Rank these results in order of being most to least out of line.

No. The first part of the statement is true. No issue with Mayweather beating Castillo the first time around, though I scored it a draw initially. The scores may have been too wide, but the result isn't actually terribly problematic for those no inclined to immerse themselves too deeply in a sea of hyperbole.

Hatton-Collazo was debatable, but not outright robbery, because a number of rounds were close and because Collazo didn't really assume control until the final stages. That meant that a Hatton card wasn't out of the question, especially taking into account the flash kd that he scored in the first round.

 

ya and I must have been sucking Hatton's balls too you dumb *****.

 

i look at this list and i only see 2 fights promoted by tr. not sure about 4 an 9 though.

...and i would put gbp's casa-santa cruz on top or the 2nd.

 

atsch
Horrible list. Several fights on your list weren't robberies but rather close fights that could have gone either way. Your problem is you don't know the difference between a close fight and a robbery.:deal

 

just me

 

1 Abril/ Rios- worst robbery ever

2 Lewis/Holyfield (1)- clearly a Lewis win- 9rds to 3

3 Oscar / Felix S.- clearly sturm win but I gave Oscar 4 rounds

4 Hearns/Leonard (2)- clear Hearns win but no landslide

5 Briggs/Foreman- close fight that Foreman deserved

6 Duran/Comacho- not much of a robbery imo

7 Oscar/Felix T- no robbery

8 Hatton/Callazo- no robbery but can see how some could give collazo 7rds

9 Martinez/Williams- no robbery- I had it by 2 rounds for Martinez 7-5

10 Castillo/Mayweather 1- Mayweather won a close fight and deserved the W

 

How about Cintron / Martinez?

 

a robbery is a bad decision

a bad decision isnt a close fight that could go either way, it is where the fighter who should have lost got gifted the win

A close fight which could be scored either way is where it is a toss up over who won (ie debatable)


a robbery is a gift which is a bad decision :good