Issue Letters Premium

The Big Question: What did you make of the scoring of Saturday’s fight between Callum Smith and John Ryder?

Callum Smith vs John Ryder
Dave Thompson/Matchroom
This week's panellists are asked to present their scorecards following Saturday's WBA super-middleweight title fight between Callum Smith and John Ryder

Wayne Alexander (Former European champion)

I disagreed with it. I scored it 117-114 to Ryder. Smith fought the wrong kind of fight and was getting caught a lot up close with clean short hooks to the head and body. Scoring a fight is very subjective but should come down to who lands the most clean scoring punches. I believe Ryder did that.

Declan Taylor (Boxing journalist)

The scoring was a disgrace and the sad thing is that it no longer comes as a surprise whatsoever. I personally made Smith a marginal winner (114-113) in a very close fight, so it was no robbery, but cards like 117-111 are genuinely damaging this sport.

Nigel Wright (Former English champion)

I had this a lot closer. A lot of the rounds were hard to split. I think they shared four or five rounds and then it’s a case of what work you prefer. I actually had Smith one, possibly two, rounds up. The 117-111 scorecard was ridiculous and that judge (Terry O’Connor) should be reassessed on his ability to judge.

Nathan Farrell (Super-lightweight prospect)

I think we saw the best version of Ryder, who managed to make the fight play out in his favour, against someone who has got a mega-fight in the back of his mind and was therefore never going to perform at his absolute best. The fight went perfectly for Ryder, yet it still wasn’t quite enough to better Smith. Credit to Ryder, though. He’s improved loads over the last couple of years and his defence is underrated.

Callum Smith v John Ryder
Callum Smith lines up an uppercut (Dave Thompson/Matchroom)

Boxing news – Newsletter

Current Issue