Robberies you didn't score as robberies?

I can't recall if I scored it as such, but I certainly recall thinking a Ward win was reasonable from Kovalev 1, whereas lots claimed it a robbery.

I thought Calzaghe clearly beat Hopkins, too.

 

Ward-Kovalev and Canelo-GGG would be mine.

 

I thought Horn beat Pacquiao alot of people consider that a robbery I don't.

 

Taylor vs Hopkins 1 and 2 …I was rooting for Hopkins in both fights …and I think he lost

 

Scored it for Ward in his first match against Kovalev.

 

When it aired live, I scored Vito Antuofermo-Marvin Hagler I a draw. I revisited it in late 2021 and gave it to Vito by a hair. I don’t see any way in which is can be considered a robbery by anyone who sits down to actually score it.

Here’s my account from the What Fights Did You Watch Today scoring thread:

Vito Antuofermo (c) vs. Marvin Hagler, 15 rounds for the WBC and WBA middleweight championship on Nov. 30, 1979, at Cesars Palace Sports Pavilion in Las Vegas.

This was a long time coming for me. I originally scored this a draw when it happened but I was a young lad just starting to score fights and while I had seen it since, I never knuckled down and revisited it. Tonight I did.

First, some background:

This was televised in primetime on ABC on a Friday night along with Ray Leonard vs. Wilfred Benitez and Marvin Johnson vs. Victor Galindez — one of the best nights of televised boxing in history, really. What a show!

Antuofermo, 45-3-1 (19), is 26 years old and making the first defense of the title he won from Hugo Corro. His purse is $190K. Hagler, 46-2-1 (38), is 27 and making his first title challenge after winning 20 in a row, 18 by KO.

Both weigh 158 1/2 pounds. Hagler is a 4-1 favorite. He is rated No. 1 by the WBA and No. 2 by the WBC, with Alan Minter rated tops by the latter.

My scoring:

1: Antuofermo 10-9 — He’s the aggressor, lands some body shots and roughhoused Marvin around a good bit. Hagler lands one good left but mostly misses.

2: Hagler 10-9 — Close, Marvin gets his jab on track, lands a few good lefts (he’s mostly southpaw the first two rounds) but Vito closes strong.

3: Even 10-10 — Neither is effective.

4: Hagler 10-9 — Close again but Marvin lands the cleaner punches. He starts switching from orthodox to lefty and does so for the remainder of the fight, although he spends more time southpaw.

5: Antuofermo 10-9 — Vito comes on strong with right leads and is all over Hagler from start to finish. Most decisive round so far.

6: Hagler 10-9 — Marvin controls the distance and lands some really nice combinations against the aggressive swarmer. Vito is cut under his right eye (by fight’s end he will be cut over and under both eyes, six cuts in all that will require 25 stitches).

7: Antuofermo 10-9 — Close but Vito outworks him.

8: Antuofermo 10-9 — Hagler gets on his bicycle but doesn’t land much while Vito gains momentum as he wings punches and lands combinations to the head and body. He’s not pretty but he’s productive.

9: Antuofermo 10-9 — Similar to the eighth but a bit closer. Now Vito is cut under both eyes and over his left.

10: Even 10-10 — Hagler jabbing, Antuofermo mauling.

11: Hagler 10-9 — What a great round. They go to war, brawling for 3 minutes as Hagler decides it’s time to make a stand. Close but Marvin rallies late.

12: Antuofermo 10-9 — And Hagler begins to sag just a bit as Vito comes on strong late to take a close round.

13: Antuofermo 10-9 — Vito with a big round, batters Hagler around just a bit.

14: Hagler 10-9 — Marvin edges it with a big rally but Vito works for 3 minutes. Hagler is cut over his right eye.

15: Hagler 10-9 — Toe to toe, Hagler rips shot and shows some dominance to close the show.

My scorecard: Antuofermo 144-143.

Official scores: 145-141 Hagler, 143-142 Antuofermo, 143-143 even — draw.

The Associated Press had it 143-142 for Antuofermo. The Ring had it 144-141 for Hagler.

The narrative around this fight has shifted over the years. A lot of the initial reaction was ‘so this is the guy everybody’s been calling the best middleweight in the world and uncrowned champion?’ This was expected to be a coronation for Hagler and he never quite stepped up and showed what we would later see him become — maybe he paced himself a bit too much in his first title fight, maybe he was tight being in the limelight for the first time … whatever. The later narrative is that Marvin got robbed (and there was some of that then, but I think it’s way too close no matter how you see it to call it a robbery … to many debatable rounds that could go either way depending on what you like).

Now it’s easy to see Hagler as the winner here — his best work is prettier while Vito is more of a caveman (apologies to Don Lee). If they were artists, Marvin would be a precise sculptor and Antuofermo would be one of those guys who splash paint everywhere to create some kind of messy abstract that you look at and can’t quite figure out if it’s really art or not … but in no way was he dominated.

I had two even rounds. Give them both to Marvin and he wins narrowly. Give them both to Vito and he wins by a close but comfortable margin. Split them and I still have Antuofermo narrowly.

But the real shame here is that it’s forgotten just what a great fight this is with a lot of shifts of momentum and action. Maybe not an all-time epic but one of the better middleweight title scraps in my lifetime and a grueling 15-round affair when those were a thing. It’s Marvin’s toughest fight in his prime, I think, and along with Duran and Mugabi you have to say Antuofermo on this night was his toughest challenge in a title fight — and I’d give Vito the nod over the other two on how close it was.

 

Agree about Calzaghe beating Hopkins, but not Kovelav Ward I, that was a robbery, Kovelav won easily

 

I also thought Kova-Ward I was very close. Not a robbery imo.

 

Gomez-Lockridge
Witherspoon-Holmes
Del Valle-Hill
Dirrell-Froch

 

Also, Jose Luis Ramirez beat Pernell Whitaker first time. Sweet Pea was literally turning his back and walking away a good portion of the fight and didn’t do much in a lot of rounds. He was still maturing.

 

Gomez-Lockridge is an interesting choice. How did you score it?

 

I haven’t seen it since it aired live but I remember at the time thinking it was close enough to go either way.

I also remember it being an NBC fight and Ferdie “The Blind Commentator” Pacheco raising a big stink because he saw it differently and, of course, no one could see a round differently then him (not to mention that one commentating on a round gets locked into what he’s saying and it’s reflected in his scoring … Ferdie was especially bad about going on about what a guy HAD been doing and ignoring what the other guy is NOW doing while he’s saying it).

Furthermore, Ferdie was the guy who ‘bought’ or approved fights for NBC, so he had a stake in it. It’s entirely possible he thought Rocky could become an affordable ‘banner’ fighter for NBC, which had a smaller boxing budget than ABC or CBS, and had plans for him if he won. There’s an inherent conflict of interest there and I think it bled through with Pachecho’s commentary quite frequently (not to mention he was just bad at his job).

I think his commentary shaped a false narrative that Lockridge ran away with it, and that simply wasn’t the case. The AP report says Gomez came on in the championship rounds and Rocky stopped being effective, which is how I remember it. I thought Wilfredo’s guile and experience allowed him to eek it out.

I will admit that I might see it differently if I scored it today, but I just don’t think it was a one-sided fight from memory. The AP account backs that up.

 

I think draws were fine decisions for both GGG vs Canelo 1 and Fury vs Wilder 1.

The adelaide byrd card gets rightfully called out and focused on for being ridiculously wide for Canelo, but neither the draw card nor the overall draw itself bothers me. As for Fury vs Wilder 1, Fury was dropped twice and didn't throw enough punches to definitively claim several other rounds. In both fights a draw didn't scream "robbery" to me.

 

I'm of a similar line of thinking to what @Saintpat has outlined above.

Last time I scored it I had it to Lockridge by a round, but the time before that I had to Gomez by the same margin - so my overall feeling is that it was a flip of a coin kind of deal, rather than a robbery.

That comes with the caveat that Lockridge threw this one away, rather than Gomez really winning it properly. I think it's one of those fights which potentially highlights some flaws or vagaries of the ten point must system. Lockridge generally won his rounds more impressively, albeit none of them quite dominantly enough for a 10-8, whereas Gomez won a lot of rounds which were low quality and which were closer. I also agree wholeheartedly with Saintpat that Lockridge coasted badly in the last third of the fight (Duva in his corner was telling him the same) which cost him.

He looked like he was going to get Gomez out of there in the middle stages, because Wilfredo looked very ragged and weak for long stretches, but just stopped working after the tenth. Gomez didn't impress all that much, but he struggled manfully and outworked a lethargic, flat-footed Lockridge who became way too passive as the fight progressed. Gomez won arguably all of the rounds after the tenth almost by default.

In terms of who produced the quality moments or who had the dominant stretches, then yes, this was Lockridge's fight. But in terms of the actual scoring rules of boxing across an entire contest? I'm not quite so sure. No issue with anyone having this to Lockridge, even by a bit of a wider margin than I had, but I don't think was a highway job.