In the history of boxing, did any challenger get dropped 2X and win a belt?

Who are these alts?? Guys with only 50 messages in 5 years but pop up knowing everything about the thread parameters and writing “again” like they’ve already corrected ppl on here? Mods?

 

Ok then the answer is yes...many fighters have been dropped twice and won the belt, dont try come at me when the op is wrong.
Many fighters have been knocked down twice and won on points( in the same fight thats different but as in THE OP IT DOESNT STATE, same fight.)

 

Hehehe! Mods do your thing if you have to.

No alt here. I just don't post regularly but i've been following this site for years and i like the diversity. But i have some time on my hands so decided to use it on here.

Oh and i said 'again' because i responded to 2 posts in quick succession.

Anyway i'm actually in disagreement with the OP because i had Fury winning 115-111 and i don't feel the lack of historical evidence of 2 KD by a challenger winning on points makes any difference.

Fury won this easily and we really shouldn't be even having this discussion

 

Lol while i still believe you’re an alt, at least you’re clever. Cheers. And yeah I had Fury winning - i’m Disgusted with judges in big fights lately. Constantly wrong and creating controversy. This is an interesting topic by the op.

 

Hey that's cool. I'm actually not in support of the OP. I don't know why there is even a parameter of challenger vs champion. Why should that make a difference. To me it's just 2 guys fighting and one wins after being down twice. Scoring criteria doesn't change depending on if you're the challenger or champ.

This thread has plenty of example of that but i really want one that disproves the OP's point.

 

Hey don't worry about it. I'm a Brit and not a Wilder fan at all. Funny enough i also wasn't a Fury fan either, more AJ for me. But Fury made a fan out of me on this weekend. He was robbed.

 

Well, that all depends, those people strongly feel Fury won those rounds and the judges scored them incorrectly as they did many rounds.

If you're favouring a certain fighter and he scores a knockdown it's very easy to give him a 10-8. It's not as though the judges have to explain their scoring very often...

 

Well, didn't another postor use Holyfield-Moorer 1 as an example that provoked this part of the discussion in the first place.