Home advantage for a fighter - why is it accepted?

The way she goes.

 

Just excuses of fan boys on the wrong side of a decision that Paulie doesn’t like

 

Its hard to win on points in germany lol.
Id prefer to fight in germany than north america..the usa is the top dog nation when it comes to robberies now

 

That’s why fighters jockey for A side position. As to why it’s accepted, well, I think boxing exists in spite of it. Same way boxers get killed in the ring, just look at Adonis Stevenson in a coma. It’s just an ugly side of the sport.

I’m sure that California judge was given instructions to score any remotely close round to Wilder. If he wants future gigs he’ll play ball. And so he played ball.

Finally there’s always a human bias which we must consider. American judges would prefer their fighter won. It’s very basic.

 

agree. the judges had stevenson pretty far ahead before the knock out. no way. the ref did NOT call a legit knock down on stevenson in the third. when he got up, he was clearly rattled. home advantage for every one to see.
shouldn't be that way.

 

See the recent Fury Wilder fight

Then watch GGG vs Canelo 1 & 2 and Kovalev vs Ward 1 & 2

America is becoming a very bad place for away fighters to travel to.

Away fighters travelling to the U.K. and Germany (especially Sven Otke) have had issues.

 

Germany are looking at the crap america is doing right now and saying ffs we could have been way more corrupt

 

In seriousness I do think bad and corrupt decisions happen. I just think they happen less often than is thrown around by people who don’t understand the nuances of scoring a fight and or rely on compubox and amateur media analysts as well as letting commentators impact thier decision. As well as it being a fighter they cheer for or wagered on. I don’t want to many inebriated boxing fans rendering official decisions either.

I think in the old days it was taught that you had to win emphatically to wrest a championship from the champ and today it happens on virtually any close card where the judges go that way.

Just my take

 

example- braddock had to REALLY dominate baer to take the title. for braddock, it would have been very difficult to knock out baer, so that was his only option. and he did it. at the end of that fight, EVERY ONE who watched it KNEW baer had been beaten. if the judges had scored it for baer, there probably would have been calls for investigations by congress. back then, boxing was much more popular that it is today.

 

Boxing is different
Especially with rounds being close

 

TBF we get controversial decisions in any sport where a 3rd or 3 (supposedly) impartial bystanders vote on the outcome. Gymnastics (which I hate, but my daughters love) is notorious for similar conflict, it just escapes our notice as boxing fans. Adding an outside arbitrator often yields unfavorable results or at least results that are unforable to those on the other side.

 

In certain circumstances, you can understand it with the crowd cheering one way etc, but sometimes people just accept it too readily.

The fight at the weekend, for example - the crowd wasn't heavily pro-Wilder.