I don't like how a fighter wins a close SD, and then calls it a day. NO! You fight again to put a stamp on it. Just because you barely won THAT day doesn't make you better than the other man. If your better, either stop the opponent or clearly UD him.
Sometimes these close SD's should actually have been wide UD's, but just edged the biased or crooked judges. Beyond judges' repair I call that.
I know what you mean. I'm talking about razor close fights where the decision is highly disputed. Classic example is Thurman Porter. Hopefully they rematch because to say "Thurman whooped Porter" is disingenuous
If it's truly warranted and there's some sort of controversy to it, then he'll yeah it deserves a rematch. Gonzalez-Cuadras was a legitimate split decision that needs a rematch.
From a sporting perspective I agree, even if it was a dull fight. For example, I believe Lara 'deserves' a Canelo rematch. Would that be desirable though, given it would delay potentially more entertaining fights? Not for me. Plus, with the exception of money fights, there's not much incentive for the guy given the win to risk another go at it. Unless they're particularly bothered about shutting up people on internet forums. Thurman did whoop Porter btw
Or decisions that should've been SD but because of corruption they became UD. I think those deserve a mention too...
