Did Collazo actually say he was quitting at any point?

Yes.


15 years in the game, he knows full well that a boxer uttering the words "I can't see" in earshot of the ref or doctor is tantamount de jure to quitting. Collazo isn't stupid. He committed match suicide by proxy...ergo, he quit.

 

exactly, use common sense op, you obviously lack it.

 

He said I can't see ,his corner than asked you want us to stop it ,he was like I can't see its up to y'all

 

True but, when you the reason you can't see is because of a head butt wouldn't they normally take it to the cards? Like, I recall Cotto getting praised against Clottey because it said by everyone that he could have chose not to continue and take it to the cards (Cotto was praised because he this would've been an obvious automatic win for him) And I could swear this is said to have been the case in other instances, have commentator's and people always been wrong about this?

 

I think if the ref or dr stop it because of an accidental heatbutt it goes to score cards but if a fighter or his corner say no more then he losses by stoppage. I think this is right

 

was the cut even caused by an accidental headbutt?

someone tell me what time mark where the headbutt that caused the cut was, and a clear sign that collazo was cut due to this.
[YT]r54gUTtly-I[/YT]

either way if it went to the cards Thurman was clearly up at least by 5-2, I had it 6-1.

 

If the cut that ended the fight was caused by an accidental headbutt, it should go to a technical decision, absolutely no two ways about it.

Remember Bradley-Alexander? No difference in what happened there, Devon complained he couldn't see and it went to the cards. If that was a Floyd/Brook/Pacquiao/Khan etc in Collazos shoes never in a million years would that be ruled a TKO.

 

I don't know, I think we may be missing some dialogue that occurred myself. Ah, yes, wait, this is making sense now. The doctor and ref were not agreement that the injury posed on Collazo would be a good enough reason not to continue, so if Collazo chooses not to continue it would be of his own accord...he quit. That's gotta be it.

 

Different sanctioning bodies may have different rules too.
If the fighter or his corner say no more or give up then its a stoppage loss otherwise if your ahead why not feign injury and go to scorecards

 

I Collazo genuinely could not see, even partially, then it would have been foolish to continue.

He had a good round 5, but the tide had turned and he wasn't going to win the fight in anycase.

Disappointing, for sure, but it wasn't a bad fight.

 

No. Absolutely not.

It only goes to scorecards if a physician (or ref acting on the physician's advice) deems the fighter can not continue due to his injuries.

A fighter doesn't just get to volunteer "I can't see" and have it be stopped because of that. Otherwise loads of guys knowing they were up on the cards with measly little scratches would use that for a cop-out.

Never was a doctor or the ref on the verge of stopping the contest because of the cuts on Collazo. He was asked by his corner if he could see and said no, within earshot of the officials. That equals him quitting. He's a veteran. He knows what is what.

 

There's nothing confusing about this.

Collazo freely volunteered the information that he could not see. There was no talk of stopping the contest before he said that. Boxers aren't just taken at their word saying their vision is affected. They're not doctors themselves. It would never be up to a fighter to decide when he can no longer reasonably continue due to cuts or injuries. You don't get to just announce that you can't see and bail out with a TD.

 

True.

There have been some notable exceptions. Usually a highly touted A-side headlining in his hometown sort of scenario.

He's one of my favorite fighters, but Donaire vs. Vetyeka is an example.

 

We have too many posters on here that don't know basic protocol or the rules of Boxing :-(

People seriously think that should have gone to the scorecards? :rofl

That was a textbook Quit Job.