BoxRec

si7dog7 wrote:sorry to harp on about Taylor v Chavez
but I did read somewhere, a long time ago, that Meldrick was severely dehydrated after the fight (I know, I know - not uncommon) but in this case, doctors/medics were genuinely concerned for his general wellfare.

Steele is still vilified for this decision to this day. Maybe it is lucky tht he wasn't clock watching and saved any further puncers from being thrown.

Should be in the Hall of Fame as far as I am concerned.

Rover wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

Rover wrote: Typical non-response. The only thing that ever came out were rumors about King and Steele. What boxers are you referring to, and what did they "know"? Try again.
It's no different than one boxer's accusing another (while providing no evidence) of the use of banned substances, like, as one example, Pascal did with B-Hop.
"Take the test! You're a fuckin cheater!"
That baseless charge doesn't have any additional credibility because Pascal's a fighter. If there were actual evidence of this Steele/King relationship, rather than rumors and paranoia, "the boxers involved" should've let the rest of us in on it.
I also love how Steele bashers conveniently ignore facts that go against their conspiracy nonsense, like how Steele took a point from King fighter Chavez (yes, the same one of Taylor fame) in the 9th round against Laporte in a very close fight, or how the same Steele took two points from Chavez that cost him his title v. Randall. Chavez was so angry after that fight that, through interpreter Gladys Rosa in the post-fight interview, he said he wanted to sue Steele.
Those are FACTS, not rumors.

Rover wrote:Ah, so fights not involving King. Is that the best you have? So the best you have is that a fighter didn't trust Steele? That's it?
Of course, Lewis trusted Steele enough to ref NONTITLE fights.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

Rover wrote:Ah, so fights not involving King. Is that the best you have? So the best you have is that a fighter didn't trust Steele? That's it?
Of course, Lewis trusted Steele enough to ref NONTITLE fights.

Lewis fought plenty of fights involving King (I thought you would know that) and when Steele was allocated as referee, Lewis demanded a change.

Which non-title fights of Lewis did Steele ref?

keithmoonhangover wrote:
Lennox Lewis refused to have Richard Steele referee any his title fights. It was documented at the time and I was told by a VERY reliable source that Lennox didn't trust Steele's decision making.

keithmoonhangover wrote:Lewis refused Steele when he was proposed and the VERY reliable source that told me was...... Lennox Lewis.

Rover wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:Lewis refused Steele when he was proposed and the VERY reliable source that told me was...... Lennox Lewis.

And he trusted him when it came to NONTITLE fights. Yeah, makes sense to have someone ref your fight whose judgment you don't trust.

Rover wrote:Nice try, but you claimed that Lewis refused Steele for all his title fights. Then you try to sneak King into the mix. Lewis fought non-King opponents. If Lewis refused Steele because he didn't trust his judgment, then why did Steele ref a fight of Lewis's after Chavez/Taylor and Tyson/Ruddock?
Those are documented FACTS.
Keep playing.
And you still haven't presented an iota of evidence of Steele's corruption--unless you include the beliefs of a fighter who allowed him to ref him AFTER the controversial fights had occurred.
Too easy.

keithmoonhangover wrote:
Lennox Lewis refused to have Richard Steele referee any his title fights. It was documented at the time and I was told by a VERY reliable source that Lennox didn't trust Steele's decision making.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

Rover wrote:Nice try, but you claimed that Lewis refused Steele for all his title fights. Then you try to sneak King into the mix. Lewis fought non-King opponents. If Lewis refused Steele because he didn't trust his judgment, then why did Steele ref a fight of Lewis's after Chavez/Taylor and Tyson/Ruddock?
Those are documented FACTS.
Keep playing.
And you still haven't presented an iota of evidence of Steele's corruption--unless you include the beliefs of a fighter who allowed him to ref him AFTER the controversial fights had occurred.
Too easy.

Who knows better on the matter, Rover or Lennox Lewis?

Rover wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:
Lennox Lewis refused to have Richard Steele referee any his title fights. It was documented at the time and I was told by a VERY reliable source that Lennox didn't trust Steele's decision making.

That was your claim, Keith. Nothing about King. This all started because of your "on the take" crap. So as evidence you offer something that doesn't have anything to do with corruption. Then you try to sneak King back in later on.

And if letting someone ref one of your fights is an indication of trust of judgment, Lewis trusted Steele's, and that's documented.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

Rover wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:
Lennox Lewis refused to have Richard Steele referee any his title fights. It was documented at the time and I was told by a VERY reliable source that Lennox didn't trust Steele's decision making.

That was your claim, Keith. Nothing about King. This all started because of your "on the take" crap. So as evidence you offer something that doesn't have anything to do with corruption. Then you try to sneak King back in later on.

And if letting someone ref one of your fights is an indication of trust of judgment, Lewis trusted Steele's, and that's documented.

I never once said Steele was on the take. King has been there all along, but the thread is called worst officials, not worst promoters.

Now, at a party several years ago, Lennox Lewis told me, face to face, that he didn't trust Steele's decision making.... So, I will ask you one last time and then the floor is yours.....

Who knows better on the matter, Rover or Lennox Lewis?

keithmoonhangover wrote:Back in the day, if Richard Steele was in the ring, I wasn't alone in thinking Don King fighters were at an advantage.

If Steele was the ref for Tyson - Douglas, I think he would have found a way to either a, count Douglas out or b, stop the fight when he got up.

keithmoonhangover wrote:I would love to put Steele on a lie detector test and ask him if he stopped the fight because he feared for Meldrick Taylor's safety, or because Chavez was King's fighter?

Ambling Alp II wrote:My problem with that fight is that Taylor was clearly distracted by his own corner and wasn't even looking at Steele. Steele should have realized that he didn't have Taylor's attention and moved so that Taylor would be looking right at him.
However, if it was just that one fight, I would not consider him such a bad referee.

What makes you wonder about Steele is that in some fights he lets the fight go on when it should be stopped. In others, he stops the fight very easily. Whether he was "On the Take" or not is hard to say.

I am beginning to think I am the only person to have seen the Tate-Olajide fight. Have never heard anyone else ever comment on it. It was on regular network TV.
Anyway, Tate just completely dominated Olajide. It was a vicious one-sided beating. Olajide was in much worse shape that Meldrick Taylor was. It was more one-sided than Holmes-Cobb. Yet, Steele just let it go on, round after round when it was obvious that Olajide had no chance. (Olajide corner deserves a lot of criticsm for not stopping it as well.)

foxy01 wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:
Now, at a party several years ago, Lennox Lewis told me, face to face, that he didn't trust Steele's decision making....

Keith,

I have to ask, did it occur to you to ask LL at this party how come he trusted Larry O'Connell's decision making after he shafted him with the draw in Holyfield 1? Indeed to the extent he was quite happy for him to ref the Botha fight, only 16 months later.

Rover wrote:

SenorPipino wrote:I should have cashed in my betting slip quickly that night. I put down $100 on Fenech as a 7-5 underdog. The fight was originally announced in the ring as a majority win for Fenech, but was changed about 30 minutes later to a draw. Boy was I pissed. Thanx "Mikey."

No, you're thinking of Leija I. Fenech I was announced as a draw right away. I am sure of this because I just rewatched Leija I a few weeks ago and have seen Nelson/Fenech I many times. There was no announcement of Fenech as the winner by MD. With respect to Leija I, I think it was originally announced as a Nelson SD.

SenorPipino wrote:

Rover wrote:

SenorPipino wrote:I should have cashed in my betting slip quickly that night. I put down $100 on Fenech as a 7-5 underdog. The fight was originally announced in the ring as a majority win for Fenech, but was changed about 30 minutes later to a draw. Boy was I pissed. Thanx "Mikey."

No, you're thinking of Leija I. Fenech I was announced as a draw right away. I am sure of this because I just rewatched Leija I a few weeks ago and have seen Nelson/Fenech I many times. There was no announcement of Fenech as the winner by MD. With respect to Leija I, I think it was originally announced as a Nelson SD.

I'm a little late with the post but you're absolutely right Rover. I have a memory block over some of those hideous DKP outcomes from the early 90s that cost me money. I lost on this fight too as my cash went on Azumah. The draw was a bad decision but admitedly not nearly as obscene as Fenech-Nelson I. I guess they needed to placate Leijas' hometown San Antonio crowd at the Alamodome.