Gervonta Davis vs Lamont Roach 2 set for August 16

Agree with this. I hope that Roach sticks to the same game plan and if he gets robbed again everyone will know and his stock won't drop but if he gets knocked out trying to switch it up all the Tank ball bag swingers will be like "I told you it was just an off night for Tank"
It is Tank that needs to be more aggressive and switch things up but that's harder to do when you know you have the judges in your back pocket. Tank even said to Roach in the 12th round "You know they ain't gonna give it to you"

 

You asked me to show proof of his bias but I cant use the davis - roach incident ? That's the proof showing bias.
Its like asking someone to name one time the U.S dropped a nuke on someone but you cant mention Japan..that's right you got nothing. Lol. That's what you sound like. Just admit it bro the ref showed bias.

 

I agree, and I hope Roach does the former. If he overextends himself thinking he needs to KO/dominate Davies to win, and gets KO'ed in the process, then the PBC mafia will be out in force trying to whitewash the rivalry and write off the first fight as a bad night or whatever excuse for Davies. Roach should presume fair judges and then do what he needs to do to win; if (as is likely) he is up against corrupt officiating once again, then he still would have won in his own heart and in the heart of any boxing fan who knows what they are watching.

 

You sound like a complete idiot trying to create a scenario that doesn't fit the discussion. I'll help your comprehension since obviously, the public school system has failed you.

First:
-I never asked you to PROVE anything. I asked WHAT MAKES YOU THINK he was bias.... That's not asking for proof, that's asking for the source behind your logic....there is a difference. And I never said you couldn't use the Davis - Roach incident which sounds goofy in itself being that we are discussing the Davis - Roach incident and I just asked you what happened that night of the Davis - Roach incident that makes you think he was bias.....WTH are you doing over there. Are you even trying to read and understand or simply just looking to argue?

Second:
-What you stated wasn't proof of bias, it was proof of a wrong decision. Bias, by definition has to have prejudice in favor of or against something or someone. Willis never showed any favoritism for Tank, nor did he show that he disliked Roach in anyway. Which would have been PROOF of bias. A single event because even you have indirectly admitted that was the only thing that night that was wrong doing by Willis.

Third:
-I gave you a consistency of his actions and how he is known to conduct himself as a referee and you dismissed it claiming you aren't referring to his RESUME......lol. But then you want to base your name calling of him on one mistake he made as if those "9 seconds" you mentioned is more telling than his entire career. His entire fair, honorable, and transparent for the fighters he was in charge of during their bouts.....but according to you....that night he all of a sudden had become BIAS for Tank Davis even though Steve Willis has zero connection to Tank, PBC, Al Haymon, or anyone else who markets, promotes, or supports Tank Davis......

Do you honestly not see how idiotic your statements are..... If this is the case, we should really just stop conversing. I don't want that stupidity rubbing off on me or effecting my computer with a Stupid Virus........lol.

 

A ref is there to call it how it is not play favorites which he clearly did, why would you ask a fighter "what's going on" instead of doing your job as a neutral party who is there to enforce the rules, he did not through malice or through incompetence.

Either way he showed his true colors protecting the house fighter to such a ridiculous degree.

the fact that he didn't count an obvious knock down especially after he rightfully called it a knock down at first, it shows either he is corrupt or a bad ref period.

 

Or it shows that he was in question of what just happened like everyone else. That one lapse in judgement doesn't mean he was bias. Y'all trying so hard to suggest that because of your own bias (hatred) of Tank. I get it. I'm not the biggest fan of Tank either. I felt Roach won the fight even without the knockdown. The refs job is to enforce the rules as well as protect the fighter which would include ring and equipment malfunctions. Willis started counting because in the moment he saw it as a knockdown, like the rest of us when we see a fighter take a knee. But when he ran to the corner and put his head out the ring, then his trainer came up on the canvas to tend to him, Willis was then confused as to what was going on as well, which is why he stopped his count, not because Tank asked him to like y'all are trying to insinuate. Willis told Tank that he couldn't do that because it looked like he was taking a knee (which he actually did), then he allowed him to continue.

Many who are directly involved with the sport as competitors, trainers, commentators, etc... have address that it was a bad call, but not one of them are going so far ignorant to suggest that Willis was in favor of Tank Davis because those that know Steve Willis knows that he has always been transparent to the competitors he's in charge of and fair.

You can jump on to this discussion all you want and regurgitate whatever nonsense the other poster has stated, but the fact is, it's not evidence of bias. It's evidence of bad judgement, bad call, massive mistake, etc.... And that's on Steve Willis, thus, I would love to see someone interview him so we can see where his mind was in the moment and why we saw him make an action that was out of character.

 

This is you now - "I never asked you to PROVE anything" and this is also you the previous post - "Funny how I ask you for any proof that he shown any bias beyond his mistake and you have nothing." you should keep better track of your post.
Anyway.
There doesn't need to be a pattern of behavior to be bias. The whole world knows Davis took a knee and in that moment the ref committed an act of favoritism by not calling it. favoritism = bias
Take the red pill

 

Exactly.