Bad Decisions - Fighters with distorted records?

Bernard Hopkins and Marvin Hagler had some controversial decisions go against them.

Hagler should have gotten the nod against Watts and Antufermo in their first fights. I had the Leonard bout even and have no complaints about the scoring other than Jo Jo Guerra having it 10-2. That was a close fight.

 

Yes there enough examples to fill volumes. Two that spring to mind are Patterson and Tiger.

 

Tiger Ted Lowry

 

Still think Hopkins suffered few bad decisions in a fights which could've gone either way.

Fres Oquendo could've had much better record if judges were on his side (actually most of his losses could've been a 'W')

 

Marvin shouldn't have let Ray play mind games. Then maybe he would have won the fight.

 

Holmes vs Spinks..sorry but no way ( not even close if you see what punches land) that Spinks won the second fight. He was literally getting wobbled by jabs the entire fight on and off. Holmes stays in boxing if he wins,and we get Tyson vs Holmes with no excuses ( Tyson still wins)

 

Lewis' draw again Holyfield was probably the single worst decision l can recall.

 

Gennady Golovkin last night! He won by at least 4 clear rounds!Absolute travesty and a disgrace!

 

Reggie Johnson might be worth a shout here. If you look at his record devoid of any context, then he looks like a solid Middle / Light-Heavy contender (so an occasional alphabet titlist in modern lingo, I guess) who would basically beat the journeymen but generally lose to the better operators.

That's an injustice to him. He clearly beat Castro in the first fight (pure home town cooking) and I also think he beat the very talented John David Jackson by a couple of rounds or so. I thought the Toney verdict was just about fair (I had it 114-113 to Lights Out)... But if Reggie had got it, there couldn't have been any complaints.

The only guy who definitively beat him in or around his prime was Roy. With some better luck from the judges he'd be more fondly remembered and have a record more in line with his talents.

 

I've always felt strongly that Pernell Whitaker's record didn't reflect his dominance. He could have been 45-1 if he had a little luck on his side; his sole loss coming at the hands of a prime Felix Trinidad at the age of 35. The case can be made that his losses to Ramirez and De La Hoya, the draw with Chavez, the no contest to Pestryaev all should have went to Whitaker. The final blemish on his record was the loss to Boroquez in a fight he very well would have won if he doesn't injure his shoulder. In that instance Pete retires at 44-1 or 45-1 (if he beats Boroquez).


Agreed on Hopkins as well. I had him edging both Taylor fights and Calzaghe. You could make a case that those 3 losses along with the 2 debatable draws(the first Pascal fight and the first Mercado fight) put him at 60-5, 2 NC.

 

This is a very good post ..imo .. I agree completely and I feel it's not addressed enough. why hagler beat himself or took himself out of the fight at least. It was a huge factor for me..SRL was the master "peoples fighter" who played into the hands of fans and judges. He got Marvin to succumb to the psychological battle where Hagler started in on the bolo punches, sticking his chin out and pulling it back, etc., not marvins game and Marvin lost focus..imo ... Not taking away from SRL, very smart of him and he was an extremely intelligent boxer, and it was a close fight and I can't really argue with the result. And if it went a Hagler win or a draw, couldn't argue with that either.. But what we did see is a 118-110 scorecard for Leonard .. so he had 1 judge a true believer

 

This content is protected