What percentage of title fights...

cross_trainer · 07-11-2007, 06:50 PM

...would you guess have been fixed? Just give a rough approximation.

heerko koois · 07-11-2007, 06:54 PM

Less than 1 % i reckon......but we will never know how many were fixed....
Clay- Liston 2 was a fix for sure though....

TBooze · 07-11-2007, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heerko koois

Less than 1 % i reckon......but we will never know how many were fixed....
Clay- Liston 2 was a fix for sure though....

Pure speculation, the amount of proven fixes are miniscule.

Proven fixes in the last 50 years or so boil down to Pep/Perez, probably Everett/Escalera and maybe Whitaker/RamirezI and Coggi/GonzalesI in big fights.

heerko koois · 07-11-2007, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TBooze

Pure speculation, the amount of proven fixes are miniscule.

Proven fixes in the last 50 years or so boil down to Pep/Perez, probably Everett/Escalera and maybe Whitaker/RamirezI and Coggi/GonzalesI in big fights.

whitaker-Ramirez a fix ? i thought that Whitaker won it ...so do you think that the Judges were corrupt ? I could agree with that...

TBooze · 07-11-2007, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heerko koois

whitaker-Ramirez a fix ? i thought that Whitaker won it ...so do you think that the Judges were corrupt ? I could agree with that...

I said maybe... because it was more than just a poor decision against Whitaker.

duran77 · 07-11-2007, 07:15 PM

Did'nt Lamotta admit he threw a fight in order to get a shot at the title.

TBooze · 07-11-2007, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duran77

Did'nt Lamotta admit he threw a fight in order to get a shot at the title.

Yes against Nardico, it was not that big a fight, hence the reason LaMotta probbaly needed the money for the dive!

Vantage_West · 07-11-2007, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TBooze

Yes against Nardico, it was not that big a fight, hence the reason LaMotta probbaly needed the money for the dive!

no that was when he was old and his corner just thought he couldnt win it.

it was billy fox who was a protected light heavy fighting guys with big but useless records.

the poeple he was with knew that jake was in thier pockets and that lamotta was a dangerous figure and if billy beat him it would be a great career piece...they made him throw the fight gave fox a title shot and made him look easier to beat....in a way it was helpful for both fighters that jake threw the fight.

TBooze · 07-12-2007, 03:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vantage_West

no that was when he was old and his corner just thought he couldnt win it.

it was billy fox .

Thanks for the correction

McGrain · 07-12-2007, 04:13 AM

The Billy Fox dive is the only fight that's been proven a fix by testimony.

I'd say that judges fixing fights is a little different from fighters fixing fights and I'd guess that the later is probably pretty rare, certainly in title fights

TBooze · 07-12-2007, 04:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by McGrain

The Billy Fox dive is the only fight that's been proven a fix by testimony.

Willie Pep/Lulu Perez as well, Pep was banned freom ever fighting in NYC after that fight.

McGrain · 07-12-2007, 04:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TBooze

Willie Pep/Lulu Perez as well, Pep was banned freom ever fighting in NYC after that fight.

Is that right? I did not know that!

Do you know what testimony exists, who took it etc., of the top of your head?

Stonehands89 · 07-12-2007, 03:22 PM

I suspect that before ~1920, many of them were fixed. Boxing was just getting out from underground and shady characters were running everything in broad daylight -at least until the cops kicked the doors in to the warehouse. Perhaps 5-10% were not completely on the level.

After it got more organized and the modern era was ushered in but before Valachi turned and blew the cover of La Cosa Nostra, Blinky Palermo and co. weren't quite running things in broad daylight, but their presence was known and felt by everyone. They were strong in the shadows and behind straw men. I'd hazard that 1-3% of title fights were tainted.

Since then, I think that fixes are happenstance and analomous. Too much risk of exposure. In '93, Ray Mercer tried to bribe his way to a win over Ferguson during the bout and suddenly he was in the New York Times. Overall, another factor may be better purses... the temptation is less.

Duodenum · 07-12-2007, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by McGrain

The Billy Fox dive is the only fight that's been proven a fix by testimony.

That the first meeting between Flynn and Dempsey was also fixed was confirmed by testimony at Dempsey's 1920 draft evasion trial, but neither Fox/LaMotta, or Flynn/Dempsey were for a title.

Quote:

I'd say that judges fixing fights is a little different from fighters fixing fights and I'd guess that the later is probably pretty rare, certainly in title fights

I've watched Lulu Perez/Willie Pep a number of times, and buying that match as being on the level is a lot for me to swallow. Once again though, that was not a title match.

My dinner with Conteh · 07-12-2007, 04:42 PM

6%.

07-11-2007, 06:50 PM	#1
cross_trainer Bergeron Avatar Club ESB Addict Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 3,381 vCash: 1000	What percentage of title fights... ...would you guess have been fixed? Just give a rough approximation.
Top

07-11-2007, 06:54 PM	#2
heerko koois Champion East Side Guru Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: veenwouden-netherlands Posts: 7,222 vCash: 75	Re: What percentage of title fights... Less than 1 % i reckon......but we will never know how many were fixed.... Clay- Liston 2 was a fix for sure though....
Top

07-11-2007, 07:15 PM	#6
duran77 newbie Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 49 vCash: 1000	Re: What percentage of title fights... Did'nt Lamotta admit he threw a fight in order to get a shot at the title.
Top

07-12-2007, 04:13 AM	#10
McGrain Diamond Dog East Side VIP Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 63,251 vCash: 1000	Re: What percentage of title fights... The Billy Fox dive is the only fight that's been proven a fix by testimony. I'd say that judges fixing fights is a little different from fighters fixing fights and I'd guess that the later is probably pretty rare, certainly in title fights
Top

07-12-2007, 03:22 PM	#13
Stonehands89 Champion East Side Guru Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 5,193 vCash: 1000	Re: What percentage of title fights... I suspect that before ~1920, many of them were fixed. Boxing was just getting out from underground and shady characters were running everything in broad daylight -at least until the cops kicked the doors in to the warehouse. Perhaps 5-10% were not completely on the level. After it got more organized and the modern era was ushered in but before Valachi turned and blew the cover of La Cosa Nostra, Blinky Palermo and co. weren't quite running things in broad daylight, but their presence was known and felt by everyone. They were strong in the shadows and behind straw men. I'd hazard that 1-3% of title fights were tainted. Since then, I think that fixes are happenstance and analomous. Too much risk of exposure. In '93, Ray Mercer tried to bribe his way to a win over Ferguson during the bout and suddenly he was in the New York Times. Overall, another factor may be better purses... the temptation is less.
Top

07-12-2007, 04:42 PM	#15
My dinner with Conteh P4P King East Side VIP Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 21,591 vCash: 1000	Re: What percentage of title fights... 6%.
Top