Why don't people like the phrase, "take it from the champ"?

The objection that it wouldn't be a level-playing field is incorrect because the champion would have had to have won his title in the same fashion.

Of course, a real problem that would persist is that judging in boxing is so ****ing bad and there's so much corruption, even three score cards that show a 3 or 4 point margin for the same fighter might be heavily disputable.

Probably best to do away with scoring completely and have every fight end in a KO.

 

I always forget not everyone has their ear to the ground on all the latest developments in the exciting world of space exploration. Strap in you're going to love this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station

Only launched in 1998 so still something of an unknown quantity outside those 'in the know'

 

I can envision a scenario where making a close fight a draw, which then supersedes the judges cards, resulting in some lawsuit. If the refs say one guy won, we are at the mercy of the official score. I know it sucks, especially with bad judging we get.

 

It's a terrible notion. If the fight is razor close then its a draw. Gifting champions this benefit devalues the entire concept of being a champion. You're not supposed to need gifts or charity or special privileges. You earn what you get in the ring or it's not worth ****.

 

But in real world scenarios, there are a lot of razor-close fights where a lot of us say "could go either way". And if the champion loses his title in such a situation, that's something he should feel aggrieved about.

It doesn't devalue the concept of being a champion if the champion is champion because he "ripped the title from" the man who was champion before him. He earned the right by smashing up the previous champion or clearly besting him.
Not many agree with this but it is completely logical.

 

I know about the ISS, bud - was just taking a long walk for some middling absurdist Islamic State riffing. But thanks.

 

<------- come take it