BoxRec

Posted: **18 Oct 2006, 11:30**

What's wrong with this thread is that alot of those decisions came after boxing already went into serious decline in the USA, plus alot of them were actually decisions that could have gone either way.

In my opinion, what hurt boxing the most was too many sanctioning bodies. We got along fine with two champions per division, but when the IBF came along it got ridiculous. The other big factor that damaged boxing was pay per view. Yes, I know it has a long history, but it went from superfights in the early 70's to now where any slob who wins 80 pct of his bouts believing he deserves to be on it.

Posted: **18 Oct 2006, 11:36**

Ezzard wrote:I agree that there are actually relatively few roberies. Trinidad-DLH was a close fight.

It was a close fight, but it was one of those fights where you'd have a hard time giving 6 or more rounds to the winner. Same goes for Oscar/Sturm.

Posted: **19 Oct 2006, 20:37**

Sumbu Kalambay was robbed of a win in his fight against Ayub Kalule, in his home town of Italy no less if I am not mistaken. Kalule did not win more than 5 rounds in that fight, one of the worst decisions I have ever seen.

Posted: **20 Oct 2006, 12:13**

Since James Toney's name appears in several places in this thread, I'd be interested to hear folks' opinions of the decisions in the first 2 Toney/McCallum fights.

Posted: **20 Oct 2006, 17:26**

Wow. Looks like everyone already mentioned all the good ones. Personaly I believe the biggest screw job in history wasnt done by judges. It was done by a referee. Anyone remember Meldrick Taylor vs. Julio Cesar Chavez?

Posted: **20 Oct 2006, 23:40**

Not that it even relates to THAT fight. All Richard Steele did was grab his gloves, look him in the eye, and call the fight. It was pretty obvious (not just to me) that although he was hurt, Meldrick was ready and able to finish the fight. He was far ahead on the scorecards, there was only six seconds in the fight, and he was capable of defending himself to make it safely out of the round.

Posted: **22 Oct 2006, 00:08**

Since I started following boxing, there were a number of bouts
in which the decisions were regarded as bad by many people.
They include Bob Foster vs. Jorge Ahumada, Muhammad Ali vs.
Ken Norton III, Alfredo Escalera vs. Tyrone Everett, Muhammad
Ali vs. Jimmy Young, Lupe Pintor vs. Carlos Zarate, Johnny
Boudreaux vs. Scott LeDoux, Pernell Whitaker vs. Julio Cesar
Chavez, Jose Luis Ramirez vs. Pernell Whitaker I, Lennox
Lewis vs. Evander Holyfield I, and Courtney Burton vs.
Emanuel Augustus I.

Suspected robberies due to referees' actions include
Pedro Carrasco vs. Mando Ramos I and Jose Napoles
vs. Armando Muniz I.

Posted: **22 Oct 2006, 16:35**

Coetzee vs Renaldo Snipes - By far the worst robbery in the history of the sport. I still fail to see why how a fighter being knocked down twice and fighting to survive for the first 6-7 rounds of the bout being awarded the decision.

Posted: **22 Oct 2006, 22:07**

Billy Graham - Kid Gavilan in 1951 .
Gavilan was given a split dec. over Graham in what is regarded as a highly controversial dec.
Graham was awarded a split dec. over Gavilan a couple years prior to this fight that was bad also, although not as bad.
I nterestingly enough Graham was also involved in a strange fight with Joey Giardello in which he originaly lost . Then the card of one of the judges was changed at ringside by the commish giving the dec. to Graham.
Giardello filed a protest and was later given back the win.

Posted: **22 Oct 2006, 23:13**

RazorKO wrote:Coetzee vs Renaldo Snipes - By far the worst robbery in the history of the sport. I still fail to see why how a fighter being knocked down twice and fighting to survive for the first 6-7 rounds of the bout being awarded the decision.

unfortuately the fight was scored by rounds and not points.

Posted: **23 Oct 2006, 09:50**

Decagon wrote:
Chuck1052 wrote:Since I started following boxing, there were a number of bouts
in which the decisions were regarded as bad by many people.
They include Bob Foster vs. Jorge Ahumada, Muhammad Ali vs.
Ken Norton III, Alfredo Escalera vs. Tyrone Everett, Muhammad
Ali vs. Jimmy Young, Lupe Pintor vs. Carlos Zarate, Johnny
Boudreaux vs. Scott LeDoux, Pernell Whitaker vs. Julio Cesar
Chavez, Jose Luis Ramirez vs. Pernell Whitaker I, Lennox
Lewis vs. Evander Holyfield I, and Courtney Burton vs.
Emanuel Augustus I.

Suspected robberies due to referees' actions include
Pedro Carrasco vs. Mando Ramos I and Jose Napoles
vs. Armando Muniz I.
Fighters who take dives don't deseve any pity for bad decisions. Augustus is a drug addict who took the most blatant dive even Denmark has ever seen.

Outside of the ring transgressions should have no effect on what the judges score. Either way, he still got completely and utterly robbed against Burton in one of the worst decisions and refereeing displays in the past 20 years.

Posted: **23 Oct 2006, 10:21**

Decagon wrote:
j_sin wrote:Not that it even relates to THAT fight. All Richard Steele did was grab his gloves, look him in the eye, and call the fight. It was pretty obvious (not just to me) that although he was hurt, Meldrick was ready and able to finish the fight. He was far ahead on the scorecards, there was only six seconds in the fight, and he was capable of defending himself to make it safely out of the round.
Wrong. Go away and jerk off, or something. I get tired of listening to the idiots who think they're smart because they've seen HBO's ubercrappy Legendary Nights, but it's obvious that you haven't even seen that, and perhaps not even the fight.

if you repeat the same bullshit enough times, eventually alot of people start to believe it.

Posted: **23 Oct 2006, 11:50**

thismodernlove wrote:de la hoya w 12 felix sturm (wat a joke, i had this fight 10 rds - 2 rds for sturm EASILY, you could even make teh case he won every round)

also, courtney burton W 10 emanuel augustus

o'neil bell W 12 Dale Brown

and also, Hatton W 12 Collazo

Come on Hatton / Collazo was contraversial, hardly a screw job.

Posted: **23 Oct 2006, 11:59**

npalboxing wrote:Anybody that reports to the general public that fights like Peter vs. Toney was a robbery is hurting boxing. All the general public hears is "robbery, robbery, robbery" when most of the "robberies" aren't robberies at all. When you hear that all the time, why would you become a fan? And if you do, you're coming into it with an already generalized opinion of scoring. They say that judging is hurting boxing. No. Granted, judging can be better but reporting needs to be better. Boxing writers/commentators around the world need to take a look at what they're sending out. They are sending out their opinions. The same as a judge is sending out his opinion. Difference is, the judge has been trained and is qualified to score that fight. In most cases, even if you disagree with that judge, that judge can give you justification as to why he scored the fight that way. We need to think long and hard before we say the word "robbery" because by saying that word when it's not necessary... we are hurting boxing. We as in the fans, the writers, the commentators.

One of the most sensible and realistic posts I have ever read. The only thing you could have added is that judges do not, nor should they have to, account to millions of fans. Writers, journo's and TV commentators of course, in the name of sensationalism ,do.

Posted: **24 Oct 2006, 18:55**

Chuck1052 wrote: Johnny
Boudreaux vs. Scott LeDoux

funny enough i was talking about this fight the other day, wasnt it part of an elimination tournament organized by don king and ABC in order to find the U.S heavyweight champion?
i think to avoid controversy they used the ring`s rankings as well in order to see who would be entered into the tournament.
after a comfortable 8 rounds for ledoux where he bossed the fight and even dropped boudreaux the decision went to boudreaux!! i heard that ledoux was so outraged he stormed around the ring shouting `rip off` and `fake` and he even aimed a kick at boudreaux that missed and knocked howard cosell`s wig off!!
i think ABC withdrew their support of the tournament due to this fight.
thats what i was told, not sure how true it is, maybe one of our american posters can remember this first hand.
apparently there was a big stink over it at the time.

Posted: **24 Oct 2006, 19:26**

headhunter wrote:
Chuck1052 wrote: Johnny
Boudreaux vs. Scott LeDoux
funny enough i was talking about this fight the other day, wasnt it part of an elimination tournament organized by don king and ABC in order to find the U.S heavyweight champion?
i think to avoid controversy they used the ring`s rankings as well in order to see who would be entered into the tournament.
after a comfortable 8 rounds for ledoux where he bossed the fight and even dropped boudreaux the decision went to boudreaux!! i heard that ledoux was so outraged he stormed around the ring shouting `rip off` and `fake` and he even aimed a kick at boudreaux that missed and knocked howard cosell`s wig off!!
i think ABC withdrew their support of the tournament due to this fight.
thats what i was told, not sure how true it is, maybe one of our american posters can remember this first hand.
apparently there was a big stink over it at the time.

I saw this fight and everything you mentioned happened.
Ledoux was steamed at the dec. to say the least. Basicaly he went off.
Cosels wig did get knocked part way off but I dont remember if the wig slippage was televised.
I think Abc got wind of some of Don Kings subtafuge involving the inflation of records of the fighters involved in the tourny as well.
"The Ring caught some heat too as some of these records were published I believe.

Posted: **25 Oct 2006, 13:47**

expug wrote:
headhunter wrote:
Chuck1052 wrote: Johnny
Boudreaux vs. Scott LeDoux
funny enough i was talking about this fight the other day, wasnt it part of an elimination tournament organized by don king and ABC in order to find the U.S heavyweight champion?
i think to avoid controversy they used the ring`s rankings as well in order to see who would be entered into the tournament.
after a comfortable 8 rounds for ledoux where he bossed the fight and even dropped boudreaux the decision went to boudreaux!! i heard that ledoux was so outraged he stormed around the ring shouting `rip off` and `fake` and he even aimed a kick at boudreaux that missed and knocked howard cosell`s wig off!!
i think ABC withdrew their support of the tournament due to this fight.
thats what i was told, not sure how true it is, maybe one of our american posters can remember this first hand.
apparently there was a big stink over it at the time.
I saw this fight and everything you mentioned happened.
Ledoux was steamed at the dec. to say the least. Basicaly he went off.
Cosels wig did get knocked part way off but I dont remember if the wig slippage was televised.
I think Abc got wind of some of Don Kings subtafuge involving the inflation of records of the fighters involved in the tourny as well.
"The Ring caught some heat too as some of these records were published I believe.

cheers mate.

Posted: **27 Oct 2006, 20:24**

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grant wrote
Fenech-Nelson 1

OK so I'm a broken record!

Could not agree more, Don King was involved - that says enough, but there was the fight. I told all my friends that I want Fenech to win but Nelson was to good and well rounded and would KO Fenech. When I watched it I was shocked. Nelson won the first two rounds and Fench won the third through to the 12th. Almost KOing Nelson at the end of the 12th round, if was a 15 rounded Fench would have stopped Nelson n the next round.
The fight tore the guts out of Fench and he was never the same after that RIP OFF.

Ross

Posted: **27 Oct 2006, 20:50**

still pisses me off to watch that fight, it was AT LEAST 117-111 Fenech.

Posted: **27 Oct 2006, 21:22**

thunderfromdownunder wrote:still pisses me off to watch that fight, it was AT LEAST 117-111 Fenech.

You are indeed from the very heart of Australia......I dont' quite think it was that lopsided....but your loyalty is to be admired.

Posted: **30 Oct 2006, 20:30**

Watch the fight again BoxBuzz and you will see it was that one sided.

What really kills is that in hind sight that fight ruined Fenech, if he had won as he deserved to he would have kept tearing through the divisions and probably belted the great Sweet Pea. But Fenechs desire and determination were undermined by the bull shit decision

Ross

Posted: **31 Oct 2006, 15:21**

Decagon wrote:Who's MattyP?

<------

I'm pretty much the anti-Hatton and I had him beating Collazo.

BoxRec

Screwjobs in boxing history........(help me out)

Re: Fighters Getting Robbed

Re: Fighters Getting Robbed

Re: Fighters Getting Robbed

Re: Fighters Getting Robbed

Re: Fighters Getting Robbed