Jesse Hart vs Joe Smith Jr

Enter your Jesse Hart vs Joe Smith Jr fan card
CONTROVERSY RATING: 9%
The percentage of fan cards that disagree with an official result. Exclusively on EYE ON THE RING.
Jesse Hart vs Joe Smith Jr
Fan Rating: 
0
Your rating: None
3.166665
Average: 3.2 (6 votes)

Date: 
Saturday, January 11, 2020
Location: 
Hard Rock Hotel & Casino, Atlantic City, New Jersey, USA
Rounds Scheduled: 
10
Contracted Weight: 
175
Titles at Stake: 
Vacant NABO Light Heavyweight Title
Referee: 
Harvey Dock

Official Judging
Joseph Pasquale 91 - 98
Henry Eugene Grant 92 - 97
James Kinney 95 - 94

More:






Averaged Fan Card:

round 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Jesse Hart
                                                                    
9.18
9
9.93
9
9.18
9.12
8
9.06
9.06
9
Joe Smith Jr
                                                                    
9.81
10
9.06
10
9.81
9.87
10
9.93
9.93
10


Fan Cards: Jesse Hart vs Joe Smith Jr


scorecard by POWERPUNCHER999
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
9
9
10
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
90
JOE SMITH JR
10
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
99


scorecard by CHAMPION97
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
9
9
10
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
90
JOE SMITH JR
10
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
99


scorecard by CAPMAN
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
9
9
10
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
90
JOE SMITH JR
10
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
99


scorecard by BRAIN79
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
9
9
10
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
90
JOE SMITH JR
10
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
99


scorecard by OTURN10
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
10
9
10
9
10
10
8
10
10
9
95
JOE SMITH JR
9
10
9
10
9
9
10
9
9
10
94


scorecard by WILLIAMBOXING
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
9
9
10
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
90
JOE SMITH JR
10
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
99


scorecard by ONLY1
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
9
9
10
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
90
JOE SMITH JR
10
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
99


scorecard by MINIMAXBOXING
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
9
9
10
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
90
JOE SMITH JR
10
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
99


scorecard by NF82
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
10
9
10
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
91
JOE SMITH JR
9
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
98


scorecard by MAGIC MAN
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
9
9
10
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
90
JOE SMITH JR
10
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
99


scorecard by AADBAA
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
9
9
10
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
90
JOE SMITH JR
10
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
99


scorecard by THEUNDEFEATED
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
9
9
10
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
90
JOE SMITH JR
10
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
99


scorecard by JAROD KILLIAN
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
10
9
9
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
90
JOE SMITH JR
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
99


scorecard by GOOSU
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
9
9
10
9
10
9
8
9
9
9
91
JOE SMITH JR
10
10
9
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
98


scorecard by YUNIDVR
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
9
9
10
9
10
10
8
9
9
9
92
JOE SMITH JR
10
10
9
10
9
9
10
10
10
10
97


scorecard by CASUALFAN
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
JESSE HART
9
9
10
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
90
JOE SMITH JR
10
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
99


Comments

Champion97's picture

Prediction,

I think Hart is the much more technically skilled, Smith hits harder, especially at 175, and Hart can be hurt, but I think Hart is the better boxer overall, Smith is technically poor, and Hart should beat him fairly comfortably.

I think Hart wins a UD.

Low skill predict everytime
I'm not suprised

Champion97's picture

Obviously not true, and let's see what you know about boxing, big mouth.

your predictions are always primitive.
I don’t often visit this site since I am from Russia and we have our own community of predictors
I think you wouldn't be in the top 10

Champion97's picture

They are not, I've had a reputation for writing great analyses, especially when it comes to predictions, you have had an account for over a year, no activity whatsoever until that first comment, you are a troll.

http://www.eyeonthering.com/comment/31570#comment-31570
http://www.eyeonthering.com/comment/32000#comment-32000
http://www.eyeonthering.com/comment/30519#comment-30519

3 examples of fights I've called very accurately, and if you read what I wrote, you see theu are obviously long and detailed analyses. I'm a hardcore boxing fan, I know a lot about it, I wouldn't say I'm an expert yet, but I know boxing.

I don't think this is your first account on Eye on the ring, I don't think this is the first time we've talked, and I think the new account and the comment are because you are still holding a grudge, that would explain the non-existent activity from you. You being from Russia being your explanation is laughable, your English is decent, if you knew boxing, you would have made comments and scored fights by now.

Are you lukaszrpb? lukaszrpb is a scorer I have had altercations with in the past, also a foreigner, and the way you talk is very similar.

Ok, let's started.
I'm not troll. It's my only account. but I have known this site for a long time and in the past I left scoring for all fights. But then I deleted them because I revised my calculation methods.
I am very weak in English. I constantly use a translator. I really consider you a weak predictor because you have been trying to analyze boxing for a very long time and still produce such weak predictions. maybe my words hurt you but I just expressed my opinion. I respect all adequate boxing fans and have never offended them.

Champion97's picture

You are clearly a troll, no other activity on this site whatsoever, that proves you are a troll because without this altercation, your account would still be abandoned. You're not weak in English, everything you say in English is clear. Why are you still calling my predictions weak when I have ventured 3 examples of accurate, detailed predictions?, there are predictions I've predicted more accurately, upsets as well. My prediction analyses are not weak because I back up everything I say with logic.

Why don't you get your translator to help you if you even need him, do some predictions analyses yourself, rather than just running your mouth at me, and then I'll take you seriously, and you'll prove yourself to be more than just a mindless troll.

You wish your words hurt me, but they don't, playing the opinion card is what a lot of trolls do. Are you lukaszrpb? How about an answer this time?

thank you for so much appreciation for my english.
it’s really funny for me to answer this question, but I'm not Lucas, I don’t know who it is.

I can send a screen with evidence that I left a lot of scores. Yes, I was not active in the comments because it is extremely inconvenient for me.I participate in the predictors competition on the CIS platform, it is much easier for me to communicate there and I consistently enter the top 5 predictors.
I have no need to prove my boxing skills to you.
you say that you reinforce your analysis with logic. but this is not so. for example, in this fight you said that Hart is simply better as a boxer and will win by unanimous decision. where is the logic here? it's just your boxing vision.

Champion97's picture

I think you are, or you are possibly a friend of his.

Aside from comments, why no scores on this site? Answer me that, because to avoid clogging up this fight page, I would comment on one of your cards if you had any, but you don't, because again, you are a troll. Well, I won the prediction competition last month, I can venture more accurate predictions and detailed analyses if you want.

I don't think you have many boxing skills, prove me wrong, post an analysis on here which your translator has converted to English, let's see what you know.

Let's keep this constructive, what was wrong with my prediction analyses for the fights I sent you? What do you think I miss?, what do I not understand?

I called Fury beating Klitschko by UD, I called Bellew stopping Haye late, I just called Pascal beating Jack by SD, the list goes on, I understand all the important factors in boxing, I understand about age, miles, I am good at analysing the technical and tactical aspects of boxing, a lot of people agree with me on that, you are the first person who has said I don't know boxing apart from people who have actively disliked me, you haven't been able to give me one bit of constructive criticism or think of one single aspect of boxing which I don't understand.

This was an upset, of course there was logic there, most people saw Hart winning a UD, we've seen more boxing skills from him in the past, sometimes in boxing,the majority gets it wrong, but if you are going to criticise me for getting this one wrong, you have to criticise a lot of people, because like I said, it was an upset.

This is some kind of crazy, I do not want to read so much in English))
you absolutely do not know how to perceive criticism.
In the CIS they would not even pay attention to my statement.Of course you have some accurate predictions. For so many years you must have them.
I don’t have points because I deleted my scoring, it’s not surprising that you didn’t think of it. I can send a screenshot if necessary. you are trying to make me a troll and relieve yourself of responsibility for inaccuracy. do not be so narcissistic, I'm just a person who expressed his opinion. I have no personal complaints to you.

Champion97's picture

The way to percieve constructive criticism to try to learn from the feedback and improve from it, but this is not constructive criticism, you want to get under my skin, but I'm not bothered by you, an idiot with no credibility to support him as someone who understands boxing.

Just luck is it that I've called some? That's ridiculous, because again, read the analyses, and you will see I call not only how the fight ends, but why, and how the whole fight unfolds, that's obviously not luck, that's experience, knowledge, I gave a very brief prediction for Hart vs Smith Jr, but for a lot of fights, I give long and detailed analyses.

Why do you keep talking about sending links to prove yourself, just do it, link me to the score cards and analyses, back yourself up.

Why delete your scorecards? Makes no sense, your nationality and language is no explanation for not scoring fights. What do you think is inaccurate? You are a troll, because again, this is your only activity on this site.

That's passive aggression, trying to start confrontation, not getting the reaction you wanted, and back tracking and trying to spin it a different way to how it is, the criticism was specific to me, obviously personal, you are the one who is narcissistic, expressing an opinion can be an excuse for literally anything, racism for example, people who run their mouths with no valid point, just looking for confrontation, always back themselves up by saying they were expressing an opinion.

Let's talk boxing, I ask again, what is it you think you understand but I don't? I'm don't know everything there is to know about boxing, I'm always happy to learn from people who know more than me, but I see no reason to think you are anything more than a troll.

obviously you are aggressive and you are still hurt by my words. this is the last time I write to you, I’m not comfortable spending a lot of time translating my thoughts for you. you call me a troll, an idiot. these are direct personal insults, you are trying to discredit my right to express my own opinion. I already explained why I deleted my scoring. I revised my methods of calculation, respectively, they began to not suit my calculations. I'm not interested in you anymore.

Champion97's picture

That's wishful thinking, it's what you want, but there is no aggression from me, you are passive aggressive. Insults are also saying my predictions, which I put time and effort into, take pride in, are all primitive, low skill, etc. There you go again, you can say something discriminatory, say whatever baseless, unreasonable thing you want, and call it expressing an opinion, that's the defence people use when they say something which is, to say the least, unnecessary. The difference between constructive criticism and non-constructive criticism is advice, you can't give me any advice because you, in all liklihood, know less than me. Yes, you revised your calculation methods, explain that, what does that mean? There is one current scoring system in professional boxing, that's the 10 points must system.

Let's talk boxing, you've run your mouth, let's see what you know. What about boxing do you think I don't understand? I thought Hart would beat Smith based on past fights I'd seen from both of them, sometimes upsets happen, Hart was the favourite, let's not forget that, and he was the favourite for a reason, Smith had been at least fairly well beaten by Barrera, was easily out boxed by Bivol, Hart beat Barrera, I understand the triangle theory is unreliable, but he showed good overall boxing ability against Ramirez, good movement, he has good variety, defence, puts combinations together well, Smith, based on his past fights, how easily he gets hit, his lack of adaptability, logically seemed the weaker boxer, granted, he beat Hart, and I can't comment on the fight itself until I've seen it, but just because that particular prediction was brief, because I was busy with other things, doesn't mean I can't back up what I said with logic, and I have proven time and time again that I am good at breaking down fights and writing prediction analyses. I see how you would think my predictions are primitive based on this fight and any other of my other brief predictions, but I linked you to detailed analyses, and you haven't acknowledged them. Why didn't you send me a link to your scorecards or analyses? Makes sense to, you have no credibility on this site, this discussion is your only activity.

If you knew boxing better than me, expressed an opinion, elaborated on it, gave me advice on how to improve, believe me, I would say thank you, but you haven't been able to do that, you haven't answered the question of what it is you think I don't understand, I see no reason to think you know more than me about boxing. Your criticism was not constructive, and in all liklihood, you can't tell a good analysis from a bad one.

Hart MD 116-112. I think this is an interesting one and I'm tempted to take the underdog odds. JH should be able to use his length and speed advantage to amass points but he does tend to slow down and leave himself vulnerable as the fight goes on. he relies on the clinch where JS is good. JS does have the power to have a solid punchers chance but the bigger x factor is his pressure footwork; JH circles away a lot and could be in danger against the ropes. even so, JH is durable too and has been able to outlast more skilled opponents. still, i think this will be surprisingly close, especially later in the fight.

Jarod Killian's picture

I guess they had a salty Bernard Hopkins fan as one of the judges

TheUndefeated's picture

ffs. did one judge score this for Hart? smh

Jarod Killian's picture

yup 95-94 for Hart

TheUndefeated's picture

Epic fail

Champion97's picture

Terrible performance from Hart, moving up in weight doesn't seem to have been wise, but weight can't be the explanation for this fight, he was unprepared, moved too much at certain times, and neglected his movement at other times, his chin was in the air, got hit with wild shots he shouldn't have got hit with, stood in the pocket and allowed Smith to rough him up. I think Smith has improved, I don't think he's as good as he was made to look in this fight, and it was more about Hart being disappointing than Smith being good, but he has improved, slipped Hart's jab well early in the fight, I think his inside fighting ability has improved as well, the right uppercut was a good shot. I think Hart underestimated Smith, hadn't really worked on a game plan, and Smith knew Hart's style, knew the best way to beat him. This wasn't an eliminator, I don't see Smith getting a world title shot next, but this was a great win for him.

It may be stating the obvious, but the scorecard for Hart was ridiculous, highly likely it corruption, because this was not a hard fight to score, you don't need to even be a casual fan to see who won this fight.

Jarod Killian's picture

Jesse Hart may very well be damaged goods at this point. I've seen that happen to Philly fighters more often than not, their style and grit makes them crowd pleasing but they become shot sooner than others.

TheUndefeated's picture

Interesting. I'm sure you could probably name a lot of Philly guys where that characterization would apply to, but to be fair, the other end of the spectrum (pun intended :)) applies as well...B-Hop, Bennie Briscoe, Larry Holmes, a lot of older generation Philly greats who were very good late into their careers. I'm not from the area, but does Philadelphia claim Jersey Joe Walcott too? ;)

Jarod Killian's picture

Okay I agree with you with all those names except for one: B-Hop. While yes, he is technically a Philly fighter his style and method is quite unique. He was very methodical and risk averse in the ring and relied on a lot of old school, throwback and wily tricks. Let's be honest, I don't think he has ever been on a FOTY candidate fight, his style wasn't the most crowd pleasing. He is a great fighter with genius-level ring IQ but you don't expect to see a Ward-Gatti/Zale-Graziano type of fight whenever he stepped into the ring.

TheUndefeated's picture

Yup. I think B-Hop's style was more influenced by other Philly guys like Jimmy Young, Bobby Watts and Willie Monroe. Maybe not in all aspects, but certainly in the tricks, the holding, ruining the opponent's offense and making ugly fights (especially later in his career). Not my cup of tea as a fan, but I can appreciate the subtle art of it. A good referee though knows how to minimize those tactics though for the sake of trying to encourage more action - like breaking clinches early and warning for excessive holding.