Worst of these particular decisions?

Lara/williams

 

Richard Steele screwing Taylor, and it's not even close!!!

 

Holy got robbed.:deal

 

Williams-Lara and Lewis-Holyfield are in a class by themselves and De La Hoya-Sturm is the next worst behind those. Marquez-Pacquiao III and Whitaker-De La Hoya were fairly poor decisions in my opinion, but there were enough close rounds that they cannot compare to the first three mentioned. Diaz-Malignaggi I and Martinez-Williams I were close fights that get labeled as robberies in large part due to horrendous scorecards.

It's pretty hard to compare the ending of Chavez-Taylor to these; even if one thinks it was an awful decision on Steele's part (I don't), it was a split second decision so I'd still be inclined to rate scorecard robberies as much worse.

 

Wow, there are a few big ones on there...

LL vs Holy I because of the stakes in that fight (undisputed unification) with a huge robbery at the end.

And if there's a JCC robbery it should be JCC vs Withaker, not vs Taylor (wich wasn't in my opinion). :thumbsup

 

Wtf you mean he DESERVED the KO. That is the stupidest **** i ever heard of. If a guy gets upt before the count of ten, how does a MF deserve a ****ing KO?

 

You also have to be able to defend yourself if you make the count. :deal
So, you can argue the last seconds of the bout will count with that. Some here even believe you have to be able to defend yourself AFTER the final bell (Bute vs Andrade I).

 

Hmm holy vs lewis at 1 then lara vs paul and sturm vs oscar, then not robberies but poor decisions in pac/jmm3 and paulie vs diaz. Paul vs smm and oscar vs whitaker arent robberies but extremely close fights, jcc vs taylor wasnt a robbery but I dont like how it ended.

 

casa-santa cruz

...casa was newly signed by gbp then.

 

So a long time vet got completely outclassed by a kid in his 24th pro fight....and Chavez deserved the KO?:-(

 

Well, for the sake that the norm had become 12 rounds, I call it a bad decision. He dominated and had the heart to get up. However, had it been a 15 rounder..

 

If someone wins every round and then gets stopped in the final, then who deserves the win? I expect you're one of the guys who want the "saved by the bell in the final round" rule back?! :think

I understand boxing has evolved to more a sport as people who trying to render their opponent unable to defend themselves. But in the ye olde days the fight went on until one man actually won... Paulie would have had a major problem in that era.

 

Pac-JMM III
Williams-Martinez
De La Hoya-Whitaker
close fights no robbery