Spinks-Holmes II not a robbery

One of the worst robberies I ever saw.Holmes won absolutely no doubt.It is mind boggling now how people go back try to find some rounds for Spinks to justify this travesty

 

I gave Holmes the first 5 rounds, after that Spinks landed the cleaner punches. I had Spinks winning by a point or 2. It was a lot closer than the first fight, but not a robbery.

 

it was.Holmes closed the show and won cleanly

 

So you do not agree with all those who say Spinks was busier & won the last round?
There are a number of fights where Larry faded late as he got older...

 

And Holmes dumb a$$ should have lost a point in the first when he threw Spinks to the canvas, what you say bout dat Serapi Henson?

 

Who is Serapi Henson?

 

Blade

 

Overrated as a robbery but I still think Holmes done enough by a few points.

 

who??? You drunk or what

 

I think the last round was a clear round for Holmes.Spinks was hurt in that round

 

I am not very close to beeing a Holmes fanboy and i have to say Larry did more to win this fight. I had it a "biased draw" when i scored it. Maybe Larry's behavior was the main point.

 

But Larry doesn't win the fight on the scorecards if he wins the 15th round.

Frank Brunette scored the fight 144-141 (or 9 rounds to 6) for Spinks. Even if Larry wins the last round, Spinks wins the fight 8-7 (143-142) on that card.

Jerry Roth had it 144-142 (or 8-6-1) for Spinks. If Larry won the last round on his card, it's a 7-7-1 draw (143-143) on Roth's card and Michael Spinks retains the title via a draw (because of Frank's scorecard for Spinks).

Show of hands: who thought Larry needed a knockdown in the last round to actually win?

Roth and Brunette were very consistent. They agreed on all the rounds they saw Holmes winning - awarding him rounds 1 thru 4, plus rounds 7 and 14. That's it. (Roth scored round 9 even. Brunette gave it to Spinks.)

 

It seems though only some folks, a minority, consider it a robbery, most consider it a Holmes win.
Those who rated in in "eye on the ring" had a 68% disagreement with the verdict.

So while most thought Holmes won, it is close enough to wonder IF there was bias by the judges.
Something about Holmes style, likeability etc.?
He already had lost the chance to match or exceed 49-0, so less likely to be racism.

What do you believe, just an understandable ambiguity of scoring some fights, or there was some reason Holmes was treated with bias?