What percentage of fights are rigged?

Not a chance in hell. With the money Sergio had riding on this win there isn't a dollar amount anyone could afford to tell Sergio to 'take it easy and avoid a KO'. It wouldn't even be entertained.

 

It depends on your definition of "rigged." Overall, I think boxing greatly parallels the NBA.

If you mean odds tipped somewhat or even heavily in the direction of one fighter, then many. Just like home teams in the NBA get extra calls and free throws which leads to extra points and more wins, home crowds often influence judging. The other fighter can overcome the obstacles, but is facing an uphill battle.

If you mean blatantly pre-determined, then I would say a few per year. Just like when the NBA suddenly changes officials during a playoff series and the team down 2-0 wins, or when they hand the Lakers 27 free throw attempts in the last 10 minutes of a game 6.

It would be far too difficult to pre-determine the outcome of an MLB game, slightly less so for the NFL. The NBA is likely as rigged, if not more rigged, than boxing.

 

I went to some very, very dubious thai boxing in Thailand, I wouldn't be suprised if people were taking dives in regular boxing there and places like that, Indonesia, Phillipines, it doesn't seem like anyone would be paying attention like the state athletic commissions do In America and British boxing board do here.

 

3.467%

 

Bert Suger said boxing would be far better off if it was run by organised crime.

 

What champions league games have been fixed?

 

I've seen a couple of Kimbo fights that made me wonder. Those bums either have no chin whatsoever (I'm talking wet toiler paper here), they aren't real professional fighters, or they are paid to take a dive

In big money fights I can't see it. For anybody getting the big money fights with Money May, Pacquaio or the Klitschkos the incentive to win is too great to be worth a one off payment for losing. Secondly they're most likely in with very little chance of winning anyway, so what's the point paying them to lose? It would be like paying me to lose a pro fight with any decent pro- I'm going to lose anyway

For most fighters in with a rising prospect (like an HBO hype job), I can see the case being made for them being paid to lose- but again, there is a big incentive for winning. The big money rematch, taking somebody's 0 on live TV watched by (potentially) millions, the chance to land a fight with an even bigger name, etc. Obviously there's a man's pride and integrity too

For a rising prospect or reigning champion to throw a fight- it's possible but the money would have to be pretty ****ing big since a loss these days is far worse than a loss back in the day. I could see it happening if a fighter knows they have a career ending injury and can cash out this way, but there are still a load of reasons against it.

In small, untelevised fights- maybe. Who gives a ****?

 

I dont have an idea of how much percent, but I think boxing is/can be the most corrupt sport in the world.

 

Butterbean his careers weren't dives... overmatching yes but no dives.

 

tough to say

I think some fights are not necessarily paid off dives but that many journeymen and cans come in trying but stay down when hit with a good punch

some guys are not necessarily paid by the other guys camp but lay down for a check to make a career of not getting hurt and winning once in a while

i think in lower levels or even higher levels if its not out right corruption where its rigged but officials and refs give benefits out


though some MMA dirty dealing makes me wonder, Elite XC where Kimbo lost they tried paying the guy to not fight on the ground and just trade with Kimbo in the hope to give Kimbo an advantage

Pride got ****ed by the Yakuza who kidnapped fighters and ****ed with judges

in all reality judges are picked months in advance enough time for mob or others to get to them, they can pay them to judge in one guys favor though theres no guarantee itll go the distance