Robberies That Weren't....?

I agree about the Antuofermo fight.

I think there is more of a tendency to cry robbery when the scores don't even reflect a close fight

 

Giardello/Carter springs to mind...fairly close fight. Carter wasn't robbed of anything...Carter was more aggressive, but Giardello out boxed him for stretches in the match.

 

Only watched Hagler-Antuofermo once, but me it was a robbery since a clearly gave Marvin the first eight rounds and at least a couple of the last seven. I e if you scored every close round to the champ, I'd still have Hagler winning it.

Robbery is perhaps a bit harsh for Hearns-Leonard II since there probably were enough close rounds to make it a draw.

 

id include Chavez v whittaker.
Whittaker won most of his rounds big whereas Chavez just edged the rounds he won giving the impression that whittaker had won the fight, but when I added up my scorecard I had it for Chavez by a round. just more consistent. Some of the rounds were very tight though so you could slide either way but definitely a very close fight and no way a robbery.

 

Ali-Young
Young would repeatedly counter Ali's missed right hands by landing with soft flurries below the belt line. The referee warned Young repeatedly for hitting below the belt early on, but then he just forgot about it while Young continued to do it. So while some people may have scored these flurries as points for Jimmy, I didn't because they were illegal.

Secondly, it could have counted as a knockdown against Jimmy when he stuck his head and body outside the ring. In the tenth round, Ali actually tried punching Jimmy while he ducked outside the ring. But the referee pulled him off.
That's why I think Ali won against Young.
Norton-Ali III
I scored this fight without any bias and even though deep down I would've wanted Norton to win on my scorecard he didn't.

Norton won rounds: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, and 14

Ali won rounds: 1, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, and 15

Drew rounds: 4 and 12

Even round 4 could've been tipped in Ali's favor looking back so all in all there was no robbery I think Ali won fair and square. Almost everyone in the arena basically had the bout come down to the 15th round which Ken gave away by landing one jab in the first two minutes and a total of two up to the last thirty seconds, he gave the round and fight away. Norton has no one to blame but himself. The (Unofficial punch counts done by various observers is 281 landed by Ali and 199 Norton for the bout).

 

Cheers. Good thread topic!

 

Giardello vs Carter is an odd one.

I think it was really mainly the ****py Denzel Washington film that stoked that robbery nonsense up, but then you had a lot of people going too far the other way to try and address it, claiming that Giardello had actually won widely and put on a boxing masterclass when he did nothing of the sort.

imo it was a razor close fight that could have gone either way, with a faded Giardello that had lost much of his defensive reflexes unable to dictate anything clearly, but Carter being too cautious\one-paced\slow of foot to fully take advantage of it.

 

Robbery is a term we all lapse pretty lazily into using at times.

I think over my years on boxing forums, i've seen most controversial fights have a few people that have a different reasonable take.

 

No....Young-Ali WAS a robbery...a blatant robbery, along with Ali-Norton lll...no revisionism here please.
Examples of robberies that weren't robberies are the previously stated Giardello-Carter, Griffith-Tiger l and Pastrano-Johnson.