Am I the only one who thinks Chad Dawson should have been disqualified?

:thumbsup way to nitpick at little things that usually get 0 attention by the refs.

 

No that's something that always urks me and when you have fighters that employ is as a standard part of their defense, doing it multiple times per round of course is should be enforced.

 

:good

 

Chad Dawson is overrated. I really don't think he's that good. If you look at the fights, he is all right hand--because he is right handed. He don't have as much skill as all you think he does, he is fast but not very skilled.

I think the fight might be overturned. I think a TKO has to come from a blow, not sure but my gut reaction is that someone shouldn't be able to win a boxing match by slamming their opponent to the canvas. Not in boxing.

Can't wait to see what the commission says. And to be able to look at the instant replays.

 

:****off

man **** that, are you serious? Dawson was winning 2-0, but Bernard starts slow anyways, so you can't say Dawson was going to clearly win, but Bernard sure wasn't winning

 

Fighters have been ducking as low as they need to in order to slip punches (often below their own waists) for decades...centuries...as long as there's been boxing in any of its evolutionary guises.

That there is a rule against it says that some boxing minds somewhere in history didn't like the tactic. That it has virtually never been enforced says that most boxing minds don't really consider it a big deal.

 

:deal

 

:thumbsup I won't say Dawson would have definitely ultimately won this had it gone 12, just can't support the notion that BHOP can jump on Dawson and keep his title bcuz Chad shrugged him off. Controversy in boxing, what else is new.

 

I would have gone with a No Contest, not a Disqualification.

 

The problem i have with it is like the Dirrell-Froch fight for example. When Dirrell ducks below Froch's waist the only target Froch has is his back or the back of his head, Direll is making himself vulnerable. Froch on occasion decided to throw at the only target available, his back, and got warned for it. On those instances the fighter doing the ducking (and not protecting himself at all times) should be getting the warning or possible point deductions if it keeps happeneing, not the guy punching.

 

Hit him hard in his temple or some **** like that instead of the back and chances are he won't do it too much more, since you're only getting warnings anyways.

 

I agree but often times they have there hands up on the sides of their head and are weaving while they are ducking below the waist which makes it difficult to land a sweeping hook to the temple so their opponent will throw straight punches instead and the only target is their back. Can't fault the guy throwing punches for that imo.

 

I don't think it was a DQ. Hopkins did jump on his back. He's dirty C'mon now! I don't think he should have lost his belt either. No contest. Hopkins is dirty and his trick backfired on him.

 

this

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cd8Zdxw2G1M&feature=player_embedded[/ame]