Might seem to be a strange question, but it seems like when a fight ends because of a cut there's always an uncertainty and sometimes even an aura of illegitimacy surrounding a win. Take Lewis-Klitschko, for example: a lot of people will tell you "if it weren't for the cuts, Vitali would've won!" I've yet to hear the argument, for instance, that if Paul Williams had remained conscious he would've won his rematch with Martinez. Do fighters ever try to cut their opponents with punches on purpose? Is it a viable strategy? Is it a dirty strategy? Is a TKO due to cuts a legitimate win? Is it a legitimate knockout?
It's interesting that a guy can beat his opponent and wound him so badly that he's medically unable to continue, yet that is somehow not seen as a legitimate win? I've never really understood that. Cuts are a part of boxing, from an entertainment perspective, they are an anti-climax, but in a sporting sense, they are a totally legit way to beat an opponent.
Cuts are legit. You pound your opponent so bad that he can not continue because of the medical risk. It's pretty much the same as any other injury. If a fighter does not want to lose due to cuts, maybe they should try and get hit less.
In my opinion cuts are often problematic. A fighter can be well on his way to winning, and then he gets cut, and the fight turns quickly. That always leaves me wondering what would happen without the cut. The 2005 Pavlik/Zuniga fight bugged the **** out of me for a long time. That was a WAR. Zuniga ended up cut over both eyes, and quit because he could not see. The problem was that one of the cuts was caused by an accidental head butt. For a long time I thought Zuniga deserved a rematch. I've also seen cases where a cut happens due to an accidental foul. The cut fighter is ahead, but the fight starts to turn, and all of a sudden the cut fighter's corner wants to pull the plug so it goes to the score cards. Kind of like Litzau/Juarez. I've seen fights stopped on cuts, and I thought it was an appropriate ending. I've seen fights stopped on cuts that left me wondering. And, I've seen fights stopped on cuts that I thought was just ****ing WRONG! The rules surrounding cuts are part of the sport, and the sport needs them. However, there are times when somebody gets screwed due to a cut.
Its a fair question since most fights have some cut or the other. Fighters know this is part of the game though. I think the rules in place are pretty good, its never going to be perfect and sometimes it doesn't settle well. The cuts that really bother me are butt cuts, when a fight changes drastically either way due to a headbutt that sucks. If its a punch then whatever happens happens. Punching is the name of the game and if a fighter gets caught that's his problem, and if he ends up losing because of it, well its fair to me, because punching is boxing, and if you get cut getting punched and it slows you down and you lose, that's on the fighter who got clocked.
One fight that just sprung to mind was Khan-Barrera. It seemed very clear to me that the hometown crew let that fight continue barely into the 5th round just so that Khan would get a win instead of a no contest. That fight should have been stopped much earlier.
I think it depends. If it's a win from a cut due to punches then thats fine. But if its from a headbutt .. then I don't think it should be counted as a win.