Should there be a asterisk on Bivols ’win’ against Beterbiev

I had Bivol winning 7-5 and the reverse for the first fight.

1-1 is perfect.

 

Why should there be? If you are still physically able to compete and on top of that be the champ of the division, why the hell would beating the champ , with no controversy , have an asterisk?

Stupid ass logic. Being a champ has no age restriction but it does if the other fighter beats him.

 

Of course age matters. Boxers usually don't fight into their 40s. Is this the best Betirbiev he could have fought. No, but this is still the Beterbiev that just unified the division. There is a huge difference between calling out a 40 year old boxer vs someone who is active and who just unified all the belts. If you are good enough to be undisputed and someone younger than you beats you then that younger guy gets a legit win. There were no foul or controversy in the fight.

 

Yes, there should be an asterisk in the first bivol victory vs beterbiev. The asterisk should say "Bivol won but Beterbiev blatantly robbed him"

 

Had fight 1 7-5 beterbiev and fight 2 8-4 Bivol, no idea what you’re on about here

 

To an extent, yes. Age should be considered and beating someone near the end of their career isn't the same as beating someone in their prime. Really the fight should've happened right after Bivol beat Canelo, which raised him to stardom.

If their ages were flipped, then it'd have been a very different fight.

On the other hand, Beterbiev was still undefeated, still a champion, and still obliterating all-comers much younger than him. This wasn't some ancient legend pulled out of retirement, but a long-reigning champion with his aura still intact.

Yes, the fight could've happened a few years earlier, but equally so it was still relevant when it happened and counts as a career-defining win.