I've always wondered about this and I hope someone can give a plausible reason why winning cheaters get away with a No Contest in boxing, while in other sports you just get disqualified for violating the doping rules? Certainly when you look at history and see that many guys that were caught afterwards just edged their opponents (often controversial), and very probably wouldn't have won the fight without their cheating. Or do I overlook something here, why boxers shouldn't just be DQ'd like other athletes?
They should absolutely get a loss. It's a sham that their record doesn't get any real blemishes as a result. Nobody really cares about an NC- the media just pretends it didn't happen. Sticking them with an L gives real consequences to those who take that gamble and get busted.
Guy uses steroids, knocks the living **** out of you, gets a DQ and you can claim that you have a W on him. It's like winning in Germany. You knock someone out but still lose by DQ
Only one guy on the fence thus far... how and why do the orgs and athletic commisions get up with these rules none of the fans like?
I guess it makes more sence. Just because someone uses something doesn't mean you wpuld beat them if they did not use anything. I prefer the NC. Its similar to when a champion is overweight. He loses the belt but his opponent still has a shot at winning it.
no , its different because you have no knowledge that your opponent cheated but you and everyone else knows he weighed a couple pounds over weight. fighters still fight knowing their opponent was overweight but if they knew he took a banned substance, most wouldn't. if margarito's hand wraps were found to be illegal after the fight and not before against mosley and had he won, would it have been changed to a DQ or NC ?