BoxRec

Deserter wrote:

columbo wrote:

dalcumly wrote:Did you notice that on the excellent 'fight collector' thread ,of the 44 press scores 26 of these had Burns winning at least 5 rounds of the 12. Of the three judges at the fight , one judge had Burns winning 6 rounds and the other had him winning 5 . The final judge had Burns winning 8 rounds.
Here's the point - was it a robbery because all 44 press reporters scored it for Beltran ? Because given all the scores I've seen and trying to reach some sort of average ,there are only very people who have scored it wildly in favour of Beltran. There are literally dozens of punters and 'experts' giving Burns 5 rounds at least . That being the case the simple arithmetic suggests that Beltran won either 6 or 7 rounds ,and of course the extra point for the knockdown. Using this calculation , to an outsider, it seems it was a relatively close fight - not a robbery.
Ricky and his manager should demand that Eddie Hearn contacts the WBO and ask if they can have a rematch with Beltran before a mandatory,and if that's acceptable , then purse bids for the rematch. I wouldn't automatically offer to defend in the USA.
And I'll add, I think Burns would win a rematch.

Just because it wasnt a wide decision win doesnt mean it wasnt a robbery though.When you have all 44 press reporters scoring the fight on behalf of Beltran that's a pretty good indication of who deserved the victory. I mean aside from the vast majority of fans thinking the same.

Exactly this. Your whole post manages to somehow deviate from focusing on the point that every single one of the 44 press present scored it for Beltran. The fact that not one individual scored it for Burns reinforces the fact it was a robbery rather than a remotely debatable decision.

Deviates from it? I thought that's what my argument was!

Thank fvck Teddy Atlas wasnt commentating ;;-)

handsofstone wrote:Thank fvck Teddy Atlas wasnt commentating ;;-)

I dont think there's a commentator I dislike more than Atlas. I remember when I first got into boxing and was listening to american commentators for the first time. I thought he was really good. Ive definietly changed my opinion on him in that regard

jameswilson wrote:In World title fights a neutral referee and 3 neutral judges should be assigned unless the fight is between two fighters from the same nation in which case officials from that nation would be acceptable in most cases.

I'm not saying this would eliminate bad decisions (we all know the American judge scored it to Burns) but I think a big issue other countries have with us is Brit refs almost always being appointed to ref World title fights.

Having neutral judges or referees makes no difference what so ever, Judges and referees are wined and dined by the home promoter, they are put up in top hotels and all their needs catered for, some work on a regular basis with promoters, when it comes to judging or refereeing in a close fight, they will go where their bread is buttered.

columbo wrote:

Deserter wrote:

columbo wrote:Just because it wasnt a wide decision win doesnt mean it wasnt a robbery though.When you have all 44 press reporters scoring the fight on behalf of Beltran that's a pretty good indication of who deserved the victory. I mean aside from the vast majority of fans thinking the same.

Exactly this. Your whole post manages to somehow deviate from focusing on the point that every single one of the 44 press present scored it for Beltran. The fact that not one individual scored it for Burns reinforces the fact it was a robbery rather than a remotely debatable decision.

Deviates from it? I thought that's what my argument was!

I was agreeing with you mate and everything after that was directed at dalcumly

daviddee wrote:Robbery get a grip!! Was a close fight that Beltran won.. A draw can be argued.. Bottom line 3 neutral judges scored this fight to a draw that was the result. No ruining boxing. Jonny Nelson has a cheek anyway after a few of his fights

That's simply an embarrassing post. One fighter clearly won in pretty much everyone's eyes and still didn't get the decision. If that's not a robbery I don't know what is.

ajwesty13 wrote:I personally would like to see how you score the Olympics with only 2 of 3 judges hitting the button if they deem a shot as a score.. however that will never happen ....i would have more chance of dating Mila Kunis....

Amateur boxing scoring was changed following the Roy Jones situation at the Olympics.

There are still plenty of "how did that happen" decisions in amateur boxing at all levels - from local club shows to the very elite.

The method you describe still requires judges to press a button - but what if for some reason they don't press the button at the right time ?

Final Round,
Is it a fact the rematch has been offered ? I don't think it's the case. Burns has to deal with his mandatory next - Crawford - so it's out if team Burns hands WBO will decide.
In any event I truly don't think Ricky will come back.
Sadly if that is the case I can't see Beltran getting a shot at a vacant title either.

It was a shocking decision no doubt but I have seen worse. It wasn't a case of Burns losing every round. Most have Burns winning 5.
As for being truthful well if you read all the threads about commentators and analysts then you've been crying out for pure honesty. Johnnys delivered that and still petty digs referring to fights of his 8 years ago ! Damned if you do damned if you don't. Get a grip.

Nothing will change it never does. Judging is objective.

It would be interesting to see what scores would be churned out if the judges had to sit a in a studio watching it on TV screens with no sound or commentary. I dare say you'd get fewer controversial decisions.

Deserter wrote:

daviddee wrote:Robbery get a grip!! Was a close fight that Beltran won.. A draw can be argued.. Bottom line 3 neutral judges scored this fight to a draw that was the result. No ruining boxing. Jonny Nelson has a cheek anyway after a few of his fights

That's simply an embarrassing post. One fighter clearly won in pretty much everyone's eyes and still didn't get the decision. If that's not a robbery I don't know what is.

How is it embarrassing? How can you "clearly" win a fight as a close as that was. I had Burns winning 1,2,3,5, 11 and 12.. A few rounds in between were close. On my scoring the knockdown was the difference but then again when Beltran was warned about hitting on the break a lot of judges would have took a point off. If that's the case then the fights a draw!! So to answer your post if its not a Robbery!!! No it's not Beltran was unlucky not to get the decision. It's funny how some people just jump on this bandwagon. That was a hard fight to score. Couldn't argue with Beltran winning by a round or 2 max... Or a draw. The result was quite fair did Beltran do enough to win without any kind of doubt definitely not! I hope the rematch happens and Ricky can shut up a lot of people on here!!

daviddee wrote:The result was quite fair did Beltran do enough to win without any kind of doubt definitely not!

So why did every single member of the press score the fight for Beltran then? In my experience that kind of unanimity is almost without precedent.
To say that Beltran definitely didn't do enough to win without any kind of doubt leaves you in a minority of one outside Burns' immediate family and friends and leaves you looking foolish and inherently biased.

Ricky boxed negatively after tasting Beltrans' power - even before he had his jaw broken. He held an awful lot and was lucky he was not penalised; Beltran did more than enough to win the bout, Ricky did well to go the distance; we'll have to see if Beltran gets a rematch; I've seen promises get forgotten - maybe Ricky will need an easier bout to ease back in and then the Beltran bout will be a distant memory.

Parson Cross wrote:Final Round,
Is it a fact the rematch has been offered ? I don't think it's the case. Burns has to deal with his mandatory next - Crawford - so it's out if team Burns hands WBO will decide.
In any event I truly don't think Ricky will come back.
Sadly if that is the case I can't see Beltran getting a shot at a vacant title either.

It was a shocking decision no doubt but I have seen worse. It wasn't a case of Burns losing every round. Most have Burns winning 5.
As for being truthful well if you read all the threads about commentators and analysts then you've been crying out for pure honesty. Johnnys delivered that and still petty digs referring to fights of his 8 years ago ! Damned if you do damned if you don't. Get a grip.

Nothing will change it never does. Judging is objective.

I liked what Johnny said the other night. He didnt kiss the ass of team that has a deal with the company he broadcasts for. Top marks from me atleast

MachoMan09 wrote:

Hagler2002 wrote:It would be interesting to see what scores would be churned out if the judges had to sit a in a studio watching it on TV screens with no sound or commentary. I dare say you'd get fewer controversial decisions.

That's not a bad idea.

The funny thing is though that im sure the argument would be that you can see it better from ringside vs on tv but then when bad results happen ref's and others would say well they have the benefit of instant replay

daviddee wrote:

Deserter wrote:

daviddee wrote:Robbery get a grip!! Was a close fight that Beltran won.. A draw can be argued.. Bottom line 3 neutral judges scored this fight to a draw that was the result. No ruining boxing. Jonny Nelson has a cheek anyway after a few of his fights

That's simply an embarrassing post. One fighter clearly won in pretty much everyone's eyes and still didn't get the decision. If that's not a robbery I don't know what is.

How is it embarrassing? How can you "clearly" win a fight as a close as that was. I had Burns winning 1,2,3,5, 11 and 12.. A few rounds in between were close. On my scoring the knockdown was the difference but then again when Beltran was warned about hitting on the break a lot of judges would have took a point off. If that's the case then the fights a draw!! So to answer your post if its not a Robbery!!! No it's not Beltran was unlucky not to get the decision. It's funny how some people just jump on this bandwagon. That was a hard fight to score. Couldn't argue with Beltran winning by a round or 2 max... Or a draw. The result was quite fair did Beltran do enough to win without any kind of doubt definitely not! I hope the rematch happens and Ricky can shut up a lot of people on here!!

Out of curiousity, how times throughout the fight did Burn's get away with holding? If you're going to use that argument atleast present the evidence fairly.

Deserter wrote:

daviddee wrote:The result was quite fair did Beltran do enough to win without any kind of doubt definitely not!

So why did every single member of the press score the fight for Beltran then? In my experience that kind of unanimity is almost without precedent.
To say that Beltran definitely didn't do enough to win without any kind of doubt leaves you in a minority of one outside Burns' immediate family and friends and leaves you looking foolish and inherently biased.

See everyone else who scored the fight!!! They don't matter it's only the 3 judges and the fight was scored a draw. Maybe that's not clear enough for you. Press scores are great but Judging is speculative and on a individual basis. As the next comment said Ricky boxed negatively but when he was doing the Jab/ Cross 1,2 he was picking Beltran off and some judges may have scored those cleaner shots rather than the more unclean ones landing from Beltran. Yes the minority scored to Burns and as I have said there was a maximum of 2 rounds in this fight!! I scored 1 point to Beltran and 6 rounds a piece!! Are you that stupid that you don't understand that was a close fight!? No matter what everyone's opinion was Beltran never won by a landslide.. The 2 fights my brother drew I felt he won by 3 - 1 v Maxi Hughes and won by 3 clear rounds to Ryan Walsh neither were a Robbery but close fights that didn't go his way.. People need to be careful with what words they used.. Replace Robbery with Unlucky not to win the Belt then I agree. Otherwise your talking out your arse

How is it embarrassing? How can you "clearly" win a fight as a close as that was. I had Burns winning 1,2,3,5, 11 and 12.. A few rounds in between were close. On my scoring the knockdown was the difference but then again when Beltran was warned about hitting on the break a lot of judges would have took a point off. If that's the case then the fights a draw!! So to answer your post if its not a Robbery!!! No it's not Beltran was unlucky not to get the decision. It's funny how some people just jump on this bandwagon. That was a hard fight to score. Couldn't argue with Beltran winning by a round or 2 max... Or a draw. The result was quite fair did Beltran do enough to win without any kind of doubt definitely not! I hope the rematch happens and Ricky can shut up a lot of people on here!![/quote]
Out of curiousity, how times throughout the fight did Burn's get away with holding? If you're going to use that argument atleast present the evidence fairly.[/quote]

Agreed but he was never actually warned so the judges wouldn't take points off because of the ref not warning Burns.. I'm not saying Beltran should of had a point off I'm saying the judges may have decided even though the ref never took a point of that they would. I'm sure the rule is they can only take the point off if a warning is made

daviddee wrote:

Deserter wrote:

daviddee wrote:The result was quite fair did Beltran do enough to win without any kind of doubt definitely not!

So why did every single member of the press score the fight for Beltran then? In my experience that kind of unanimity is almost without precedent.
To say that Beltran definitely didn't do enough to win without any kind of doubt leaves you in a minority of one outside Burns' immediate family and friends and leaves you looking foolish and inherently biased.

See everyone else who scored the fight!!! They don't matter it's only the 3 judges and the fight was scored a draw. Maybe that's not clear enough for you. Press scores are great but Judging is speculative and on a individual basis. As the next comment said Ricky boxed negatively but when he was doing the Jab/ Cross 1,2 he was picking Beltran off and some judges may have scored those cleaner shots rather than the more unclean ones landing from Beltran. Yes the minority scored to Burns and as I have said there was a maximum of 2 rounds in this fight!! I scored 1 point to Beltran and 6 rounds a piece!! Are you that stupid that you don't understand that was a close fight!? No matter what everyone's opinion was Beltran never won by a landslide.. The 2 fights my brother drew I felt he won by 3 - 1 v Maxi Hughes and won by 3 clear rounds to Ryan Walsh neither were a Robbery but close fights that didn't go his way.. People need to be careful with what words they used.. Replace Robbery with Unlucky not to win the Belt then I agree. Otherwise your talking out your arse

Have you ever seen a blatant out and out robbery daviddee?

daviddee wrote:

Deserter wrote:

daviddee wrote:The result was quite fair did Beltran do enough to win without any kind of doubt definitely not!

So why did every single member of the press score the fight for Beltran then? In my experience that kind of unanimity is almost without precedent.
To say that Beltran definitely didn't do enough to win without any kind of doubt leaves you in a minority of one outside Burns' immediate family and friends and leaves you looking foolish and inherently biased.

See everyone else who scored the fight!!! They don't matter it's only the 3 judges and the fight was scored a draw. Maybe that's not clear enough for you. Press scores are great but Judging is speculative and on a individual basis. As the next comment said Ricky boxed negatively but when he was doing the Jab/ Cross 1,2 he was picking Beltran off and some judges may have scored those cleaner shots rather than the more unclean ones landing from Beltran. Yes the minority scored to Burns and as I have said there was a maximum of 2 rounds in this fight!! I scored 1 point to Beltran and 6 rounds a piece!! Are you that stupid that you don't understand that was a close fight!? No matter what everyone's opinion was Beltran never won by a landslide.. The 2 fights my brother drew I felt he won by 3 - 1 v Maxi Hughes and won by 3 clear rounds to Ryan Walsh neither were a Robbery but close fights that didn't go his way.. People need to be careful with what words they used.. Replace Robbery with Unlucky not to win the Belt then I agree. Otherwise your talking out your arse

Have you ever seen a blatant out and out robbery daviddee?[/quote]


Yeah, a robbery can never be too outrageous though or it wouldnt be plausible to people watching. Is has to be relatively close for the person to get away with.

I watched the bout on TV and thought Ricky struggled the whole way through; I didn't think Beltran was awfully dynamic but he was the pressure guy and hit hard and was steady with his pressure. I thought Beltran won quite easily though recognise how brave Ricky was with the jaw break bit it weren't the ref who broke it (or who dropped him). If the bout had been on neutral ground I can imagine Burns would have lost his title and I am typing with my fingers and not talking out of my arse.

daviddee wrote:

Deserter wrote:

daviddee wrote:The result was quite fair did Beltran do enough to win without any kind of doubt definitely not!

So why did every single member of the press score the fight for Beltran then? In my experience that kind of unanimity is almost without precedent.
To say that Beltran definitely didn't do enough to win without any kind of doubt leaves you in a minority of one outside Burns' immediate family and friends and leaves you looking foolish and inherently biased.

See everyone else who scored the fight!!! They don't matter it's only the 3 judges and the fight was scored a draw. Maybe that's not clear enough for you. Press scores are great but Judging is speculative and on a individual basis. As the next comment said Ricky boxed negatively but when he was doing the Jab/ Cross 1,2 he was picking Beltran off and some judges may have scored those cleaner shots rather than the more unclean ones landing from Beltran. Yes the minority scored to Burns and as I have said there was a maximum of 2 rounds in this fight!! I scored 1 point to Beltran and 6 rounds a piece!! Are you that stupid that you don't understand that was a close fight!? No matter what everyone's opinion was Beltran never won by a landslide.. The 2 fights my brother drew I felt he won by 3 - 1 v Maxi Hughes and won by 3 clear rounds to Ryan Walsh neither were a Robbery but close fights that didn't go his way.. People need to be careful with what words they used.. Replace Robbery with Unlucky not to win the Belt then I agree. Otherwise your talking out your arse

I don't need to add anything else as your own comments on here mean no-one is going to take you seriously.
I would just loved to have seen your reaction if roles had been reversed and it had been Ricky dominating Beltran only for the fight to be scored a draw. You'd have been the first on here screaming robbery, no doubt about that.

Deserter just to clarify .... Are u saying that this was not a close fight ?
Even the one judge who scored it for Beltran scored it 115-113 ( I think )so surely that's close?
Personally I scored it 115-113 Beltran on the night then 114-114 the next day sound down.
Surely that's close ??? On watching it the day after I gave burns round 2 changing my score to a draw.
How did u score it deserter ?

cutthecacklebullyup wrote:See everyone else who scored the fight!!! They don't matter it's only the 3 judges and the fight was scored a draw. Maybe that's not clear enough for you. Press scores are great but Judging is speculative and on a individual basis. As the next comment said Ricky boxed negatively but when he was doing the Jab/ Cross 1,2 he was picking Beltran off and some judges may have scored those cleaner shots rather than the more unclean ones landing from Beltran. Yes the minority scored to Burns and as I have said there was a maximum of 2 rounds in this fight!! I scored 1 point to Beltran and 6 rounds a piece!! Are you that stupid that you don't understand that was a close fight!? No matter what everyone's opinion was Beltran never won by a landslide.. The 2 fights my brother drew I felt he won by 3 - 1 v Maxi Hughes and won by 3 clear rounds to Ryan Walsh neither were a Robbery but close fights that didn't go his way.. People need to be careful with what words they used.. Replace Robbery with Unlucky not to win the Belt then I agree. Otherwise your talking out your arse

I don't need to add anything else as your own comments on here mean no-one is going to take you seriously.
I would just loved to have seen your reaction if roles had been reversed and it had been Ricky dominating Beltran only for the fight to be scored a draw. You'd have been the first on here screaming robbery, no doubt about that.[/quote]


Deserter just to clarify .... Are u saying that this was not a close fight ?
Even the one judge who scored it for Beltran scored it 115-113 ( I think )so surely that's close?
Personally I scored it 115-113 Beltran on the night then 114-114 the next day sound down.
Surely that's close ??? On watching it the day after I gave burns round 2 changing my score to a draw.
How did u score it deserter ?[/quote]Deserters point isnt that it wasnt a close fight, but yet whilst being somewhat close it was still clear that Beltran won the fight.

columbo wrote:

cutthecacklebullyup wrote: Deserter just to clarify .... Are u saying that this was not a close fight ?
Even the one judge who scored it for Beltran scored it 115-113 ( I think )so surely that's close?
Personally I scored it 115-113 Beltran on the night then 114-114 the next day sound down.
Surely that's close ??? On watching it the day after I gave burns round 2 changing my score to a draw.
How did u score it deserter ?

Deserters point isnt that it wasnt a close fight, but yet whilst being somewhat close it was still clear that Beltran won the fight.

Exactly this. Pretty much everyone from ringside reporters through to members of the boxing fraternity viewed it as a clear Beltran win. In my 10 years on this forum I am genuinely struggling to recall a fight where there's been such an overwhelming consensus that this decision was both inaccurate and unjust.
My question to those who are struggling to grasp this simple concept is that if this does not constitute a "robbery", what does?

A robbery can, imo, be close or wide, the key isn't the closeness merely the fact the obvious winner was denied his moment.