Jean Pascal VS Bernard Hopkins and the flawed 'robbery' logic.

After reading a few comments on here, i'm absolutely flabbergasted to discover people actually trying to justify the result last night. There is a reocurring flawed logic amongst the boxing community, that a close fight, can not be a 'robbery'. Yes, I concur this was a close fight. Does that mean this was not a 'robbery'? Absolutely not.

Firstly, the basis of this being a close fight, is purely, based on the two knockdowns. Legitimate or not, they were scored as two official knockdowns. However, the second knockdown, could have (and should have, in my humble opinion) been scored as a 10-9 round, due to Hopkins clearly winning the 3rd round, up until the knockdown occurred. This round, I feel, was the only round, which, may have presented both the judges, and viewers with a difficult decision to make.

Personally, i scored the fight identical to Steve Morrow, 114-112, in favour of the Challenger Bernard Hopkins. Yes, this 'contradicts' my opinion that this fight was a 'robbery'. On the other hand, the nature of the fight, the manner in which Hopkins clearly won, 8, if not 9, of the remaining rounds, after round 3, asks the question, when a fight is so easy to score, should we seriously accept any less than the correct decision??

I seldom remember a fight, where, round by round it was so easy to score. In this respect, i would deem this fight, a 'robbery'. Based on how clear, concise and apparent the winner of each and every single round (apart from maybe the 12th) was. Yes, this fight on the scorecards was close, but a close fight on the scorecards, as witnessed, can also be a robbery.

Thanks for reading people.

 

Well said.

 

spot on

 

Like i have always said in close fights, you cannot claim robbery in close fights, the knockdowns certainly helped Pascal. Robbery? no chance I scored that a draw as well. R1 10-8 jp,R2 10-9 jp,R3 10-8, 4567 10-9 bh,8 draw, 9 bh, 10 draw, 11 bh, 12 jp

 

I had it 8-3-1 BHOP

 

Of course you can. The rounds were decisive, and winner clear. Why should the scoring be anything less then a victory all be it a close one?

 

That's a bad scoring. Worst than the actual one. People get influenced by the later rounds, where Hopkins dominated. He went to Pascal's body and managed to took away his speed advantage. That's impressive and I understand you to want Hopkins to win that kind of fight. The reality though is he was down by 5 points after 3 rounds. Judges very rarely score 10-9 when you have a knock down, sorry for the TS theory. Hopkins would have needed to be more dominant to get 9 points in that round.

You have to give only 2 more rounds to Pascal to get a draw. In my book, Pascal won the 12th, and maybe the 10th, if I remember, although I had Hopkins winning by 114-112.

You cannot call for a robbery with one single close round scored differently by the judge, who is sitting just by the ring while we are looking at the fight on our TV. People got very emotionnal about yesterday.

 

You guys still doubting if it was a robbery, check this:

This content is protected

 

I'm pretty sure one of the judges scored the 3rd round a 10-9 round.

 

In fact i'm pretty sure one of the judges gave either round 5 or 6 to Pascal!!!! Unacceptable.

 

Of course you can still have close fight robberies.

 

8-4 hopkins for sure, minus that "knockdown" in the first round hopkins walks away with a comfortable victory

 

Your stating that as if its widely accepted.

 

I had round 5 for Pascal aswell as round 12 and 1-3. A draw was the correct result.

 

Thanx,this ten second clip realy shows who won the fight.atsch

Fool...