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

Firstly, that's a ridiculous rule, even worse than taking a point from a fighter who accidentaly causes a cut from a headbutt.

I don't know the answer to that. The vast majority of rounds are such that you can find a winner, even if it's by a small margin. If I couldn't seperate them and wasn't allowed to score it even? I honestly don't know - I'd like to hear what the judges think about this and what they do in that situation.

 

until there is some kind of eagle eye technology similar to the olympics that can score punches or whatever its judged by humans who are easily influenced by money and other incentives

 

You can say about that fight what you want... Dirrell was running, spoiling, holding and hiding behind the ref. The only thing he didn't do was hide behind a ringpost.

 

How do you know he'd have done that, it looked to me like Dirrell wanted to spoil, not fight his way to a victory, if he had drawn leads and countered, that would actually be boxing. not the constant clinching becasue he's heart scared of actually getting hit back.

clinching rather than exchanging is illegal, bottom line. move away or fight, don't hold on every two seconds.

 

It's a silly notion, if it gos the distance, you tot up your score and whomever has the most points is the winner, whether he's 'ripped the title away' or not.
Also, the reticence to score even rounds is really, really stupid. If you can't split 'em, it's even. Giving it to one guy just because he's the one defending or because you like him better is totally unfair.
There's nothing wrong with a draw. If people don't like draws then rather than fiddling the scorecards to avoid them they should be demanding the return of the 15 round bout.

 

If Dirrell had have won a world title fighting like that it would have been a travesty for the sport.

 

it's called the championship advantage, been a part of most combat sports for decades, you have to take the championship away from the champion, its his, you have to take it.

if dirrell was defending, he probably would have won.

 

That's true... hence my 7 rounds to 5 score, but do you really want guys like that winning a title? It gives a really bad example and may even kill boxing altogether. What if Dirrell won, Mora won, and who else... it could start a trend. Fast guys with trackshoes on running, making basketball fakeout moves and scoring once or twice a round. Some get caught by a punch, others take take the belts.
WORST NIGHTMARE!

 

It is an awful notion and if any judge actually believes it or scores even rounds to the champ because they don't like scoring even rounds then they should never be allowed to judge again.

It doesn't matter who is fighting (champ v challenger/champ v champ) or if its a mega fight in Vegas between two p4p fighters or a fight in a back water hick town between two bums; whenever two guys step into the ring they step in on an equal footing and should be judged fairly.

It doesn't matter if the challenger 'steals' the belt. It may be dull to watch but there is no rule saying a fighter must be exciting. Said fighters punishment for being dull will be dealt out by the fans (who won't watch him therefore decreasing his pay) not by the judges.

If the challenger tries to steal the fight it is up to the champ to stop him. Dirrel v Froch was awful. Dirrel was far to negative. He evaded Froch expertly but he rarely countered. If he had thrown a few more counters he would have won the fight quite easily. However Froch and his fans should stop whinging about Dirrels tactics. Instead of throwing telegraphed wide winging bombs from a distance Froch should have cut the ring of, come in behind his jab and threw shorter, straighter punchers.

Yes Dirrel was far to negative, but Froch didn't help matters by fighting like a drunk bouncer.

To be honest the fairest decision to made in the Froch-Dirrel fight would have been to disqualify them both.

 

Hatton was an in-fighter, if you clinched with him he usually had you rolling on the floor gasping for air, dirrell just held on, ala malignaggi-hatton

"I find it extra-ordinary, with all the talk by malignaggis camp of getting the right referee for hattons holding, it is malignaggi who holds on again, and again" - Jim Lampley

"Not only that but Malignaggi said in America with his holding Hatton would just be a club fighter"- Merchant


"What does that make Paulie?"- Lampley


sure its part of the sport,and its perfectly legal if you're hurt, but not every time a guy gets close.