What is your definition of a robbery?

Well it doesn't really have to go to personal issues and just in the realm of boxing then we're good. Agreed. :beerchug: I don't judge a person by their boxing opinions.

I'm 27 and living with good salary with a hot wife. What do you have? Truthfully, a lot more than that^. I'm pretty blessed but I'm not one of these insecure douchebags that brags about it online so I'll be the first to say that my good fortune doesn't make me a more valuable person and it's irrelevant to our conversation.

"The fight was a full close round fights but I will give every close round to Ward." I know you're getting older, and life is passing you by, but there's help; http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2013-12-27-Ellen_Dolgen_Menopause_Monday-thumb.jpg

When a fighter clearly wins atleast 7 rounds and doesn't get the decision. I.e Pernell Whitaker vs Jose Luis Ramirez Whitaker dominated atleast 7 rounds yet lost the official decision. If there's loads of close rounds I.e Ward-Kovalev then it's not a robbery because there was about 7 swing rounds in the fight and only two or three clear rounds at all in the whole fight. That's the epitome of a close fight. When a fighter wins 7 or more clear, indisputable rounds that no knowledgable person could score the other way and doesn't get the nod. I like this definition.

matthysse-alexander walters-sosa McDonnell-solis i think it was a robbery

When a fighter wins 7 or more clear, indisputable rounds that no knowledgable person could score the other way and doesn't get the nod.

Meh, in general it's when you can't realistically make a case for enough rounds being given to the winner to outscore the loser. I thought this one was a poor decision, but not a robbery. Perez - Hooker was a robbery, Williams - Lara, Cloud - Campillo, Sturm - Chudinov II are merely the first examples that spring to mind of fights I considered robberies. Oh, and then there's BS like Kirkland - Molina, or Stieglitz - Khomitsky when the fight is stopped late on a technicality because the wrong guy's winning.

When a fighter clearly wins atleast 7 rounds and doesn't get the decision. I.e Pernell Whitaker vs Jose Luis Ramirez Whitaker dominated atleast 7 rounds yet lost the official decision. If there's loads of close rounds I.e Ward-Kovalev then it's not a robbery because there was about 7 swing rounds in the fight and only two or three clear rounds at all in the whole fight. That's the epitome of a close fight.

the deserving winner lose And deserving ,,,,,, to you ! So its back to throw out scoring and we will just go with who fans thought was the tough guy . Whats your definition of a robbery , name the fights and we will do some comparing .

Ward lost the fight. Even ward fans will say they think it was a phoiphoito finiush type win. That's not enough I'm afraiud to take a champs belt. No reason why ward deserves favouritism

As a far as i can tell the only clear rounds on everyone's card are 1,2,6 for Kovalev and 7,8,9,11 for Ward. 3,4,5,10,12 are where people are having a difference of opinion. (Personally i thought 10 was a clear Kovalev round too.) Agree with your clear rounds. 10 was competitive but seems like most people, including myself, gave it to Kovalev. The disputes lie in 3,4,5,12 of which I saw 3 of them for Ward. The range of scores from flipping these four one way or the other is 115-112 Ward to 116-111 Kovalev. This range includes about 90% of media scorecards that I know of. What's baffling to me is not that people scored the fight for Kovalev, which in a fight decided by 1 pt on all 3 cards is to be expected, but rather the sheer inability to see how the fight might have been scored the other way.

I'm not sure if you've heard of you've got to take it to the champion. Countless, numerous challengers have failed to beat the chsamos as they didn't take it go the champion. Just doi ng enough usuaklly iusnt enough and they fall short. People are bored with ward fans counting how many rounds ward won like accountants. Ward didn't do enough. Wasn't prepared to sacriufuce enough! So hoiw come ward is exempt from it? Can anyone say ward took it to the champion? So hoiw come ward is shown favouritism?

This seems to be a controversial topic so I want to get your opinions on this. It's pretty simple and is a definition as old as boxing: when the guy who clearly won the fight loses. Basic. Now, a fight can be close but still have a clear winner. I hadi t about 115-112, it's kinda close on the cards but it was a clear decision, with teh KD and the rounds won by Kovalev far more convincing than the rounds won by Ward. There hasn't been much discussion on it not being a robbery in real boxing circles tbh.

Pacquiao-Bradley I.

Sweet Pea Whitaker vs Chavez Sr. Lennox Lewis vs Evander Holyfield I

When there aren't enough rounds (swing or otherwise) to award victory to the fighter who won. This fight was full of close rounds so the claim of "robbery" is pure bitterness. Several analysts who picked Kovalev have broken it down and have agreed that Ward could win the fight, depending on what criteria one favors. The reason fights aren't scored by a computer, or a single judge, is that there are complexities to weight and assumptions that must be made (since we don't know just how hard each body blow was, etc). Some are swayed by body language. Others award technical brilliance.

the deserving winner lose that's about it for me. I don't know why people think it has to be a 120-85 fight for a robbery to happen. If one guy did more and still lost he got robbed period. However there is a difference between a robbery and a fix. For example the cards for the perez-hooker fight were obviously fixed/bribery. He was the "house fighter" and there's no WAY any judge is that blind. I don't know if the kovalev fight was corruption or just sloppy lazy judging.

pac Bradley 1, sweet pea chavez, etc the fight sat was nothing like those, while I can see arguments for Kov winning it was close, a draw, or either fighter winning by one point. this was far from a robbery people are just angry their fighter lost.

https://heavyeditorial.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/chair.gif?w=780 :lol1::lol1:

https://heavyeditorial.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/chair.gif?w=780 :lol1::lol1: In my mind a fight like Lara vs Williams was a robbery. Lara vs Williams is an excellent example of a robbery. No way should Williams have been given anything remotely close to a victory. Most people felt that Lara should have been given the decision. Ward vs Kovalev is not a good example of a robbery, even if you disagree with the decision. It was a decision that could have went either way. The fact that a lot of people disagree with it but that a lot of people agree with it is the marking of it having been a close fight.