Robbery !!! ... They do happen.

i saw a close fight. they were both doing good work, but briscoe should have been instructing his charge to close out the show in impressive fashion and press the action with PUNCHES. you're able to obviously take his punches, you can walk him down, you can win. rosado gave that fight away.

The Hagler-Leonard fight is infamous for that example; but, in theory, a fighter can score more punches in the final seconds of a round than his opponent did earlier in the same round. It often happens that you'll get an aggressive guy who's pressing the action and throwing a lot of punches, but isn't hitting his mark. The other guy might not be throwing as many punches, and might be fighting off the back foot, but he's landing the greater number of clean shots. I'm not trying to say Leonard should've won that fight, mind you, just that ineffective aggression is often given too much weight. ^Very True!

I'm not sure if that fight was a robbery because i wasnt paying close enough attention to the rounds but i thought Rosado won. Like Bojangles said, people have this thing in their heads that a robbery has to be a complete blowout given to the wrong fighter. But if a guy clearly wins majority rounds, thats also a robbery, just look at Judah-Lucas. People seem to think judges are just incompetent, but thats bullsh1t. How are 90% of the public seeing the fight for the loser but 3 super trained judges with years in the sport and boxing knowledge get it wrong? Cmon this is all corruption. Judges are rewarded for scoring in a certain fighters favor with kickbacks and crap like that. I agree. There are too many examples of ridiculously wide scores where the judges handed the victory to the wrong man. I might not agree with every score of every close fight, but fully understand it's just my opinion. When you get a fight like Abril-Rios, there's no way anyone can tell me a professional judge can honestly score it for "Bam Bam."

Those are the kind of fights that would feel more convincing in the 15-round era of boxing.

Robberies to me off the top of my head is like" Abril vs Rios, Lara vs Paul Williams, Paulie Malignaggi vs Juan Diaz I, Lucas Matthysse vs Devon Alexander, Evander Holyfield vs Lennox Lewis When a guy CLEARLY wins and the decision is not given to him...some of you are screaming fukin "ROBBERY!" for every fight when the fighter you wanted to win doesn't win I thought Rosado edged it out in that 12 Round just like the one judge that scored it for him, but no question it was a CLOSE FIGHT, also the scoring and I even see the play by play guys do this: A Guy is out-boxing a guy for 2:40 and then the other guy comes back the last 20 Seconds and lands a few good punches and you want to reward him that round? WTF? That never made sense to me and that is why the Ray Leonard vs Marvin Hagler to this day is still such a controversial fight...Hagler working his ass off for 2:50 then Ray rattles off a combo the last 10 second and they want to give him the Round for it? I think that is BS! The Hagler-Leonard fight is infamous for that example; but, in theory, a fighter can score more punches in the final seconds of a round than his opponent did earlier in the same round. It often happens that you'll get an aggressive guy who's pressing the action and throwing a lot of punches, but isn't hitting his mark. The other guy might not be throwing as many punches, and might be fighting off the back foot, but he's landing the greater number of clean shots. I'm not trying to say Leonard should've won that fight, mind you, just that ineffective aggression is often given too much weight.

Are you sure? That's not how Lederman does it. 10-9 is always to the winner, and 1 point always of for a knock down. So the options were 10-8 to Rosado if you thought Rosado won the round. Or 9-9 if you thought Love won the round. I'm pretty sure about this, but your strong conviction is confusing me now. I will go back and try to find a source for you. I totally get your reasoning, you get 1 point for knocking down your opponent, makes sense. But it really doesn't work like that, a KD is an automatic 10-8. The best the other guy can do is 10-9 (provided no KDs or foul deductions), and he really has to dominate the rest of the round.

Are you sure? That's not how Lederman does it. 10-9 is always to the winner, and 1 point always of for a knock down. So the options were 10-8 to Rosado if you thought Rosado won the round. Or 9-9 if you thought Love won the round. I'm pretty sure about this, but your strong conviction is confusing me now. I will go back and try to find a source for you. 10 point must system, the winner HAS to get 10 points unless he has a point taken away. Since when are knockdowns independent of the rest of the round?

I'm not sure if that fight was a robbery because i wasnt paying close enough attention to the rounds but i thought Rosado won. Like Bojangles said, people have this thing in their heads that a robbery has to be a complete blowout given to the wrong fighter. But if a guy clearly wins majority rounds, thats also a robbery, just look at Judah-Lucas. People seem to think judges are just incompetent, but thats bullsh1t. How are 90% of the public seeing the fight for the loser but 3 super trained judges with years in the sport and boxing knowledge get it wrong? Cmon this is all corruption. Judges are rewarded for scoring in a certain fighters favor with kickbacks and crap like that.

Absolutely and to add to that, you can have a very tight fight and it can go all for one fighter. Judging it like every round is an individual fight is the way to go. People see a knockdown and then the fight is over, it's just not that way. Again, I thought it was a very close fight but I'm not mad at Love getting the nod. If they would have given it to Rosado, I would have been cool with that too. Also, when you are watching a fight from ringside, it's very different than watching it on TV. I don't envy the judges. Good points. Sometimes you'll get a fight where fighter "A" dominates the first seven rounds (of a twelve round bout) and fighter "B" wins the last five rounds. If fighter "A" (rightfully) is given the decision, people not keeping score will get upset because the last few rounds are freshest in their minds. Also, a 10-9 round is a 10-9round. It doesn't matter how much more "dominant" one was over the other. Judging close fights is a difficult task. Judging one with lots of inside-fighting can be a nightmare. No one gets it right all the time. That's why they have three judges. It's a subject for another thread, but I've come to believe that fight judges should be assigned television monitors to help them keep score. Watching live action is inaccurate by comparison.

Sorry man, I had the same score in the end, but your round 6 is plain wrong. You can't score that 9-9. I get your reasoning, a KD is a point off. But it doesn't work like that, it's an automatic 10-8 Rosado unless Love dominated the rest of the round, in which case it's 10-9 Rosado. But Love didn't dominate, merely won the remainder so 10-8. Not sure Rosado won rd 4 though. Are you sure? That's not how Lederman does it. 10-9 is always to the winner, and 1 point always of for a knock down. So the options were 10-8 to Rosado if you thought Rosado won the round. Or 9-9 if you thought Love won the round. I'm pretty sure about this, but your strong conviction is confusing me now. I will go back and try to find a source for you.

This is how I had it. http://i.imgur.com/B4WyZQd.png Robbery? No way. Rios-Abril was a robbery. Hate to sound cliched, but this could have gone either way, I barely had Rosado winning.

This is how I had it. Rosado Love 9 10 9 10 10 9 10 9 9 10 9 9 10 9 9 10 10 9 10 9 95 94 Sorry man, I had the same score in the end, but your round 6 is plain wrong. You can't score that 9-9. I get your reasoning, a KD is a point off. But it doesn't work like that, it's an automatic 10-8 Rosado unless Love dominated the rest of the round, in which case it's 10-9 Rosado. But Love didn't dominate, merely won the remainder so 10-8. Not sure Rosado won rd 4 though.

Robberies to me off the top of my head is like" Abril vs Rios, Lara vs Paul Williams, Paulie Malignaggi vs Juan Diaz I, Lucas Matthysse vs Devon Alexander, Evander Holyfield vs Lennox Lewis When a guy CLEARLY wins and the decision is not given to him...some of you are screaming fukin "ROBBERY!" for every fight when the fighter you wanted to win doesn't win I thought Rosado edged it out in that 12 Round just like the one judge that scored it for him, but no question it was a CLOSE FIGHT, also the scoring and I even see the play by play guys do this: A Guy is out-boxing a guy for 2:40 and then the other guy comes back the last 20 Seconds and lands a few good punches and you want to reward him that round? WTF? That never made sense to me and that is why the Ray Leonard vs Marvin Hagler to this day is still such a controversial fight...Hagler working his ass off for 2:50 then Ray rattles off a combo the last 10 second and they want to give him the Round for it? I think that is BS!

I think a knockdown alone can have a psychological effect on the viewer. It may make you think the fighter that scored the knockdown is still in control especially in close rounds the knocked down fighter might have won.

Love lost the fight clearly.

This is how I had it. http://i.imgur.com/B4WyZQd.png

There's only one way to score a fight, and that's round-by-round. Watching a fight without keeping score is totally unreliable. It's easy to be swayed by aggression and knockdowns. That's why so many casual fans scream robbery when there isn't any. The first time I watch a fight, I don't keep score. I'll usually only break out the pen if the contest is controversial and I truly want to judge for myself. Unless one guy is dominating the majority of the fight, a couple of swing rounds can really make things hazy. Judging a close fight can be very tricky, to say the least. Absolutely and to add to that, you can have a very tight fight and it can go all for one fighter. Judging it like every round is an individual fight is the way to go. People see a knockdown and then the fight is over, it's just not that way. Again, I thought it was a very close fight but I'm not mad at Love getting the nod. If they would have given it to Rosado, I would have been cool with that too. Also, when you are watching a fight from ringside, it's very different than watching it on TV. I don't envy the judges.

Yea ill watch it again tonight and really score.. But just from what I saw last night I thought the rosado rounds were pretty clear cut. Yeah, I'm not saying I disagree, but it wouldn't be the first time I re-watched a fight and thought: "What the hell did I see the first time around?" lol

There's only one way to score a fight, and that's round-by-round. Watching a fight without keeping score is totally unreliable. It's easy to be swayed by aggression and knockdowns. That's why so many casual fans scream robbery when there isn't any. The first time I watch a fight, I don't keep score. I'll usually only break out the pen if the contest is controversial and I truly want to judge for myself. Unless one guy is dominating the majority of the fight, a couple of swing rounds can really make things hazy. Judging a close fight can be very tricky, to say the least. Yea ill watch it again tonight and really score.. But just from what I saw last night I thought the rosado rounds were pretty clear cut.

95-94 Love. Close fight :boxing: