What about the old saying that you must beat the Champion to get the decision against the champion? That the Champ would or should get the nod in a close round situation. Is it still relevent today? or was this the case in the old days of Boxing? Or just a mythe?
It's not one I've ever liked but it has and will probably always happen sometimes. You usually hear it as an attempted excuse when a challenger's been ripped off.
Yeah i don't like it or agree with it personally. All fights should be viewed the same by judges in my opinion.
"You must beat a world champion to take the title." This was true at a point in time. This is why Jersey Joe Walcott failed to win the belt from Joe Louis in their first fight.
It's definitely not myth - in some instances, if you didn't knock out the champ, you didn't take the title. It was literally impossible for the challenger to take it on points. As far as how it is today, that exact attitude is extremely rare, but there's always politics that favor one man to win over the other in a close situation- be it the hometown fighter, marketability, etc.
It comes from the old No Decision days where a chalengar had to knock out the champion to win the tittle/championship.
Ali obviously benefitted from this sentiment...Jimmy Young should have been crowned champion in '75('76?) IMO...I'll always think that Young got screwed, and it goes without saying that Norton should have won in '76 in that 3rd fight as well.
