Page 1 of 1
chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 27 Dec 2011, 11:09
by tommo100
right time to stop it or was taylor robbed??
from what i could see meldrick was out of it and did`nt know where he was
he`d took a lot of chavez punishment,despite all the flash combo`s,admittedly he was winning by a country mile
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 27 Dec 2011, 16:51
by Goodnight, Irene
I'd be happy wiht either result --- it was a legit stoppage, but Steele would not have been out of line to let it go.
What I do take exception to, however, is this idea that with two seconds left, the fight should not have been stopped. That would --- undisputably --- be robbing Chavez. The fight is not over with two seconds left. It's a 12-round fight --- not an 11-round, 58-second fight.
If that were the case, why should Chavez bother to fight & throw punches & stay in there for the last five...ten...fifteen...twenty seconds? At which point is the bout unofficially over?
That is what I take exception to with the (many) Taylor defenders --- that they seem to have this notion that Taylor was entitled to the victory because there was so little time left. The fact is there was time left, so the stoppage is no robbery at all.
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 27 Dec 2011, 16:59
by Jaclem
..i thought this one had been beaten to death here...but again it rises. ....and again i respond. what i can't understand is why it hangs around, as goodnight has the correct answer and as i have had many times. the referee is not a time keeper...and taylor was in bad shape. npw, can we all go on to something else?????
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 27 Dec 2011, 17:39
by SaadOffTheDeck
Agreed it's been done to death. So all I will say is that Taylor was robbed as badly as any fighter in history.
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 27 Dec 2011, 19:00
by Trent
Ive seen fighters in worse off conditions than Taylor being able to continue and fight (example Vargas against Tito). also it was a title fight and first knockdown of the fight. Obviously something fishy about the whole thing.
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 27 Dec 2011, 19:13
by Goodnight, Irene
No way was Vargas in worse shape after a minute and a half with Trinidad than a beleaguered Taylor was against Chavez after twelve rounds.
Even if I conceded that, its a flawed argument. Heavily.
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 27 Dec 2011, 19:30
by BoxBuzz
In retrospect I sort of sentimentally pull for the underdog....in this case the ultimate loser of the fight. (I did not consider him a particular underdog going in.) However if it were reversed I'd probably pine for Chavez instead.
Good point about the last round being a full 3 minutes, and not 2:58.
It's just an appealing human interest story and always will be. The ref is not the timekeeper (as was pointed out). I don't think Steele "saved Taylor's life" as some espouse. I do think that he "saved the day for Chavez". And as long as it was without ill intent, then we should all be at peace.
I suppose the only argument left is .....if the two seconds would have ran out on the clock and the fight was not stopped, does anyone think Chavez won the fight?
I don't, but I also don't remember what the scorecards would have dealt out to the public on that day. Chavez may have benefited from some poor judgment for all I know.
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 27 Dec 2011, 19:37
by crusader
BoxBuzz wrote:In retrospect I sort of sentimentally pull for the underdog....in this case the ultimate loser of the fight. (I did not consider him a particular underdog going in.) However if it were reversed I'd probably pine for Chavez instead.
Good point about the last round being a full 3 minutes, and not 2:58.
It's just an appealing human interest story and always will be. The ref is not the timekeeper (as was pointed out). I don't think Steele "saved Taylor's life" as some espouse. I do think that he "saved the day for Chavez". And as long as it was without ill intent, then we should all be at peace.
I suppose the only argument left is .....if the two seconds would have ran out on the clock and the fight was not stopped, does anyone think Chavez won the fight?
I don't, but I also don't remember what the scorecards would have dealt out to the public on that day. Chavez may have benefited from some poor judgment for all I know.
Taylor would have won a split decision.
Dave Moretti 107-102 | judge: Chuck Giampa 104-105 | judge: Jerry Roth 108-101
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 27 Dec 2011, 19:41
by BoxBuzz
Think Giampa was watching this fight though the eyes of Don King? lol
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 27 Dec 2011, 19:44
by Goodnight, Irene
Taylor took a nasty beating, but even so, Giampa should visit an optometrist for scoring that fight for Chavez.
By the rounds, Taylor led AT LEAST 7-4. Bare minimum.
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 27 Dec 2011, 20:04
by Seamus
At the time of the fight I was all for Taylor, but looking at it many years later, I think Steele made the right the call. Taylor was unresponsive to his questions and had taken a savage beating. Steele wasn't watching the clock. I suppose some people think Taylor should have gotten the decision as a reward for taking such a beating, but I can't agree.
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 29 Dec 2011, 22:12
by duranfan
BoxBuzz wrote:In retrospect I sort of sentimentally pull for the underdog....in this case the ultimate loser of the fight. (I did not consider him a particular underdog going in.) However if it were reversed I'd probably pine for Chavez instead.
Good point about the last round being a full 3 minutes, and not 2:58.
It's just an appealing human interest story and always will be. The ref is not the timekeeper (as was pointed out). I don't think Steele "saved Taylor's life" as some espouse. I do think that he "saved the day for Chavez". And as long as it was without ill intent, then we should all be at peace.
I suppose the only argument left is .....if the two seconds would have ran out on the clock and the fight was not stopped, does anyone think Chavez won the fight?
I don't, but I also don't remember what the scorecards would have dealt out to the public on that day. Chavez may have benefited from some poor judgment for all I know.
As you rightly point out Steele is not the timekeeper, so he doesn't know there is only 2 seconds left. So on that basis lets assume there are 4 seconds left, (because only the timekeeper knows and he aint in the ring ) is 4 seconds enough time for Chavez to cross the ring, and nail a totally defenceless man with a hugely damaging shot, perhaps a Watson / McClellan type shot? I dont proffess to know, but were I a ref, I wouldn't allow that totally defenceless man to take a shot no matter what the circumstances regarding time.
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 06 Jan 2012, 21:24
by duranimal
duranfan wrote:BoxBuzz wrote:In retrospect I sort of sentimentally pull for the underdog....in this case the ultimate loser of the fight. (I did not consider him a particular underdog going in.) However if it were reversed I'd probably pine for Chavez instead.
Good point about the last round being a full 3 minutes, and not 2:58.
It's just an appealing human interest story and always will be. The ref is not the timekeeper (as was pointed out). I don't think Steele "saved Taylor's life" as some espouse. I do think that he "saved the day for Chavez". And as long as it was without ill intent, then we should all be at peace.
I suppose the only argument left is .....if the two seconds would have ran out on the clock and the fight was not stopped, does anyone think Chavez won the fight?
I don't, but I also don't remember what the scorecards would have dealt out to the public on that day. Chavez may have benefited from some poor judgment for all I know.
As you rightly point out Steele is not the timekeeper, so he doesn't know there is only 2 seconds left. So on that basis lets assume there are 4 seconds left, (because only the timekeeper knows and he aint in the ring ) is 4 seconds enough time for Chavez to cross the ring, and nail a totally defenceless man with a hugely damaging shot, perhaps a Watson / McClellan type shot? I dont proffess to know, but were I a ref, I wouldn't allow that totally defenceless man to take a shot no matter what the circumstances regarding time.
You've only got to look at the Curry/McCrory fight after the 1st knockdown & then the righthand finisher straight down the pipe as to what can happen in a couple of seconds. Anyway it was a good & fair stoppage & too let the fight continue is to cheat Chavez of his rightful & dramatic victory + it proberbly saved this gringo from getting a fearful kicking as i was there that night to witness it 1st hand. Incredible fight & ending.
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 06 Jan 2012, 22:03
by Goodnight, Irene
I actually thought the stoppage in the SECOND fight was premature.
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 07 Jan 2012, 12:16
by Ambling Alp
My biggest probelm with the stoppage in the first fight was the referee did not have Taylor's attention. Taylor was duistracted by his corner and was not looking at Steele. I don't blame Steele for stopping it because there was not much time left.
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 07 Jan 2012, 15:57
by Ezzard
Agree. If Taylor had won I'd feel bad for Chavez. As it is I feel bad for Taylor.
I suspect Taylor was a great fighter.
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 07 Jan 2012, 20:30
by Goodnight, Irene
Ive always thought hes more myth than potential legend, personally.
Re: chavez vs meldrick taylor 1st fight
Posted: 07 Jan 2012, 23:21
by SaadOffTheDeck
He was what he was, blinding fast and tough but with little power or defense. I don't know if he was great, but he was better than Chavez on that night.