put the dampners on Smith who was desperate to stick to the narrative that Linares would fold and Crolla would get him late (which didn't look like happening).

It was a true veteran's performance from JL. He did as he pleased and was always in control. I know you can't pass up title fights but if I was in Crolla's ear, I'd persuade him to fight Flanagan rather than take the rematch.

Really? Cos TRUSS reliably informed me that Linares didn't let Crolla DO anything and that I was watching the fight incorrectly (using my eyes and forming an opinion based on what I'd seen...novice tactics clearly). Glad I'm not alone in being wrong about what I'd watched though!!!

Maybe it was the Sky commentary that influenced him. According to Hearn afterwards, Crolla lost by a round, is a great champion and this was the fight of the year!

Sand to the Arabs, that fella.  

In fairness one of your "expert" mates Gareth A Davies had Crolla 6-3 up after 9 .....

He's an expert remember..

Sick of the sky commentary to be honest. In my opinion they need to think about whats going on long term and they need to do it fairly sharpish. I like Paulie, Froch is ok but sometimes Im not sure he's actually watching the fight. They need a really good pairing that know their boxing, understand how to score a fight and bounce off each other pretty well. If I was them I would keep Paulie and try to find someone that fit's with him. I really don't like three commentators either. Two is enough, possibly a third on the outskirts that they cut to every now and again.

EX7EY wrote:Sick of the sky commentary to be honest. In my opinion they need to think about whats going on long term and they need to do it fairly sharpish. I like Paulie, Froch is ok but sometimes Im not sure he's actually watching the fight. They need a really good pairing that know their boxing, understand how to score a fight and bounce off each other pretty well. If I was them I would keep Paulie and try to find someone that fit's with him. I really don't like three commentators either. Two is enough, possibly a third on the outskirts that they cut to every now and again.

Froch tends to interrupt Paulie too much.....Worried he'll upstage him..

Smith should have just one guy in the analyst seat (Paulie)......All the best teams had two guys with one go to guy between rounds.....(that could be Froch)

Clancy-Ryan being for me the best....

Froch definitely doesn't want to be the third wheel, which just makes him more irritating. Smith is OK but he's too biased in my opinion. I'd have smith as a co presenter rather than part of the commentary. As un-patriotic as this will probably sound, I would try and find another American to go with Paulie. There would be less bias due to no national attachment and in my opinion Americans doing boxing shows / commentary a lot better than us. Maybe that's just me though

EX7EY wrote:Froch definitely doesn't want to be the third wheel, which just makes him more irritating. Smith is OK but he's too biased in my opinion. I'd have smith as a co presenter rather than part of the commentary. As un-patriotic as this will probably sound, I would try and find another American to go with Paulie. There would be less bias due to no national attachment and in my opinion Americans doing boxing shows / commentary a lot better than us. Maybe that's just me though

We've had some biased types like Alex Wallau on ABC...

But I must admit that lately British commentators seemed to have thrown any kind of objectivity out of the window and not just in Boxing...

Halling being the worst case example in Boxing I've ever seen on both sides of the Atlantic......Thankfully SKY probably thought he went too far..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:I only gave Crolla the 4th over the first six rounds (I agree he was winning the sixth until caught - the round then went to Linares).

I had Crolla pulling it back to 5-3, couldn't split them in the 9th (and I watched that round twice) and Linares clearly took the last two rounds. You could have given Crolla the 9th (if you were being generous) but 116-112 was the absolute closest you could score it in my view.

The referreeing was pretty poor in the opening third (when Crolla effectively showed out in order to kid Terry O'Connor). Had that not occurred, Linares may not have abandoned the body attack he had started with (to good effect). Thankfully Malignaggi was on hand to call it out and put the dampners on Smith who was desperate to stick to the narrative that Linares would fold and Crolla would get him late (which didn't look like happening).

It was a true veteran's performance from JL. He did as he pleased and was always in control. I know you can't pass up title fights but if I was in Crolla's ear, I'd persuade him to fight Flanagan rather than take the rematch.

Really? Cos TRUSS reliably informed me that Linares didn't let Crolla DO anything and that I was watching the fight incorrectly (using my eyes and forming an opinion based on what I'd seen...novice tactics clearly). Glad I'm not alone in being wrong about what I'd watched though!!!

Maybe it was the Sky commentary that influenced him. According to Hearn afterwards, Crolla lost by a round, is a great champion and this was the fight of the year!

Sand to the Arabs, that fella.  

In fairness one of your "expert" mates Gareth A Davies had Crolla 6-3 up after 9 .....

He's an expert remember..

Decent writer. Lousy judge!

EX7EY wrote:Sick of the sky commentary to be honest. In my opinion they need to think about whats going on long term and they need to do it fairly sharpish. I like Paulie, Froch is ok but sometimes Im not sure he's actually watching the fight. They need a really good pairing that know their boxing, understand how to score a fight and bounce off each other pretty well. If I was them I would keep Paulie and try to find someone that fit's with him. I really don't like three commentators either. Two is enough, possibly a third on the outskirts that they cut to every now and again.

Paulie did a cracking job TBF

It was like:

Carl how you got it? Close Linares by 1

Jamie? Linares by 1

Adam: Linares Close

Paulie? Got Linares by a canter, but its subjective....

LOL Paulie calling them out on home cooking as well, fair play to him

He didn't call them out on home cooking..

They all had it to Linares..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:I only gave Crolla the 4th over the first six rounds (I agree he was winning the sixth until caught - the round then went to Linares).

I had Crolla pulling it back to 5-3, couldn't split them in the 9th (and I watched that round twice) and Linares clearly took the last two rounds. You could have given Crolla the 9th (if you were being generous) but 116-112 was the absolute closest you could score it in my view.

The referreeing was pretty poor in the opening third (when Crolla effectively showed out in order to kid Terry O'Connor). Had that not occurred, Linares may not have abandoned the body attack he had started with (to good effect). Thankfully Malignaggi was on hand to call it out and put the dampners on Smith who was desperate to stick to the narrative that Linares would fold and Crolla would get him late (which didn't look like happening).

It was a true veteran's performance from JL. He did as he pleased and was always in control. I know you can't pass up title fights but if I was in Crolla's ear, I'd persuade him to fight Flanagan rather than take the rematch.

Really? Cos TRUSS reliably informed me that Linares didn't let Crolla DO anything and that I was watching the fight incorrectly (using my eyes and forming an opinion based on what I'd seen...novice tactics clearly). Glad I'm not alone in being wrong about what I'd watched though!!!

Maybe it was the Sky commentary that influenced him. According to Hearn afterwards, Crolla lost by a round, is a great champion and this was the fight of the year!

Sand to the Arabs, that fella.  

In fairness one of your "expert" mates Gareth A Davies had Crolla 6-3 up after 9 .....

He's an expert remember..

That is a shocking scorecard, no freaking way, would love to know which 6 rounds

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He didn't call them out on home cooking..

They all had it to Linares..

He did, when the ref was being fussy, he was saying, if you want world titles here this stuff has to stop

Should still be on telegraph Website if you type in Crolla v Linares.

BoxingFan88 wrote:

EX7EY wrote:Sick of the sky commentary to be honest. In my opinion they need to think about whats going on long term and they need to do it fairly sharpish. I like Paulie, Froch is ok but sometimes Im not sure he's actually watching the fight. They need a really good pairing that know their boxing, understand how to score a fight and bounce off each other pretty well. If I was them I would keep Paulie and try to find someone that fit's with him. I really don't like three commentators either. Two is enough, possibly a third on the outskirts that they cut to every now and again.

Paulie did a cracking job TBF

It was like:

Carl how you got it? Close Linares by 1

Jamie? Linares by 1

Adam: Linares Close

Paulie? Got Linares by a canter, but its subjective....

LOL Paulie calling them out on home cooking as well, fair play to him

Paulie had kameda wide in the second mcdonnell fight. I quite like him as a commentator, but i wouldn't be holding up as the gold standard of fight judging. I think he was genuine when he said it was subjective. There were a lot of close rounds in the middle of this fight - if you prefer crolla in them you can get it close without it being home-cooking. Think Froch had it by 3 in the end, Smith had linares further ahead I think.

... his calling out of the ref re the low blows was spot on though - only saving grace was at least the ref only kept dishing out warnings and not points deductions

I don't mean he was always right just in this case he was better than the rest

That Kameda fight was not hard to score they royally screwed it up on that telecast

i took the generous 5/1 odds on linares points. 120 quid back

Wish I'd took the 5/1 on Linares. The OP saw the value and I almost put it on but I wanted Crolla to win so I couldnt back Linares on points. Conflict of interests and all that

EX7EY wrote:Wish I'd took the 5/1 on Linares. The OP saw the value and I almost put it on but I wanted Crolla to win so I couldnt back Linares on points. Conflict of interests and all that

crollas a local lad, know quit a few who know him. like the guy and really wanted him to win but my mentality was that if linares wins im happy because i won money, if crolla won i would have been happy as well. as long as he didnt get knocked out or was a draw either result was good for me

compelling and rich wrote:

EX7EY wrote:Wish I'd took the 5/1 on Linares. The OP saw the value and I almost put it on but I wanted Crolla to win so I couldnt back Linares on points. Conflict of interests and all that

crollas a local lad, know quit a few who know him. like the guy and really wanted him to win but my mentality was that if linares wins im happy because i won money, if crolla won i would have been happy as well. as long as he didnt get knocked out or was a draw either result was good for me

Sound logic but as an absolute tight wad I'd have been cheering where the money was rather than where my heart was