Who actually supports to the notion you must rip the title from the champ?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by gooners!!, Sep 27, 2010.


  1. gooners!!

    gooners!! Boxing Junkie banned

    10,166
    1
    Jan 15, 2009
    Who actually supports to the notion you must rip the title from the champ? I personally feel its an outdated opinion.


    Im gonna use the Froch-Dirrell fights as an example, what I dont get, is that rounds are scored on a round to round basis, you dont suddenly get to the end and think, I know!, I will alter my card as it did not appear to me that he ripped the title from the champ, or are they saying that to win a particular round you have to win it clearer than the champion has to win a round? cause that is the only way Froch could of won more rounds than Dirrell imo, if they were looking at the rounds Dirrell was winning and saying, he is not dominating the round enough so we will just give to the "champion", even though he is landing even less, that is winning rounds by default, which is a bit :nut imo.


    Also, the direction of motion argument does not wash with me, what about you :thumbsup
     
  2. timeout

    timeout Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,718
    3,533
    Jun 15, 2010
    With Dirrells performance on the night he couldnt even rip a $5 hookers of the street.

    Running around, holding, bending under the belt, crying about getting hit off the break? Dirrell aka as the ***** of the SUPER SIX>:patsch
     
  3. AlisJab

    AlisJab I crush homers Full Member

    1,456
    1
    Sep 19, 2010
    Yeah I know what you are saying, it basically implies that the challenger must have a convincing victory over the champion. Well in this era I believe we can call them belt holders.
     
  4. Henke67

    Henke67 One of the 45% Full Member

    9,468
    377
    Feb 10, 2009
    I think it's nonsense. If you win by one point on a split decision, you still win the fight. As you said, the rounds are scored one at a time and you can't possibly think "well, the challenger won that round but it was close, so I think I'll score it to the champ".
     
  5. horst

    horst Guest

    I think it's complete and utter bollocks of the very highest calibre.
     
  6. Robney

    Robney ᴻᴼ ᴸᴼᴻᴳᴲᴿ ᴲ۷ᴵᴸ Full Member

    93,188
    27,906
    Jan 18, 2010
    There is some logic in it, but I personally support the opinion that you shouldn't be able to 'steal' the title from the champ.
    Your Froch vs Dirrell example is just what I mean... I scored it 114-113 Dirrell (7 rounds to 5 -1 point for holding), but didn't think he deserved it one bit. He totally stank out the place, and it's the same with the Mosley vs Mora bout.

    I think the scoring method should be revised, so these fights end in a Draw more often. Noone should deserve to win a bout like that, period!
     
  7. gooners!!

    gooners!! Boxing Junkie banned

    10,166
    1
    Jan 15, 2009
    But dont you agree that the idea of Boxing, is to get your own shots off and shut the other guys offense down? which for my money, is what Dirrell was doing.

    I think there is a notable difference between what Mora was doing to what Dirrell was doing, Mora really did fight a negative fight, Dirrel fought a cautious fight, but an effective fight.
     
  8. AnthonyW

    AnthonyW ESB Official Gif Poster Full Member

    2,732
    21
    Dec 22, 2009
    I think it has to a mix of these two.
     
  9. NoHomeJerome

    NoHomeJerome Boxing Junkie banned

    8,229
    0
    Feb 14, 2010
    I don't like it but it definitely exists.
     
  10. timeout

    timeout Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,718
    3,533
    Jun 15, 2010
    If in doubt who took the round you give it to the champion. FACT.

    You dont like it?

    Go watch some other sport UFC or something...
     
  11. Henke67

    Henke67 One of the 45% Full Member

    9,468
    377
    Feb 10, 2009
    If the round is so close you can't seperate the fighters, you score it even. That's the rules and that's the way it should be.
     
  12. Robney

    Robney ᴻᴼ ᴸᴼᴻᴳᴲᴿ ᴲ۷ᴵᴸ Full Member

    93,188
    27,906
    Jan 18, 2010
    Not if it's a WBC bout... they don't do even rounds, so how do you score it then?
     
  13. BlackBrenny

    BlackBrenny Guest


    If Froch just stood in the corner there wouldn't have been a fight.

    Frochs job was to defend the title, Dirrells was to take it, he didn't. Froch was the only reason there was a fight.
     
  14. timeout

    timeout Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,718
    3,533
    Jun 15, 2010
    There are some things that are called the UNWRITTEN RULES.
    This is one of them. Deal with it. Or boxing is not for you fella.
     
  15. Tora

    Tora Guest

    boxing isint always to pleasing on the eye but its an art, if its a fighter you love its great when it go's to the wire but the descion in the end is alwys gonna be difficult and draws are the most soul destroying way of ending a fight but someone has to win a smarter score system could sort it