This is pretty much the real question after this Kovalev/Ward decision, since people are screaming at opposite ends. The hard thing is of course that the word "robbery" is a bit subjective here and so people will use it differently, but I'm gonna argue for a case that YES, YOU CAN HAVE A CLOSE ROBBERY. Simply put I think you can prove a robbery not by scorecards, but by looking at the general consensus of ringside and boxing critic opinions. The best example of this is Sturm vs De La Hoya. Even most DHL fans admit that Sturm was robbed of a decision that night, I agree. But people also forget that the fight was close on the scorecards. Officially it was a UD 115-113 for DHL, but vast majority of critics had it 115-113 or 116-112. Close on cards but boxing history has shown that this fight is seen as a robbery up to today as people as still bring it up as a DHL loss. Kovalev/Ward was pretty much the same as DHL/Sturm. Both Kovalev and Sturm landed more, both won by most expert opinions, and both got the short end of a close decision to the popular "hometown hero". Nonetheless the stigma of of the DHL/Sturm fight never went away. Up to this day people still call it a "robbery" or bad decision. Which means that most likely the same will result for Kovalev/Ward. But that's just my opinion. What do you guys think, can a fight be close or a bad decision?
Yes , its very much possible for a fight to be close and a robbery . You need to win at least 7 rnds the most to win a decision . Ward did not do that, he won 5 rnds . Kovalev won 7 including a knockdown . Which makes this fight close but still makes Kovalev the very clear winner . So i can see how some would view this fight as a robbery .
Yes, only the idiots think a robbery can not be close. This was a robbery because Kov was the clear winner.
If there's no conceivable way that a fighter can win 7 out of the 12 rounds, then yeah, you can call it a robbery. Pac-Bradley 1 is my best example of that. That said, I personally could see the path that a judge might take to submit a card of 114-113 in favor of Ward, even if I personally had Kov ahead by a point. So this decision, while open to debate, hardly qualifies as a "robbery".
I just watched it. Ward put up a decent fight, sure, but Kov damaged him throughout the fight and was quite obvious. There were a few moments that really summed it up. A few moments where both guys weren't budging, both throwing hard shots and landing, but every time it was Ward that would cave and backpeddle, looking like he was hurt. I had Ward winning a MAX of 5 rounds. I'm so sick of boxing and bad decisions. And looking at the stats after, Kov landed more, landed more power, put Ward on his butt AND busted his face up pretty darn good, and was the aggressor yet loses? And Kov wasn't hurt ONE time, Ward hurt several times. I'm actually surprised Ward made it out of the first couple rounds, but he did not deserve a W, not at all. It's a real shame, boxing seems to mess up the big fights that go to decision quite a bit.
except Oscar easily won the first few rounds and Sturms punches weren't actually hurting Oscar. Oscar being fat and completely out of shape was the underlining factor. Sturm wasn't a big puncher at all. So its quite a bit different. Oscar lost that fight by sheer stupidity, going out and throwing 100+ punches per round early when he was in the worst shape of his career. lol I'm surprised Oscar didn't KO himself by the 8th round just from being so tired.
I don't think so. I thought that the term/phrase "robbery" or "so and so was robbed" is boxing slang for a fighter who CLEARLY won the fight by a WIDE margin in terms of rounds won, punches landed, damage done, etc. and the other fighter being given the decision. I've seen plenty of robberies like Augustus/Burton but this fight isn't even in that category. Even the people who scored the fight for Kovalev admitted that it was a close one with a lot of rounds being difficult to score. I think if there's an argument, then it doesn't deserve to be labelled a robbery.
I'd bet that Ward could of have two 10/8 rounds and the judges would have either still give it to Wars or more than likely give it a draw. The word robbery in such a close fight seems harsh but in this case I think not because the judges must have taken one or two rounds from somewhere to make it up to seven which when I rewatched the fight no matter how many times I rewatched it subjectively for the life in me I can't find the rounds they conceded to Ward its a simple as that.
Well, I've seen worse decisions, but I still think Kovalev won. If that means it is a robbery, then so be it. Ward did not do enough to take his title
In my opinion no. A robbery is when a fighter clearly and dominantly wins a round and yet the judges inexplicably award that round to the other fighter. The problem with a fight being close, but still being a robbery is that you will have close rounds that could conceivably be scored for either fighter, and therefore you could reasonably get 10 different score cards.
It's possible for a fight with a close score to still be a robbery, as in Alexander-Matthysse for instance, but what happened last night was not a robbery.