Eugenia Williams

Don't know if its true, but it wouldn't surprise me. One of the shoddiest jobs of judging in fight history. If it was on the up and up she should have never been involved with ever judging a fight before or since.

I found this little tid bit.

"Her $1,600 fee was paid by the promoter, Don King. He paid for her three nights in a $125 room. He also paid for her meals"

 

3 nights at a cost of $1600 how disgraceful. the hotel musta been a hovel at that price or at best just a bog-standard digs. Williams scored the fight 113-115 Holyfield yet British judge Larry O`Connel scored it one round different at 115-115.. Their rematch was a diabolical result with 42 of 49 ringside reporters having Holyfield the clear winner.

 

First off, why is a promoter paying for a judges room? You don't see anything wrong with that? Second, it's comical you consider the second fight a bigger robbery than the first. Third, you're still avoiding my questions in other threads. Actually don't even worry about it. Im use to that by now as you have no logical or factual answers.

 

The promoter of the show rightly pays for accomodation for officials, who else do you think would pay?... maybe you could list these questions you claim i am avoiding and i will gladly address them for you. as i cannot seem to find any that are outstanding, so list them here asap :good

 

It was impolite of Williams not to have shared any of that **** she was smoking that night with the other two judges.

 

Promoters always pay for the officials expenses. And, yes, that might explain some bad decisions.

It was a bad decision. I wasn't at ringside but it looked bad to most who were there.
But it was probably not as bad as some people make out. I mean, it was a declared a DRAW, so that's not a full robbery - only half a robbery.

 

larry o' connell was smoking it too that night. disgraceful.

 

no way, it doesn't matter where you were at or how you watched it. it was a joke. they scored it a draw so don king could get another pay day out of the rematch. i had the rematch 8-4 for lewis but evander fought much better.

 

Lewis fought like a sissy, I dont know that he deserved to be called Undisputed Champion of the world off that performance.

Williams was definitely paid off, but as someone said, the promoter usually pays for all that crap anyway, so Don probably added a little extra bonus to make his case.

 

Like I said, a DRAW isn't as bad a robbery as a LOSS. No way as bad.

And all the exaggerated controversy and outrage over the decision only served to justified Don King's plan, and build up the rematch.

It was a bad decision. A robbery. But I've seen much worse.

 

It was better than Holyfield's performance, that's what counts.

I agree to some extent though - the way he backs off away from a hurt non-retaliating Holyfield is downright cringeworthy.
(If Wladimir Klitschko does that he gets called a bum. )

 

it's the worst decision i've seen and it was on the biggest stage for the most prestigious title. it was a terrible moment for the sport. roy jones agrees with me

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXLNdGHG3Eg[/ame]

 

Boxing should be purged of incompetent judges...that and restoring the title limit to 15 rounds and I'd be happy!

 

The promoter always pays the judges fees, room, and board. Her fee was $1,600, her room was $125 (which is about right, maybe even cheap for that area, certainly wasnt a luxury suite) and she got a per diem for meals. Thats certainly not luxurious or out of line with or such fights. Furthermore this decision wasnt nearly as bad as people try to make it out to be. Dissappointing after a dissappointing fight? Yes. But a horrible decision? No. Neither guy fought like he wanted to win the others title and it certainly wasnt nearly as bad as the second fight decision where Evander clearly won bigger in more rounds but the decision went to Lewis (unlike a draw in the first fight where nobody lost). Where was the outrage there?

As an aside, someone mentioned that the rematch was the ultimate goal and that I believe is exactly correct. I think the main goal in keeping the first fight inconclusive, from all sides, was that they could all double up on their money in a rematch.