The difference between a close fight and a "robbery"

A close fight is a fight where both sides have a viable argument for their fighter being the winner.

A robbery is where one side has a viable argument and the other side has a "Well the judges picked my guy so...HA HA *****!" argument.

Robbery- Spinks/Phillips

Close fight- Both Pac/JMM fights

 

:hi: Hi there.....It's also just YOUR OPINION that the fight was a robbery. And there were MANY in the boxing world who felt the right man one...even with the crazy margins in the scoring. The decsion wasn't what was the most contraversial aspect in the fight but the MARGINS in which the scores showed in favor of DLH was....but many had DLH winning anyway so it is what it is.:good One!

 

I actually had a pretty clear view... And was rooting for Holyfield... But that didnt change the fact that after round 6-7 Holyfield didnt do ****. I had the fight a draw.

The "controversy" is that people wanted Holyfield to win because of his name and his opponents boring style.

Some jugdes has scored the fight afterwards and from what i have seen, none has called this a robbery.

 

I wasn't there but saw the fight. It's true that being there live will give you a different perception from watching the fight on TV. From what I saw Valuev just didn't have answers to Holy's Ring generalship. And from what I saw Holy landed more, harder and more sharply. There are MANY in the boxing world and sports world for that matter who did view the fight that see it the way I did. But again...I wasn't there live.

 

I wasn´t there eighter. Like you I saw the fight on tv. And scored it a draw on the night. I havent bothered to watch it again, but from what I have read and seen the jugdes that has scored the fight afterwards agrees with the original victor or simply states that it was a close fight to score.

Holyfield did indeed land the harder shots, and for the first 4 landed more. Then he started to dance a lot and run allowing Valuev to be competetive. Valuev was/is the champion so Holyfield had to take the title from him, in the last half of the fight he didnt do that.

I have no problem with people who argue for Holyfield won the fight, but calling it a robbery is going to far.

 

I'll have to watch it again....I was a little tipsy as I am for most fights, but I usually re-watch them anyway. This fight wasn't exactly exciting but I've been wrong in the past. So I may have been watching with biased eyes since I love Holy! But with that said I can't see that I had that much to drink to call the fight a robbery to be completely wrong. :good

 

I called jmm and pac a robbery when it was a very close fight, just me being a dick because i fav jmm, its easy to say it out of anger. at the end of the day, if its a close fight the boxer who lost will always feel robbed.

 

The difference is, FIGHT FANS can call it a close fight while the FANBOYS cry like bitches about it being a robbery their fave lost, no matter how close. Keep track of those who cry robbery, you'll see exactly who I mean.