It simply had one judge who rendered one of the worst scorecards in the history of the sport. I personally had the fight 7-5 for Martinez but it was a close fight. It could easily have been seen as 7-5 for wiliiams which is how one judge saw it. The bottom line is you could make a legitimate case for either man to win even though I think Martinez has a stronger case. A robbery is when one man completely and clearly dominates and wins the fight but doesnt get the decision that he deserves. Thats not what happened here. We had a close, classic, fight which simply had a terrible scorecard which was repugnant. The scorecard was awful, but this was not a situation where one fighter so throughly dominated that its a travesty that he lost the fight.
yes because you are american !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am not american or argentinian martinez got straight up robbed he busted up williams the entire fight come on now
The fight WAS a robbery. The judge had his scorecard written before the fight even started, we all knew that much. Williams could have won the fight, it could have gone either way, but Martinez could have scored 3-4 knockdowns and the best he would have got from that judge was a draw. It was a robbery, on that basis. He was robbed of a chance of victory.
I agree......the fight overall is not a robbery....but when one of the judges gives a 119-110 scorecard you are being robbed of a fair fight, in essence, a robbery..... Me personally, i'm not going to scream robbery....I had it 115-113 Martinez....he seemed to land most of the shots that mattered in the rounds to me....Williams best punch was his jab.....but it really didnt seem to stop martinez....
that is the definition of a robbery. If the score would have been 115-113, 115-113, and 114-114 for Williams then it wouldn't have been a robbery. However when you sccore it 119-110 by a judge the fight was literally robbed from Martinez because, he didn't judge on any criteria other than he had to have Willams win on his scorecard but he was too stupid to do it subtlely
Yeah, his post makes sense in theory I suppose. But doesn't make sense in accordance to the reality that took place. The fight was in no way a robbery.
The fight was a robbery on the basis that one fighter, in this case Sergio Martinez, was "robbed" of a chance of neutral scoring. There's no conceivable way any judge with a pair of eyes could have only scored one round in favor of Martinez. It can't happen, so corruption must have been a factor somewhere along the line. Terrible scorecard. One of the worst I've ever seen.
Exactly, if Martinez scores a KD, in lets say the 11, the round flips and he wins the fight by split decision. Hyperbole is a pet peeve of mine. Keith
Ignorant ****, what does it have do it with being an American or not? OF course there is never robbieries overseas, like in Germany. What's next create a thread claiming that the Yankees robbed Ali Funeka -oh what some nitiwit already accomplsihed that mile stone. http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=190070&page=1
Better post. I concure with the fact that the scorecard was awful, but by inpartial eyes, Williams could definitely be viewed as the winner, so he wasn't robbed. Keith