No americans just like to say it could have gone either way even if no one else believes it so they can justify robberies
its the long time problem with the boxing scoring system ever since the beginning of the sport because it is subjective to eyes of a judge. thats why I rely more on stats..punch stats for me determines who won the fight.
It's not overused. If 70% of hardcore boxing fans think one guy won the fight but the decision was given to the other guy, it's a robbery Best examples are Canelo and GGG 1 and 2 First fight 90% + thought GGG won the fight Second fight 70% + thought GGG won the fight.
Just because a fight is close doesn't mean there isn't a clear winner in them, many robberies are allowed because people view fights through the lens you do.
Not saying close fights are never robberies, that statement is ignorant. Im saying in my opinion, it's overused.
I have to admit robbery tends to get overused, but it's used almost every week because there's such a lot of real robberies out there. Almost everytime a name/home fighter gets beaten and it goes the distance, they still give it to him. It's telling that everyone in the RbR held their breath when the Usyk vs Joshua scores were announced. And talking Ali vs Norton 3, or as I like to call it Norton vs Ali 3, not even Ali himself believed he won the fight, and thanked the judges giving the fight to him anyway. He said that he didn't know how to beat Norton in the ring.
Not necessarily so. Plenty of Andre Ward fans acknowledge the bad decision in his first fight with Kovalev. The same with Canelo vs GGG 1. Many DSG fans cop to him getting a gift vs Herrera and Porter fans that he got lucky vs Ugas. That's off the top of my head. I'll bet most in this thread could come up with plenty more examples.