Controversial Fights Re-Visited --- Your Scores?

[dempseyfire]

Witherspoon had the best round of the fight, the 9th I think, when he had Holmes hurt a bit. He showboated a little the next round, but other than that I didn't think he did enough to win. He picked off Holmes jab fairly well, but didn't do much else I thought.

Agreed. Witherspoon had the BIGGER rounds by far, but he didn't win MORE than Larry. Lots of rounds without exclamation points but Holmes outworked him overall.

Now Truth Williams is another story. Carl the clear winner in that one IMO.

[Robinson]

I had Holmes winning both bouts (naturally).

I thgink I had the Witherspoon fight for Holmes by
one point. Whereas the Williams fight I think I had
it by 2 or so. Ill have to check.

[alexpaterson]

I had Leonard 1 round up against Hagler and had Hearns 2 rounds ahead of Leonard

[alexpaterson]

Ken Buchanan vs Ismael Laguna 2

I had Ken 1 round up in the end. It was all on the last round on my card and Ken nicked it with his jab imo

Great Thread

[Finn]

Bernard Hopkins v Calzaghe: Bernard Hopkins, 114-113

Agree with some of the above bouts

I don't know. Is that one controversial, though? It doesn't get much argument. Some, but not much. Still, it was close. I guess this fight could be used to establish the minimum for controversy. I had it for Calzaghe by two, in any event

close but definatley calzaghe by 2 rounds, no controversy in my opinion. hopkins had to adopt a spoiling style of fighting as he knew calzaghe's hand speed would be to much and was hoping to knock him out ur never going to win a fight like that against someone like calzaghe. However he still did better than guys who tried to fight calzaghe out right.

I think Lewis v Holyfield was a controversial one, lewis clearly won, but got his rematch so alls good.

[dempseyfire]

Rewatching the first Lewis-Evander fight I was shocked at how close I had it . . .7-4-1 for Lewis. Lewis the definitive winner but a draw is not the 'all-time robbery of robberies' people make it out to be. Lots of close rounds where Lewis would paw and poke wheareas Evander would land two-three punches but they were clearly the best punches of the round. Even the Sky television commentators had it 7-5 for Lennox.

[Robinson]

DF

I do agree, I scored it not too long ago and I had it a bit closer
than the media made it at first seem. It was a win for Lewis no
doubt, but it was not the tragic robbery that many had screamed
it to have been.
Maybe they should watch some Pernell Whitacker fights where he
was robbed instead.

[I Feel Fine]

Mayweather-Castillo I... don't remember the exact score, had Castillo winning... I am a Mayweather fan, so has nothing to do with me wanting to see Floyd lose... I've only seen it once, though
Rematch... Mayweather 115-113
Whitaker-De La Hoya... draw
Whitaker Chavez... Whitaker 116-112 if I recall correctly
De La Hoya-Trinidad... De La Hoya by one round, I believe I had the exact same score as Larry Merchant
Holmes-Witherspoon... takes a big person to admit they're wrong, in the past I've said that Witherspoon should have won it, but having seen it again recently I had Holmes winning by two points
Ali-Norton II... Ali 115-114
Ali-Norton III... don't remember exact score, but I had Norton winning by two or three... Ali past his best
Calzaghe-Hopkins... had Calzaghe winning by two, the seven year age advantage helped the overrated Welshman, peak for peak Hopkins schools him
Hopkins-Taylor I... forget exact score, had Hopkins winning by one point

I plan on watching Leonard-Hagler again soon, so I'll post back when I do.

[dempseyfire]

I also rewatched Norton-Ali III about a month back and I stand by my assertion that is one of the WORST decisions in championship history. Had Norton winning a CLEAR-CUT 9-6 decision and I was trying to give Ali the benefit of the doubt, it could have been 10-5. I will defend Ali as one of the top 2 greatest heavyweights ever from shills like Gran/BRR but an objective viewing can't possibly have that fight as even close. Norton should've been the new champion and Ali should've called it a day after that fight, although he had one more impressive victory in the tank vs Shavers (a close fight which I believe Ali shaded), especially since Ali by that point was already showing early signs of Parkinsons.

[Goodnight, Irene]

IFF...

I thought Merchant had it 7-4-1 De La Hoya against Trinidad? Haven't watched it in a long time, though. Maybe I'm wrong?

Robinson...

Absolutely! As a Sweet Pea devotee from way back, look at the blemishes on his record. Razor-thin loss to De La Hoya (I had it for Oscar by a point, from memory, but it could've gone either way), clear robberies against Ramirez & Chavez, & the stoppage in his last-ever outing against what's-his-face.

Take away that first Ramirez result, & the Chavez draw, & he's damn close to an undefeated career. The only times he was clearly beaten both came when he was shot-to-bits, & above his best weight --- one against an all-timer in Trinidad.

[I Feel Fine]

Goodnight, I checked real quick, he had it 6-5-1 for Oscar. I remember that every time Merchant declared a round for either Oscar or for Tito it was always the same as the fighter I had scored it for, and we ended up with the same final score. Mediocre minds think alike, I suppose.
Ali-Norton III is a bad decision. I suppose it is a robbery, though I've seen much worse (to Whitaker, as Goodnight mentioned). To Ali's credit he also thought he lost the fight and said so at the press conference, I can't think of too many fighters who admitted that they should have lost a fight where they had won the decision. But Norton was still at his best, while Ali should have retired before that fight, if not for money problems and his obvious desire to keep going. Coopman should have been his retirement fight, his 50th win and 5th defense, giving him wins over all his opponents. Most of his losses/bad decision wins came after Manila. His health would have been better too.
As for Whitaker, he in his prime clearly would have beaten Oscar. Whitaker is the best fighter of the last twenty years in my view.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

Calzaghe-Hopkins... had Calzaghe winning by two, the seven year age advantage helped the overrated Welshman, peak for peak Hopkins schools him

- My, how quickly their minds slip themselves of memory.

Peak for peak, Mr. Popkins ducked SuperJoe to the tune of a 2 million judgment rendered to Dibella when Pops jumped his contract rather than face Jones and Joe among the 4 fight plan Dibella had planned out.

Back to school for you!

[I Feel Fine]

My memory is quite capable, and I even recall that we have had this discussion before. You maintain that Hopkins at his best and as undisputed champion coming off his finest win ducked a fighter with no serious achievments, yet at 43 decided to fight this same fighter after this same fighter had unified his division with career defining wins over Lacy and Kessler and was as a result regarded as a top ten P4P fighter. At his best and on top he's afraid of this paper belt holder, while during his declining years he's suddenly brave enough to take on this undisputed highly rated champion. Odd logic. I, on the other hand, maintain that it was not ducking, it was about the money... which is rather obvious. I also maintain that had the fight occurred then that Hopkins takes Calzaghe to the cleaners, which stands in either case.

[Collins2000]

My memory is quite capable, and I even recall that we have had this discussion before. You maintain that Hopkins at his best and as undisputed champion coming off his finest win ducked a fighter with no serious achievments, yet at 43 decided to fight this same fighter after this same fighter had unified his division with career defining wins over Lacy and Kessler and was as a result regarded as a top ten P4P fighter. At his best and on top he's afraid of this paper belt holder, while during his declining years he's suddenly brave enough to take on this undisputed highly rated champion. Odd logic. I, on the other hand, maintain that it was not ducking, it was about the money... which is rather obvious. I also maintain that had the fight occurred then that Hopkins takes Calzaghe to the cleaners, which stands in either case.

Good points. Which BRR will ignore.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

My memory is quite capable, and I even recall that we have had this discussion before. You maintain that Hopkins at his best and as undisputed champion coming off his finest win ducked a fighter with no serious achievments, yet at 43 decided to fight this same fighter after this same fighter had unified his division with career defining wins over Lacy and Kessler and was as a result regarded as a top ten P4P fighter. At his best and on top he's afraid of this paper belt holder, while during his declining years he's suddenly brave enough to take on this undisputed highly rated champion. Odd logic. I, on the other hand, maintain that it was not ducking, it was about the money... which is rather obvious. I also maintain that had the fight occurred then that Hopkins takes Calzaghe to the cleaners, which stands in either case.

- Odd that I don't recall attributing emotions of fear to the reasons Mr. Popkins instead chose to instead stay anchored in the middleweight division to defend his title against the mighty Carl Daniels in the boxing capital of the world, Reading Pennsylvania and then Morrade The Great Hakkar in Philly, Mr. Popkin's glorious homecoming since winning his title.

Yeah, money, right, much less money... which is rather obvious. In this particular example, what you "think" doesn't match what really transpired, Mr. Popkins turning down much larger purses for lesser bouts against small fry for small potatoes.

Fear..........perish the thought. The public is still trying to get a handle on how Mr. Popkins managed to scurry about on all fours across the canvas whilst cradling the Popkin's family jewels all while signaling the executioner's slashing gestures. Brilliant piece of ring genius that doubtless swooned the Almighty hisself!

[Collins2000]

Mr Popkins? Hahahahahha. I suppose your brand of homo erotic fiction will play in dear old Blighty.

Jaclem2 probably enjoys it.

[alexpaterson]

I had JC 1 up against B-HOP and I had Toney 1 up against Mike McCallum all on the last round I thought the commontators had it very wide for Toney

[dempseyfire]

My memory is quite capable, and I even recall that we have had this discussion before. You maintain that Hopkins at his best and as undisputed champion coming off his finest win ducked a fighter with no serious achievments, yet at 43 decided to fight this same fighter after this same fighter had unified his division with career defining wins over Lacy and Kessler and was as a result regarded as a top ten P4P fighter. At his best and on top he's afraid of this paper belt holder, while during his declining years he's suddenly brave enough to take on this undisputed highly rated champion. Odd logic. I, on the other hand, maintain that it was not ducking, it was about the money... which is rather obvious. I also maintain that had the fight occurred then that Hopkins takes Calzaghe to the cleaners, which stands in either case.

Good points. Which BRR will ignore.

That is a given.

He's not here for discussion, he's here to annoy and that he does very successfully.

[I Feel Fine]

- Odd that I don't recall attributing emotions of fear to the reasons Mr. Popkins instead chose to instead stay anchored in the middleweight division to defend his title against the mighty Carl Daniels in the boxing capital of the world, Reading Pennsylvania and then Morrade The Great Hakkar in Philly, Mr. Popkin's glorious homecoming since winning his title.

Yeah, money, right, much less money... which is rather obvious. In this particular example, what you "think" doesn't match what really transpired, Mr. Popkins turning down much larger purses for lesser bouts against small fry for small potatoes.

Fear..........perish the thought. The public is still trying to get a handle on how Mr. Popkins managed to scurry about on all fours across the canvas whilst cradling the Popkin's family jewels all while signaling the executioner's slashing gestures. Brilliant piece of ring genius that doubtless swooned the Almighty hisself!

He "instead chose to instead" stay at Middleweight because he felt that he should get bigger money for bigger fights. He clearly felt that the money was right in '08 and he took the match then, despite the fact that he was now past his best while Calzaghe was now five times more accomplished than he had been in '02 and was now favored to not only beat Hopkins but even to stop him, as many predicted and which did not happen. The notion that Hopkins was afraid of these guys was clearly what you were implying and it is obviously wrong. Hopkins has done nothing but fight top ten pound for pound fighters in recent years, all above Middleweight... you are using outdated arguments. These arguments about Hopkins "being afraid" to leave the Middleweight division might have worked for some people in '04 or '05, but they are obviously anachronistic at this stage. I thank you for these nostalgic arguments, but I require that you come up with something fresh.

The Toney-McCallum fights... I thought McCallum certainly won the second fight, the first fight was close and I can see how it was scored a draw, though even there I would lean towards The Body Snatcher. To be fair Toney was clearly draining himself to make 160.

[yancey]

DF> I agree with all of the matches you listed...except I had some minor variations.

I had Holy-Lewis II as a draw...but in 1999 I had it 2 points Holy.
Mercer-Lewis a draw and in another sitting 1 point mercer.
Ellis-Patterson.....I had for Patterson by 2 or 3 points. I disagree that
it is an over rated robbery.

Absolutely agree that Patterson got robbed. I saw every round as it happened and was dumbfounded at that decision. He also knocked Ellis down in the fight but it was called a slip. Yeah, right.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

Ellis-Patterson.....I had for Patterson by 2 or 3 points. I disagree that
it is an over rated robbery.

Absolutely agree that Patterson got robbed. I saw every round as it happened and was dumbfounded at that decision. He also knocked Ellis down in the fight but it was called a slip. Yeah, right.

- Always boggles the imagination the number of boxing fans viewing fights with their bad blinkered eye instead of the good one.

Floyd "slipped" at least a half dozen times in the fight in the early going and was pretty much swept in the first half of the fight because of unbelievably shaky legs gave him as much credibility as a rag doll. He does come on strong in the latter half, closing the stronger man against Ellis who ends up looking a mess, maybe a broken nose. I had Ellis winning by one in a razor thin fight very difficult to score on a spaghetti legs vs busted up basis.

Not a robbery regardless of who won as both showed courage in managing their less than ideal circumstances during the fight. As I recall, the broadcaster kept track of the scores of a couple of three boxing writers ringside that favored Ellis, the details of which I outlined in a previous specific post about the fight in which others weighed in.

[Robinson]

BRR

I shall concede that a robbery is a strong term. Spagetti legs though..?

What frustrates me about the Patterson-Ellis affair is the whole, referee
as judge thing, and circumstances behind it. Hardly a fair playing field in
any case.

Close fight yes, but I had it for Patterson. And yes, I am biased towards
Patterson...I make no excuse for this.

[jugg2000]

Pretty much most of Emanuel Augustus' losses. Those were almost all controversial.

Teddy Atlas went as far as too snatch up one of the judges score cards.

-jugg

[alexpaterson]

Marco Antonio Barrera vs Erik Morales 1

I had it 2 round to Barrera thought he did the cleaner more effective work

[Goodnight, Irene]

Thought I might revive this one, as I just scored a fight. Even though this fight didn't go the distance, I thought the stoppage was controversial.

Casamayor-Katsidis (an excellent fight last year, which gets overlooked, having been sandwiched between the higher-profile affairs of Marquez-Pacquiao II & Vazquez-Marquez III) I had 75-75 Even, through nine completed rounds.