Boxing Monthly most disputed title fights in history (January 1988 issue)

if i knew waht a stoon was id agree

 

The highlights that I've seen don't show either guy having a clear edge IMO.

 

here are some fights:

pea v oscar
sturm v oscar
pac v jmm 1 & 2
mab v morales fights 1-3
hagler v leoanrd
hopkins v calzaghe
hopkins v taylor 1 & 2

 

Ali-norton 2 and 3 were both awful robberies, but the 3 rd fight is my number 1 for biggest robbery ever. No way can anyone score that for Ali. No wonder norton retired, having lost his faith in boxing.

How about lewis-Holyfield 1 as well?

 

In the Tyson-Douglas fight Judge Morita had tyson ahead 87-86 & Judge Uchida had the fight even... WTF!?!

 

If we mean disputed in the sense that there is actual argument both ways as to who won and people actually bother to argue about them, these are the ones that come to mind in recent times:

Leonard-Hagler
Chavez-Taylor
DLH-Whitaker
Camacho-Rosario
Pac-Marquez I & II
Morales-Barrera (as to who won the trilogy)
Mosley-DLH
Toney-McCallum I & II
Calzaghe-Hopkins
Taylor-Hopkins I & II
Mayweather-Castillo I
Holmes-Witherspoon

 

I always felt "disputed" referred strictly to how many people were arguing against the decision. So in other words, the more people there are that agree with the decision, then the less disputed it is.

 

I can remember his commentary in the last round "The time is now coming up to midnight. And midnight in the career of Muhammad Ali" I liked Harry,but I thought Reg Gutteridge was better.

 

Conteh-Parlov and Whitaker-Ramirez

 

Agree.

 

Fair enough.

 

I guess no one else agrees on Zarate-Pintor? I thought Zarate won about 10-5..........maybe I should re-score it???

 

Here's the scorecards of the 3 Ali-Norton bouts.

Muhammad Ali vs. Ken Norton (1st meeting)

Referee: Frank Rustich 4-7
Judge: Hal Rickard 4-5
Judge: Fred Hayes 6-5

Unofficial AP scorecard - 7-4 Norton
Unofficial UPI scorecard - 6-4 Ali


Muhammad Ali vs. Ken Norton (2nd meeting)

Referee: Dick Young 7-5
Judge: John Thomas 6-5
Judge: George Latka 5-6

• Unofficial AP scorecard - 6-5 Norton
• Unofficial UPI scorecard - 9-2 Ali
• Unofficial LB Independent scorecard - 8-4 Ali
• Unofficial Pasadena Star-News scorecard (2 reporters covering fight) - 7-5 Norton and 7-5 Ali
• Unofficial ringside poll of sportswriters - 8 scored it for Ali, 6 scored it for Norton and 1 scored it even

Muhammad Ali vs. Ken Norton (3rd meeting)

Referee: Arthur Mercante 8-6
Judge: Harold Lederman 8-7
Judge: Barney Smith 8-7

• Unofficial AP scorecard - 9-6 Ali
• Unofficial UPI scorecard - 8-7 Norton

I talked to Mercante and Lederman on this bout, and they both said that they had Ali winning and they have no regrets on how they scored it.

 

I actually thought the fight could've been a bit closer than that. I believe I had it like 8 rounds to 7 for Zarate, plus a knockdown, giving him a close but fair edge. I agree it was a questionable decision, but not as "bad" as some of the ones that have been listed here.

Anyway, what's the point of re-scoring it? If you had it 10-5, then you had it 10-5. Why care what some posters on some boxing forum think?? Besides, it was such a crappy fight, why would you want to sit through it again?