Utter fail. You can't be serious man. How can anyone call these two fights "robberies"? :nut I think MAYBE you can call the Froch/Dirrell fight a "gift" but nothing more.
Danny_Rand is right. Revisionist history is again forgetting how awful the scoring was. Clottey dominated the effective punches throughout the fight, dictated the tempo, and blocked virtually everything Cotto threw. Dirrell flat-out dominated Froch, and outlanded him at least 10 to 1 in significant punches. Bunch of hillbillies come out way after the fact and call it "close" to change the facts, just like Pac-Marq 2, where suddenly it was "close", when every significant poster at the time scored it for Marquez.
There should be more judges, even out the playing field a bit more and prevent so called robberies of bad judging.
the cut was caused by a headbutt, get over it. The only blatent robery was Martinez Cintron, Kermit was KO'd and they let him continue. Funeka got a pretty raw deal but still no robery Everything else was way too close to call a robery.
Never saw Sturm-Gevor so I wont comment on it. Bradley did not defeat Campbell there was video evidence of a headbutt then Campbell cut open right after it occured therefore its a NC. Diaz-Malignaggi 1 was very close its only considered a robbery because it took place in Texas. Juarez-John 1 was BS but atleast John didnt lose his title because of it, Funeka-Guzman was just flat horrible Guzman in a best case won 4 rounds, Clottey-Cotto was very close could have went either way although I feel Clottey won by 2 points but good luck winning a decision over Cotto in NY when you are from Africa, Williams-Martinez another super close fight.
Oh an d Cintron-Martinez was pathetic, first off Cintron got KOed and only won one round on my scorecard. It goes with that saying you have the knock a guy out just to get a draw.
This thread just proves that people continue to overuse the word "robbery". What ever happened to "gift" decisions? If not that, a fight that was very close and could've gone either way? No, people have to exaggerate. Just because the guy you thought won lost, doesn't mean he was robbed.
100% agreed. :good I had Martinez winning by 2 points over Williams. Again i think the poster is referring also to some of the Judges scorecards. CLottey vs Cotto was the worst scoring along with Funeka vs Guzman.
Are the only fights i consider robberies, the other ones werent robberies at all, close... sure... but just because a fight doesnt go the way some think it should have doesnt make it a robbery, and the nate/bradley fight ended because of a headbutt before the point of heading to the scorecards in case of a butt, that means its a NC. Not a robbery.
:good Barring some extreme examples people always think that they way they score a fight is the only way to score it lol, granted, there are certain fights that are plain as day to score (like some other guy in another thread having jermain taylor beating abraham before the stoppage, i would say that guy doesnt know how to score a fight), but for the most part, a lot of these fights were close as hell, with close rounds every time out just about, and depending on what your favoring in those rounds is going to reflect that. I think Cotto - Clottey was a close fight that Cotto won Bradley/Campbell was a fight Bradley was dominating for a short time before it was stopped due to an injury caused by a headbutt i have funeka winning their fight, but i dont have a round by round to back it up, i feel he got a raw deal there, but until i go back and score it round by round im not going to call it a robbery, that being said, its pretty close imo. Ill have to go back and score it. I had Williams vs Martinez close as hell, with Williams slightly edging it, or a draw as well, and a martinez win wouldnt have upset me eather. It was close and subjective in its winner imo. i didnt see some of them so cant comment.... but people, as is usual, go way overboard with the robbery stuff.