I see it like this. It's most apparent in close fights. DLH-Sturm? Totally cool with DLH winning that fight. He through a TON of punches, they were loud, they were fast, he actually looked good ringside. He looked like **** on TV. DLH-Trinidad was a wipeout everywhere.
Thanks. Fascinating insight! You, a Holyfield fan, strived to will a victory for Evander. How many times we see only what we want to see. It's not that easy to judge a fight amid the roiling passions of 17,000 souls.
This is why I discount any theory of completely commonplace corruption. In most cases, incompetence in judging results from a close fight not going the way TV viewers with the perfect spectator spot think it should, or judges seeing what they want to see, which, no matter the training, no matter the effort, isn't easy to stop.
Agreed! Boxing is tricky to score, so subjective even when the blows being dealt are very, very objective. I agree with Seamus that Whitaker was ahead of Chávez by some two rounds, but two people see two rounds for the other guy and you have a stinking draw. Ali-Norton III probably did boil down to Round 15. Personally, I gave it to a champion who worked the whole round, dictated the pace, landed punches that were not strong, but at least helped keep his foe off-rhythm and at bay. Three hard shots in the last 30 seconds--particularly for the championship--do not trump this, I believe.
Again, that was my experience being in San Antonio, which is the point of this thread... being there as opposed to seeing it on TV. The rounds Whitaker won were more emphatic and decisive but not in a 10-8 fashion, still 10-9. I had Chavez winning closer rounds. I have my scorecard somewhere. Maybe I will dig it up. Probably I won't.
Could disagree more with this post. Chavez wasn't only ahead by two rounds... The majority on this site and others have the score either 9-3 or 8-4... which make a draw even more ludicris. If the majority did have whitaker only up by two rounds, then maybe it could be understandable. Even then, the majority still saw at least a 2 round difference, so thus how could it be viewed a draw? I didn't see the last round of Ali vs. Norton as having the same meaning you did. I had Norton comfortably ahead at this point. Ali even agrees, and I'll go ahead and go with the fighter in the ring and what I saw with my own eyes. Both these fights aren't as close as you make them out to be imo. Whitaker vs. Chavez even more so
Perfect example. I had DLH whitewashing him live. You couldn't see Pea's defensive work! Oscar throws with some SPEED, man. I saw Whitaker sway, duck, dodge, this way and that, but it sure looked like he was getting lit up. I don't use that word lightly; Lit up. Some of the famous DLH whiffs didn't look like whiffs ringside. And the KD, weak as it looked on film, looked utterly nonexistent from the third row. Then, low, I have it Whitaker's way by a point when I get home I've recently settled that Oscar deserved to edge it; Pea did some incredibly skillful work, but only in a couple rounds did he combine ace defense with effective offense and control. He was bullied, and his survival skills prevented him from taking damage and made DLH look stupid, but he was still bullied and outlanded. Live, though, I agreed with the official scores, more or less.
Wow can't believe you got to go to that bout. I'd have **** myself once they announced Trinidad the winner :verysad
Ok, so at the fight you had Whitaker winning by only 2 rounds... Now that you've watched the fight numerous times on T.V. .. do you score it the same way?
Don King was buttering me up a bit . Took care of the whole thing. Comped. It was glorious. Now, that makes me feel a bit dirty.
Thanks buddy, but you were right the first time when viewing it on the T.V... Whitaker by a point, especially when you take away the silly point taken away from whitaker for an accidental headbutt.. Not sure why people even count that in their scoring.