A challenger should never have to do more

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by ero-sennin, Oct 18, 2009.


Page 3 of 3
  1. ero-sennin

    ero-sennin Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,206
    1
    Jan 31, 2009

    Agreed. No doubt, it's naive and stupid for the challenger/out of towner to think that rounds will be given purely on the fight itself, but that doesn't make it right. Blaming the fighter on the wrong end of the decision shifts the attention away from the real culprits-the judges.
     
    ero-sennin, Oct 19, 2009
    ero-sennin, Oct 19, 2009
    #31
  2. Uncle Rico

    Uncle Rico Loyal Member Full Member

    39,748
    3
    Jun 28, 2009
    I don't agree with the notion that the challenger must do more to win the fight. To me this means the champion can get away with doing less. It's two fighters, in one ring, for 12 rounds. Both should be free from favouritism

    People seem to be forgetting that the other night was a bout in a tournamant! Is there something in the rules, that state a person can benefit in decisions if he holds a belt????? This would mean that belt holders have an unfair advantage over those in the tournemant that don't
     
    Uncle Rico, Oct 19, 2009
    Uncle Rico, Oct 19, 2009
    #32
Page 3 of 3