Was Tyson Fury Robbed?

It was completely outrageous, barring the knockdowns the fight was a shutout. Ben Davison put it best - “I think you’ve got to be a sick person to do that as someone who knows Tyson’s story,”

 

I was watching it with 2 friends.
The only round we all disagreed with was round 2.
I scored that round to Fury
One of my friends scored that round to wilder
The other had round 2 even

My card was 116 - 110 Fury
Another was 115 - 111 Fury
The other was 116 - 111 Fury

We all thought Fury was a clear winner

 

Most definitely. A clear win for Fury. Regardless of the official scoring, the majority of people know that fight was rightfully his. The corrupt paid off judge may have tried to ruin his fairytale ending, but we all know he was victorious on that night.

 

Yes he was robbed. It was as bad of a robbery as Whitaker vs Chavez Sr. and Holyfield vs Lewis I. Complete disgrace.

 

I think it has more to do with snowflakes crying after EVERY big close fight that it was a robbery. Every time something does not go the way they want. This was a close fight and while Fury thinks he won, at least he isnt crying like his fanboys.

 

Awwww, that’s so cute but Tyson’s story wasn’t fighting. Fury not story was fighting and this was a draw...no disrespect to Tyson Fury as I respect him and like him much more than I like his fans lol

 

10-2 aka 116-110 Tyson Fury!

 

What sort of post is that? Complete gibberish!

 

This. Logistically somebody credibility.

 

Definitely. The thing is, other than the knockdowns Tyson won rounds 9 and 12 so they should've been 9-8 rounds rather than 10-8.

Once you realise that you can see it's one of the strangest decisions in boxing history.

 

Most judges will score a round with a knockdown 10-8 no matter what else happens in the round. That's become pretty standard in boxing, but what Tyson did in the two rounds he was knocked down would have probably been enough to win the round if it weren't for the knockdown. So then it becomes : should it be a 9-9 round or a 10-9 Wilder round instead of 10-8 Wilder. If you score those rounds 9-9, you're saying Fury would have won the round 10-9 but you take away 1 point for getting knocked down. Or if you score it 10-9 Wilder you say well what Fury did in the 2nd half of the round was only good enough to even up the round (anotherwords you're scoring the round even 10-10 outside of the knockdown but then -1 for getting knocked down).

Either of those two scores are OK to me but judges don't typically think that deeply about a round. They just see a knockdown and score it 10-8, and only score a knockdown round 10-9 (instead of 10-8) if the fighter who got knocked down comes back with a flury and controls more than half of the round. (or if both fighters score a knockdown in a round)

Personally I don't think there's anything wrong with scoring the 9th and the 12th 10-8 to Wilder. Yes Fury came back and landed some good punches but the knockdown in the 12th was so spectacular that I think by itself it's still better than what Fury did in the 2nd half of the round. You could argue 10-9 or 9-9 but you can't expect those scores to be the standard in a round like that, becuase we know historically that typically judges will score a round with a knockdown 10-8 no matter what happens in the rest of the round, to give an extra point for a knockdown.

 

Hell yes he was robbed. Blatantly. And I posted recently how I was siding with Wilder on this one.
A 115-111 card in favour of Wilder means that, even without the knockdowns, the fight was level. How in the bejesus do you see that?.
Even a draw means that, in the other 10 non-knockdown rounds, Wider won 3 of these rounds. No way in the world. Tyson won 9 of those 10 rounds very clearly.

 

Clearly? I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

I bet it becomes more and more clear the harder you cheer for Fury, huh?

 

Watched live scored it Fury, watched again scored it 114-112 Fury.