Unless I've missed a post claiming that the judges were bribed in any of those fights, I don't know that anyone is really making such accusations. Frankly I don't know how bribing a judge would be done. Does the promotor go to the officials and say " just in case, this happens to go the distance, would you like to make a few extra bucks?" I don't think any of Holmes' fights were fixed. Just not sure I agreed with some of the decisions, but that's also subjective and opinion based.
The judges are sanctioning body judges usually. The promoter goes to the President of the WBC, WBA OR IBF, in a private hotel meeting and hands him an envelope full of cash and that says it all. The president then appoints the judge he knows will play along and there you have the makings of a fixed fight.
But how do they determine if the bout is to go the distance? Do they involve the fighters as well, or is the deal just made with understanding that IF the fight reaches the final bell, then the chosen one gets the W?
Again, most of the judges I know wish that would happen, given their economic status. I've hand a good friend of mine judge a fight of mine, once. I was the favored fighter of the promoter, even. Got my ass roundly and soundly beat, and my buddy scored it a shut out in favor of the other guy.
You don't. That's why you get those ridiculous cases like that bribed ******* who scored the 5th round of Lewis - Holyfield I for Holyfield. Just for reference, here is that round for those who say "well it's hard to see when you're ringside!": [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4JA74eMlIM[/ame] Judges and the entire sport is corrupt to the bone. Anyone denying that is living in a fantasy world. And yes, those judges do leave with a nice big envelope everytime. That said, the individual judges are a symptom of the problem, not the cause. That is with the even-more corrupt promoters.
I grew up a Holmes fan. He was robbed in second Spinks match for sure. It was one of the worst title match decisions in the history of the division. I thought Holmes edged Nielsen, but lost to McCall. Holmes just did not do enough vs. McCall. Larry should have at 2 more wins on his resume.
First of all... the punch stats are not reliable, I'm glad the judges can't see them. There is no way Lewis landed that many punches that round. I saw a lot of missing by both men and the punches that did land were not clean. I gave it to Lewis but it was not the dominating round that you are suggesting.
I just watched both Spinks fights. The first is a clear Spinks win. Holmes was clearly old and getting out hustled. Spinks got a bunch of rounds just do to his aggression and activity level more than for the damage he was doing. The second one was closer. I scored it 8 rounds to Spinks 6 to Holmes with one even. If I gave Holmes the benefit of the doubt and the even round he still loses by a point. Holmes swept the first 4 rounds by domination and taking the fight to Spinks but then the tide clearly turns and Spinks wins most of the rounds afterward. The clear exception being the one where Holmes had Spinks out on his feet but failed to score a knock down. If you want to score that a two point round I guess we could have a draw. If you want to score not on rounds but on who did the most damage then clearly Holmes won the fight. But based on a ten point must system over 15 rounds it was a close fight that Holmes barely lost. As a side note, I also just watched the fight Muhammad Ali had with Bob Foster and he just plays with that dude, carries him until the round he predicted, and knocks Foster out no problem. A heavyweight champ like Holmes really shouldn't be having that much difficulty with a light heavyweight, however good, when he has that much of a weight advantage. People who think Holmes was better than Ali should take that into consideration.
As champ, Holmes was never robbed, his opponents were. Carl Williams and Tim Withsersppon have case against him that they deserved decisions, and Weaver may have been stopped too early. Holmes was protected as champ by Don King, who was his promoter and manager.
How about that Quinn Navarre fight? I thought Larry lost that one as well and just got outhustled. That's how he was losing those late fights anyway--outhustled and going right hand happy. And it was no longer a straight right but a looping one like Bowe's and it worked against guys like Shepherd, but not that many of the top 10/upper journeyman guys. Also, if he beats McCall, does anyone really think he fights Bruno? I see a much different opponent and DKP having a very very tough time getting him to re-sign for a Tyson rematch. And that's about all DKP was doing was getting beatable guys as champs and Larry would have wanted an awful lot of $$$ for a Tyson rematch.
Larry Holmes was robbed in the second fight with Spinks, 46 writers were asked who they thought won the fight 42 believed Holmes won the fight. Think that say,s it all.At least Joe Cortez was Honest that night he gave the fight to Holmes.
It's not necessarily about payoffs, but also about the possibility that tabbing the "wrong" fighter might affect future assignments. It's also often about the race or nationality of those concerned. If you've got the Ring Record Book and Boxing Encyclopedia from '81, check the section on the year's title fights, and look at the scorecards and nationalities. It's amazing.