Fights where the official verdict is generally disregarded

Love it.

 

Wasn't there a tussle at the end of LeDoux/Boudreaux where Cosells wig was knocked off?

 

There's something very dumb about being pissed off with all Italians because Frankie Carbo of 'La Cosa Nostra', the name given to the Sicilian born/of Sicilian blood New York Mafia families, controlled a boxing corruption racket.

And thanks for filling me in on boxing fixes going on in Europe, wow this really is the best forum, i'm learning.

 

The problem with Louis-Walcott I is that it was scored on a rounds basis, not on points. Therefore, Jersey Joe only got credit for a single round for each of the two knockdowns. Some observers felt he conceded the last two rounds by running away, costing him the match.

 

Lynes got robbed silly against Branco in a Euro title fight in Italy

 

Oh okay, thanks for that. I remember when i first used to by boxing videos years ago, i'd watch the old fights and score them as we do today, only to realise afterwards that the system was different back then.

 

Nardiello was probably ahead on the cards against Benn (joking)

 

tszyu vs mas. tszyu breaks the jaw of mas and is almost disqualified for hitting on the break when it was clearly simultaneous and he was pasting mas all over the ring.

 

Yes, and in my demented mind, this entitles Scott to IBHOF induction, as well as a full boxer's pension (to be transferable to his surviving relatives in the event he succumbs to that miserable affliction he's now battling).

 

I agree. I actually had Tito winning close, but could absolutely see a close De La Hoya win or a draw. People blow that fight way out of proportion because of Oscar's flashier punches. It was a close fight no matter how you slice it.

Whitaker-Chavez is known to be one of the most terrible decisions in history. I myself haven't yet scored it. Marquez-John is another fight that I would like to score. If I remember correctly, I have read different opinions on the winner of that fight.

 

It isn't as bad as Pachilles makes it sound. Of course there are fixtures on the more obscure cards, like everywhere else, but the big fights aren't worse than anywhere else.

 

I agree. Most places are hard to go and get a win.

 

To me, the ten point must system is clearly the best way to go. I do feel it should be liberalized more for the sake of discretion. A knockdown ought not be cause for an automatic two point margin if the one getting knocked down otherwise wins that round, while a dominant round in which a knockdown does not take place should still provide the winner of that round with full scoring credit. (Sports Illustrated raised a big stink about this after SRL-Hearns I, stating that Ray should have had some two point rounds which he only was given by a 10-9 margin.)

Nonetheless, Walcott fully understood how officials scored fights during his title shots, as the rounds basis was standard throughout his career.

 

Yeah you're right on Oscar-Tito. I've had Oscar every time personally, but different rounds were scored differently each time so it's a hard one. On Whitaker-Chavez, well it's a fight that is contested well throughout by both men, but with a clear winner (imo) to the rounds. I had Whitaker 10 rounds to 2. It's a very good fight though. I had Marquez clear over John, even with i think a point deduction.

 

I agree completely, i've been over it hundreds of times myself on these forums and in general. I just think that if a guy scores a knockdown his opponent should have a point deducted, but like you said, if a fighter wins a round in general but gets say a flash knockdown against him, then my opinion is the round should be scored even, he wins the round of boxing but loses a point for going over. I personally don't score a round 10-8 if a guy is getting a pasting and is even out on his feet but doesn't go down, imo if a fighter is getting battered and shows the heart to stay upright, he deserves his 9 points for that round, rather than 8 as he would if he wilted.