The Boxing Diary

Views and Opinions

Sunday, November 17, 2013

Andre Ward dominates an overweight Edwin Rodriquez in 12 rounds

[caption id="attachment_763" align="aligncenter" width="550"]ward_vs_rodriquez Ward dominates Rodriquez in a 12-round one sided affair[/caption]

Andre Ward showed no ring-rust on Saturday night's HBO fight card in Ontario, California. Ward dominated Rodriquez in 12 rounds of one-sided action.

Andre Ward 27-0-0 (KO 14) was coming off from over a year lay-off due to shoulder injury and subsequent surgery. But his performance showed no ring-rust and still sharp with his jab and quick on his feet. Rodriquez face was the constant target of those precise jabs.

Although the fight got nasty on early because of the usual hit-hug approach of Ward, it was in round 4 that referee Jack Reiss issued tough warning to both combatants.

Both men ignored Reiss instruction as he (Reiss) tried to separate them. Rodriquez got Ward's head locked in his left arm, while Ward was moving forward.  The referee stepped in the separate them but both men didn't adhere and continue punching instead.

Reiss was almost knocked down by a left hand from Rodriquez as he tried to hold Ward to stop the action. He then sent both men to each neutral corner and needed a second to shake-off that punch. After that he issued two-point deduction to both guys.

The fight went on, minus, a little bit of roughhousing.

But we can't deny that the style of Ward is just too clever, which he don’t need it against Rodriquez. I mean, he can win the fight minus the routine clinching. His hit-and-hug approach or 1-2-hug combo is no longer necessary.

Rodriquez clearly had no answer to Ward's quickness and precise jabs. "La Bomba" was just too sloppy and tentative. His punches were wide, wild and traveled like 5 KPH it seems?

Personally, I don't like this approach: the hit-hug. It's like hitting and then apologizing and then hitting again. Sounds like betrayal to me. Anyway that is Ward style.

Ward won the scores of 118-106, 117-107, and 116-108.

No comments:

Post a Comment