Is it possible for a fight to be close and still be a robbery

Trinidad/De La Hoya

 

I say absolutely not...it's one thing if a guy wins, say, nine rounds clear but loses.

But there's no such thing as a 7-5 robbery (or thereabouts).

 

Basically, here on ESB robberies are close fights in which YOUR favorite fighter loses.

 

:yep

 

Yeah, maybe if a guy wins 7 rounds clearly and the other guy wins 5 rounds clearly, it's a robbery.

 

:yep:rofl:roflthumbsup yup. acb is right 90 of how people view it on here. I dont though. If its a close fight and one person wins I will admit they won. wont call it a robbery

 

How is there not? If one guy CLEARLY wins 7 rounds, and I mean clear in every sense of the word and the other gets 5 and then it goes to the 5 round guy, how is that fair?

That's robbing the man who clearly won the ****ing fight.

 

I guess everyone has their own subjectivities when deciphering between a robbery and a bad decision.

I would call a 7-5 fight that went the wrong way a bad decision.

A robbery to me is a blatent bad, arguably corrupt decision in which shortly thereafter Don King may be seen circling the auditorium.

 

:yep

 

If the rounds were that easy to score in that one guy CLEARLY won 7 rounds while the other guy CLEARLY won 5 rounds and there is no dispute whatsoever, i would say you can call it a robbery. The problem is, no fight is that clear cut. Some rounds are harder to score and that when people's biased comes in.

 

same here, even though when it all comes down to it it kinda means the same thing. But i agree with you acb

 

You rarely get a robbery in boxing. Even something like Lewis/HolyfieldI IMO was not a robbery. Sure Lewis was unlucky, but he did not do himself any favours by giving Holyfield too much respect.

The last mainstream robbery was probably Whitaker/RamirezI. I would include maybe Cogg/GonzalesI, but I suspect that was a fix, which is a different kettle of fish...