Has the word "robbery" lost all meaning?

you absolutely reek of dopey pac-tard just saying And you’re the Big Dunn’s alt! Haha you big dumb sum muh ma biiaaatttchh! Der der ya ret@rd!!

The thing about Hopkins/Calzaghe is everyone who says Hopkins won always point to how Joe's slapping style didnt do any damage as if Hopkins doesn't have to do anything and automatically wins unless Joe bludgeoned him. It was more of a fight where Hopkins didn't do enough to win rds more than Joe won them but I always score that 115-112 for Joe everytime I watch that messy ugly fight hopkins was landing clean punches. joe wasnt. a fight like that is frustrating because it shouldnt be that hard to score. a fight like pac marquez is much harder because both guys are landing solid shots and its hard to separate them. its not hard to separate one guy landing cleanly from one guy whiffing at air.

Yes. People started using it to describe 115-113 fights that could go either way. The proper definition is as you said Pacquiao vs Bradley and Lara vs PWill.

Horn Manny was a robbery. Floyd Manny was a robbery. And you are The Big Dumb. The Big Dumb Sum muh ma biiiaaattch! you absolutely reek of dopey pac-tard just saying

I don't believe Horn/Manny was a robbery in any way. Manny just lost. I had Fury beating wilder in the 1st fight but I didn't think it was a robbery either. I scored Kov Ward for Kov and didn't think that was a robbery either. Now Whitaker/Chavez and Manny/bradley-those were robberies of the worst kind IMO. Horn Manny was a robbery. Floyd Manny was a robbery. And you are The Big Dumb. The Big Dumb Sum muh ma biiiaaattch!

Bubba, I did not quote you to have a debate about a thing you openly object to debating. I'm willing to discuss the validity of fan cards vs official cards or some such similar. Ask me who I think landed the most effective punches in a given fight or round and I'll answer that. Asking me to produce a card is asking me to either: (A) Search this forum for my former posts (B) Rewatch a fight and report what I think. I do have gigs worth of boxing relative text and pdf files, but, they're sources not scorecards because I'm not the type to keep such meaningless nonsense. Check the round by rounds and live response threads. I score live when I'm here and when people ask for it while it's active in my notifications I'll copy and paste it for them. Outside of that, you're asking me to do work for you so that you can use me has a vehicle to have a debate that interests only you. Find the cards, quote me, I'll back myself up. Outside of that I have no reason to entertain this debate. For the record, I did not intend to come off as self righteous. I got ya man...maybe I have a good memory... for most of those contentious fights I can more or less remember my cards so I thought others could do the same. But to be fair, I probably only remember the rd by rd scores for about 5-10 fights...and the rest I just remember my general score...trying to think back on some of those fights now, I would need to watch go back and refresh my memory to see which rd was which, so I understand your point.

Because you've a chip on you shoulder and clearly want to a debate over scorecards. My stance is those debates range from pointless to straight up stupid. If you want my scorecards and you want to change the issue to my scorecards rather than discussing whether or not any knowledge of how to score actually matters given it's judges, not you, who do it then you're going to have to make that happen. I came here to make fun of people who can't get enough scorecard comparison and you jumped right up to be that guy.....why the **** would I join you? Well I guess you've got me man...I do want to debate/have discussions on here...it's a boxing forum and that's what it should be for. I guess you want to use the forum to make snarky comments and act holier-than-thou...that's cool though. Again I just find it a bit funny that you act like some moral authority on judging fights, yet I've never seen you post a card...so I asked if you had any cards available, as this seemed like an appropriate thread to discuss cards/what fights we felt were robberies/weren't robberies. Your buddy Time already admitted he hasn't scored fights for decades...yet he tries to have all these big opinions about who won fights lol...it's bizarre...not really lumping you in with him of course, but yeah not sure why you would make the comments you made, and not just join the discussion/give your opinion on specific fights...my 2 cents is that it makes you look like a bit of a douche. If you are going to make a big claim about who you feel won a 12 round/10 round fight, you should pretty much immediately post your card from the fight, and then a little summary of why you scored it the way you did...then some good boxing debates can happen. Not really sure why you're being so defensive about it, but do you my friend.

If their fighter loses they call it a robbery, yes they use that term way too much

Go back and watch the fight again. I said 'arguably' because Hopkins performed extremely well yet somehow the judges didn't agree. It was the one fight I can recall that exposed Calslappy's defensive weakness. Even if it was close ( I don’t think it was ) it can’t be a robbery. A robbery is a blatant bad decision and the vast majority of people thought joe won the fight... You are who this whole thread is aimed at.

Should underestimate how intelligent boxing fans are to judge story of fight though. Fury was robbed in 1st wilder fight. I don't want to kick wilder when he's down though

I never have watched Bradley-Manny 1...I need to get around to watching that and scoring it. oh yes.... you simply MUST have a pen/paper handy when watching a fight :lol1: fcukboy, why did you post this MOUNTAIN of laughable garbage ? thinks that Golovkin has a better resume than Canelo..... I just made a thread about specifically why people rate Canelo's resume as better than GGG's...and I laid out my case as to why I rate GGG's better..... https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=820918 ---------------------------- thinks that one of the " killers " on Golovkin's resume could have beaten Canelo.... but will not say which one I don't think Canelo would have gotten all of his guys out by KO and maybe would not have 'won' all of them..... https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=820918&page=10 ---------------------------- thinks that Golovkin has faced more quality opposition than almost any other fighter in history..... never had a slip up against quality opposition, and he faced probably more of them than almost any other fighter in history... https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=824905 ---------------------------- thinks that Andre Ward is no better than Bika Barrera and Miranda I just never really saw the skills from him..... if he was born in a different country I don't think he would have been looked at much differently than Bika Barrera or Miranda etc..... https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?p=19903762#post19903762 ---------------------------- thinks that Golovkin has 5-6 'great' wins..... but cannot even name 1 of those 'great' wins Yeah he has about 10+ good wins imo...and 5-6 'great' wins if you want to term it that...great fighter, great career...an ATG at MW...that's pretty clear I think..... If a great win is a dominant win over another prime great fighter...I would say GGG has quite a few tbh..... https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=821123&page=20 ---------------------------- thinks that Lemieux, Murray... are the same level as Canelo/Jacobs Lemieux, Murray pretty clearly around the level of SD Canelo Jacobs... https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?p=20112309#post20112309 ---------------------------- thinks that Murray Lemieux Monroe and Vanes, are better wins for Golovkin..... than Lara Cotto Trout and Mosley, are for Canelo..... Canelo's top wins would be Lara..Jacobs and Cotto imo...GGG's would be Jacobs, Murray and Lemieux...I don't see a ton of separation there..... winning 7-5 vs a great Lara...and going 12 with a shot fat Cotto...is not imo better than 8 Round destruction of Lemieux...and 11 round destruction of Murray..... Vanes was inactive and moving up in weight...but he wasn't shot like SSM more or less was..... I don't think going 12 with Mosley when Canelo did, or 12 with Trout, are better wins than GGG running through Monroe and Geale..... https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=820918&page=16 ---------------------------- creates a thread misquoting Steve Weisfeld..... Boxing1013 attempted to remove defence, ring generalship, and effective aggression, as official scoring criteria..... to justify why he thinks Golovkin beat Canelo in their rematch..... but, had NO IDEA that Steve Weisfeld was AN OFFICIAL JUDGE at the Canelo/Golovkin rematch..... and Weisfeld scored that fight for Canelo looool https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=818903 ------------------------------- proves that he has no idea how to score a professional boxing match... I'll also tell you how I score them...generally give a 'full point' for a good hard clean shot...and a 'half point' for a punch that is a scoring blow but isn't necessarily super hard or clean. https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?p=20372893#post20372893 -------------------------------

Bro why say all that, instead of just posting a scorecard or two from a recent fight. Bro you don't even score fights lol...just fall back man. Btw you look increasingly foolish when you try and create arguments on here out of nothing...you just look desperate...if you don't understand that not every punch is scored equally and that harder and cleaner punches are given more weight, I don't know what to tell ya man. In any event, the little bit of fun I have with you on here is kind of gone at this point...you have such a big opinion of fights and fighters and you don't even score fights, and haven't for decades! Just embarrassing man...take care...try toning it down a bit, and actually watching the sport and judging guys based on what they do, and not what you want them to do. well, I know what to tell you... you fkn idiot :lol1: when you proved that you have absolutely no idea how to score a fight... by literally butchering the official scoring criteria... and by misquoting a judge who SCORED THAT FIGHT FOR CANELO... you burned your credibility kid LMAO you fcuked that shltty account son, do the right thing oh, before you leave... tell us your cool story again, bro your cool story about how Golovkin has faced more quality opponents that nearly every other fighter in history loooool and if you could post the detailed notes that you made when you evaluated the careers of "nearly every other fighter in history"... that would also be amusing :D:D

I don't believe Horn/Manny was a robbery in any way. Manny just lost. I had Fury beating wilder in the 1st fight but I didn't think it was a robbery either. I scored Kov Ward for Kov and didn't think that was a robbery either. Now Whitaker/Chavez and Manny/bradley-those were robberies of the worst kind IMO. I never have watched Bradley-Manny 1...I need to get around to watching that and scoring it.

But some say Pac-Horn was a robbery...and I don't think it was...I also don't think Wilder getting a draw vs Fury in the first fight was a bad result. But Kov-Ward 1 was a robbery to me as there is no way I can get Ward to 7 rounds...so yeah idk, I am a bit surprised that on here there isn't more of a general consensus of which fights are actually robberies...but some fanbases are really strong I guess and kind of shift the narrative in some fights. I don't believe Horn/Manny was a robbery in any way. Manny just lost. I had Fury beating wilder in the 1st fight but I didn't think it was a robbery either. I scored Kov Ward for Kov and didn't think that was a robbery either. Now Whitaker/Chavez and Manny/bradley-those were robberies of the worst kind IMO.

Yes. Robbery is yet another term that disgruntled NSB posters have weaponized whenever a guy they like loses a close fight. Robberies are like the fights you described-where the winner is clear and the loser is given a draw or a win when they didn't deserve it. But some say Pac-Horn was a robbery...and I don't think it was...I also don't think Wilder getting a draw vs Fury in the first fight was a bad result. But Kov-Ward 1 was a robbery to me as there is no way I can get Ward to 7 rounds...so yeah idk, I am a bit surprised that on here there isn't more of a general consensus of which fights are actually robberies...but some fanbases are really strong I guess and kind of shift the narrative in some fights.

Probably because crying about scores and having your personal card be noticed goes hand-in-hand around here. If I'm not crying I'm being buried by those who are, aren't I? I've had Wilder in my sig for a very long time. I've been a vocal Wilder supporter long before Fury I. Everyone of us were requested multiple times to supply a scorecard for Fury-Wilder I. It is not my fault you missed multiple posts on one of the biggest and most controversial decisions in the past five years at least probably better. I'm not blaming you either, but, fair is fair, I made those posts. I had those arguments. It was a very popular fight. I got buried in the crying because I won't be convinced to add to it. You can keep crying about actively scoring punches exclusively....why would I care? Why do you care if I don't care? Bro why say all that, instead of just posting a scorecard or two from a recent fight. listen here dickhead... STOP changing your story to save face... you are fooling nobody, you dumb kid first you stupidly attempted to twist the words of Steve Weisfeld, to proclaim that Golovkin beat Canelo... which backfired spectacularly when we informed you that Weisfeld was an officially sanctioned judge for that bout, and he awarded the fight to Canelo... HILARIOUS !! :lol1: then you stupidly attempted to proclaim that Golovkin won 8 rounds in that fight... despite the fact that ALL 3 judges awarded 5 of those rounds to Canelo... and despite the fact that you admit you needed to butcher the official scoring criteria in order to achieve that magical feat... when posters use the term... " dumb casual "... they are referring to you Bro you don't even score fights lol...just fall back man. Btw you look increasingly foolish when you try and create arguments on here out of nothing...you just look desperate...if you don't understand that not every punch is scored equally and that harder and cleaner punches are given more weight, I don't know what to tell ya man. In any event, the little bit of fun I have with you on here is kind of gone at this point...you have such a big opinion of fights and fighters and you don't even score fights, and haven't for decades! Just embarrassing man...take care...try toning it down a bit, and actually watching the sport and judging guys based on what they do, and not what you want them to do.

Seems like that with every fight now that is reasonably competitive there are boxing fans complaining that the loser was robbed. Either some people have zero idea how to score fights or they are just extremely biased. Real robberies are fights like Pacquiao-Bradley 1, Whitaker-Chavez, Williams-Lara ect. Yes. Robbery is yet another term that disgruntled NSB posters have weaponized whenever a guy they like loses a close fight. Robberies are like the fights you described-where the winner is clear and the loser is given a draw or a win when they didn't deserve it.

That dude is a complete imbecile. I think he’s actually just an alt tho. Him and Curtis Harper I believe are the same person. Man I honestly can't believe someone can be so opinionated about fights, and then he says he doesn't even score them and hasn't for decades...like wtf lol. Then again, it actually makes perfect sense...what fighters actually do or don't do doesn't really matter to some on here...they are going to run with their narrative regardless...so scoring the fights and just calling it like it is, is meaningless to them.

Clean punches: To me, clean punches are the most important aspect, and the other factors are really tied to that. Take the phrase, "effective aggressiveness." How is a boxer effective? He's effective by landing clean punches. How about "defense?" A boxer shows great defense by not getting hit with clean punches. And, finally, the term "ring generalship." A boxer uses the ring to put himself in a position to land clean punches. So let's focus on the phrase "clean punches." It may not be initially apparent, but there are various elements included within that phrase. First, there's the number of punches. The boxer who lands more punches generally wins. However, harder punches count more than lighter punches. Now, there's no mathematical formula that equates the number of punches with the hardness of the punch. The judge has to weigh the two based on his experience. But more important than the number of punches or the hardness of the punch is the effect of the punch. For example, a seemingly lighter punch that causes a boxer to stagger is scored higher than a seemingly harder punch that has no effect. listen here dickhead... STOP changing your story to save face... you are fooling nobody, you dumb kid first you stupidly attempted to twist the words of Steve Weisfeld, to proclaim that Golovkin beat Canelo... which backfired spectacularly when we informed you that Weisfeld was an officially sanctioned judge for that bout, and he awarded the fight to Canelo... HILARIOUS !! :lol1: then you stupidly attempted to proclaim that Golovkin won 8 rounds in that fight... despite the fact that ALL 3 judges awarded 5 of those rounds to Canelo... and despite the fact that you admit you needed to butcher the official scoring criteria in order to achieve that magical feat... I'll also tell you how I score them...generally give a 'full point' for a good hard clean shot...and a 'half point' for a punch that is a scoring blow but isn't necessarily super hard or clean. when posters use the term... " dumb casual "... they are referring to you

correct... I have not sat down with a pad and pen when watching a fight... FOR DECADES... there is literally no point, and no reason I have watched THOUSANDS of fights... you excitable fanboy muppet the fact that you think that is essential, tells the whole story I do not care what others think of you, but I HAVE YOUR NUMBER... you shlt-talking little tosser... as you excitedly count up jabs on your fingers :lol1: only a fool would respect your opinion you proved you are an absolute shlthead when you posted this nonsense punches that are neither hard nor clean... are NOT official scoring criteria you shlthead fanboy you have no idea what you are talking about oh, riiiiiiiiiight... now I see how you scraped together 8 rounds for Golovkin... despite the fact that ALL 3 judges scored 5 of those rounds for Canelo what a moron kid a better example of a shlthead casual-fan... will not be found hey, this is a prime opportunity for you to tell us your story again... your story... about how Golovkin has faced more quality opponents than almost every other fighter in history