What was the worst robbery?

I dont think Louis Walcott I belongs in this thread.

Yes Walcott might well have deserved the decision but it was too close to call.

Louis outlanded Walcott and pressed the fight throughout. Under the conventions of the day these factors alone could get him a legitimate win.

 

Do you have punchstats on Louis outlanding Walcott?

Actually, given that Walcott scored two knockdowns (I know, no extra point, but it secures two rounds undisputably), bloodied Louis' lip, swelled his left eye nearly shut, and was nearly unmarked himself at the final bell, when he received a standing ovation from the crowd and was the winner on the majority of ringsiders' scorecards (and remember that many were grossly biased in Louis' favor at this time), I'd say Walcott-Louis I absolutely belongs on a list of the worst decisions in heavyweight title fight history.

 

Lewis Holy is the worst heavyweight one ive seen.
Fenech Nelson 1 was a shocker from memory.

As an aside Tyson Douglas at the time of stoppage would have been a draw according to score cards i believe. I think 1 judge had it a draw 1 Douglas & 1 for Tyson

 

Of the fights in the poll, I've only seen two of them in their entirety.

I think Lewis-Holyfield 1 was a worse decision than Norton-Ali, because I thought Lewis won 9 or 10 rounds of 12, whereas I think Norton won the same amount of 15.
But as I said before, they at least gave Lewis the DRAW, and he kept hold of his WBC belt, so it's not the worst robbery.

I think Schmeling-Sharkey was probably worse, I've only seen highlights, but some say Schmeling was lucky to get the title from Sharkey on the single "foul" rule anyway. Still, that doesn't justify robbing him of the title like that.

 

This is not arguing against you, but i don't really see how it's lucky to receive the title on a low blow. It's really simple, if you violate the rules you lose. Does anyone think Holyfield was lucky that Tyson disqualified himself against him? It must be a big disappointment, but low blows should not go unpenalized. I'm not really impressed by Sharkey and it was his own damn fault. He seemed to be looking for a DQ win himself against Dempsey, but who knows.

 

Well, they changed the foul rule after Sharkey-Schmeling 1. (If that fight happened today it would be "NO CONTEST".)

Disqualifications now occur after repeated fouls, or deliberate fouls.
In those days you just had to throw one stray low blow, accidentally perhaps, and if the opponent was debilitated or appeared to be, by the force of the blow, you lose.

I dont know whether I disagree with the old rule or not, but many people obviously thought it too severe, esp. in a championship fight.
Some thought Schmeling seemed to come in high as Sharkey threw a shot that may have been directed around waist height, so perhaps he was unlucky there.
Just an unfortunate incident.

 

Fenech-Nelson I. This will haunt me to my grave.

The judge who gave the nod to Nelson never officiated again.

 

Yes, but did Johnson quit? I just don't know. It depends on the source one relies on. Cyberboxing lists this as a twenty round fight which ended in 10. Boxrec lists it as being scheduled for 10. There have been accounts of the fight posted on this board, but none, I think, make it clear that it was scheduled for more than 10.

In a 1930 Ring Magazine article, Dan McKetrick, the manager of Frank Moran, who was at ringside, praised Johnson's guts for going the distance with a broken arm. He does not mention the fight being aborted early.

I also think it odd that, if Jack Johnson quit, Battling Johnson did not claim the title, regardless of the ruling in the ring. I have never read anywhere that he ever claimed to have won. A newspaper article reproduced at boxrec claims Battling Johnson was in worse shape at the end than Jack Johnson.

I am not certain of the facts concerning this fight, but if anyone can post solid evidence, I would be interested.

 

I have not seen the entirety of Louis/Walcott I for many years, but my impression at the time was that Louis did do most of the scoring, and did not take a single backwards strep. However, anybody who does have the complete film of that one should be able to provide very accurate punchstats, as the lighting, sound and film quality are about as excellent as that of black and white footage could possibly be.

 

Holyfield-Lewis

Tito-De la Hoya

Chavez-Whitaker

Sturm-De la Hoya

 

:rofl
Your hate for Jack Johnson has now become borderline comic relief!!!!

You put the Johnson fight as one of the worst robberies of all-time, when there was no real controversy or complaints from spectators, or even Jim Johnson himself.:-(