Incorrect database record

adrianwingate · Post by **adrianwingate** » 20 Jun 2004, 13:43

Robert Wangila 146 W Roddy Blake 147 TKO 1 0

The result was actually a KO not a TKO.

Blue · Post by **Blue** » 20 Jun 2004, 16:41

Houston, we have a problem.

March 90 Ring on page 51 agrees with U.

But the 1995 Fight Fax on page 673 sez it’s a TKO. :(
Both publications have been wrong before.

Do U have a 3rd source/reference?

adrianwingate · Post by **adrianwingate** » 20 Jun 2004, 19:39

I watched the fight about 3 hours ago. It was definately a knockout. A good one at that.

By the way, do you know anyone who has a copy of Gaby Ruelas v Jeff Franklin?

Blue · Post by **Blue** » 20 Jun 2004, 19:59

Ah…nothing better than an eyewitness.

Post the TV network that televised it and we’re home free.

Post an query on the Current Scene Forum and maybe VhsWes or Dutch windmill can help U on the tape U are seeking.

adrianwingate · Post by **adrianwingate** » 20 Jun 2004, 20:04

I'm not sure about the television network. I got it from a British network. I will check it out again and let you know.

Blue · Post by **Blue** » 20 Jun 2004, 20:13

Sometimes the announcers will say (Unless it’s dubbed) or U can look for banners in the background.

Also, see my previous post above where I edited in a response to your tape enquiry.

adrianwingate · Post by **adrianwingate** » 20 Jun 2004, 20:18

Just to let you know, Blake was down twice and on the 3rd occasion was knocked clean out. Surely the 3 knockdown rule (if it was in effect for that fight) does not make it a TKO does it?

There was 1:17left on the clock. As for the network, it was the same network that showed the Grable v Williams fight (does that help).

The description of the logo is:-

A purple strip on top of a green strip with an undescribable writing/picture to the right. Does that help you?

wouter · Post by **wouter** » 21 Jun 2004, 05:09

Might be Screensport

adrianwingate · Post by **adrianwingate** » 21 Jun 2004, 06:10

It probably was screensport that showed it in the UK but I have no idea which network they bought it from.

wouter · Post by **wouter** » 21 Jun 2004, 06:34

If the three knockdown fight was in effect, the fight was over as soon as Blake hit the canvas for the last time, making it a TKO. Did the ref reach the count of ten?

adrianwingate · Post by **adrianwingate** » 21 Jun 2004, 07:17

No, the ref did not count to ten. He waved the fight off as soon as he hit the deck. But I don't know if the 3 knockdown rule was in effect.

The reason why I question it is because even though it was his 3rd time down he hit the floor so badly that he could not continue even if he wanted to.

wouter · Post by **wouter** » 21 Jun 2004, 07:26

Then it's a TKO. it's only a KO if a fighter is actually counted out.

Matt · Post by **Matt** » 21 Jun 2004, 10:32

I would agree with that from my personal interpretation, but commissions have differing views on what a TKO is. For example the Nevada Commission called Antonio Tarver's win a KO over Roy Jones, when Jones was actually stopped as he rose from the knockdown in what looked like a TKO.

I can recall instances where the ref waves off a count after a brutal knockdown and they announce it as a KO, not a TKO. One I can remember is Terrance Lewis-Robert Davis.

delisa · Post by **delisa** » 21 Jun 2004, 11:35

I understood that Jones-Tarver was a ko because the referee counted to ten --

Jones was on his feet, but not ready to fight -- therefore the ref kept counting.

adrianwingate · Post by **adrianwingate** » 21 Jun 2004, 13:39

I had a very interesting discussion with a boxing expert who believes that it can depend on where you come from as to the result of the fight.

Also, this then leads me to think about other results that were not KO's and actually TKO's.

So, let me get this right. If a fighter get knocked out sparko. He is lying on the floor with more chance of hell freezing over then getting up, the referee doesn't even bother counting because he thinks it is more important to get the gumbshield out and get the fighter on his side. That is counted as a TKO???

adrianwingate · Post by **adrianwingate** » 21 Jun 2004, 13:42

The last post is not me being sarcastic. It is a genuine comment/question.

Matt · Post by **Matt** » 21 Jun 2004, 14:33

I think what you describe would be a kayo. Of course a commission could call it a TKO still.

wouter · Post by **wouter** » 21 Jun 2004, 14:37

I''d go for exactly the opposite, it's a TKO, but a commission could call it a KO. You're knocked out if you fail to beat the count, therefore if there's no count, there's no KO.

adrianwingate · Post by **adrianwingate** » 21 Jun 2004, 15:17

There should be some uniformaty amongst commisions and organisations. A win is a win and a loss is a loss but some records might look better/worse than they should.

Blue · Post by **Blue** » 21 Jun 2004, 17:28

It depends on the referee and the commission.
There’s really no need to count when the fighter has crashed to the canvass and is motionless.

Records are full of official decisions that didn’t follow the rules set by the commissions.
For instance, if a fighter refuses to fight, turns his back, or a corner man steps into the ring during the action, the rules state that it’s a disqualification because only the referee can stop the fight.
IIRC, the Leonard-Duran, Holmes-Cooney and a bunch of others are official TKO’s but should have been disqualifications.

Here’s some more on the subject of the inconsistent regulation of boxing
Report: State-by-state regulation of boxing has ruined sport's integrity
By SIOBHAN McDONOUGH, Associated Press Writer July 22, 2003
http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/20 ... sions.html

Incorrect database record

Incorrect database record

Believe nothing you read and only half what you see!!!!!