Fake outrage over Estrada vs Chocolatito/close fights) exposes what a joke biased fans/msm are

1st of all I want to start off saying I genuinely could give a fck less who won going into the fight(I've always had tremendous respect for Chocolatito although I picked him to lose by close decision x3),but since I'm a longtime Canelo fan apparently it means I can never score a fight for another mexican boxer(no matter how rare)without being labled a "rassist" by those who also say the same when I score for american black fighters in close fights. Before the fight,the commentators were already tonguing Chocolatitos bunghole with praises about how much they want him to cuck them with their wives. Then despite it being a razor thin fight where neither fighter won clearly enough to cry robbery,every single biased fanboi cried robbery as they do in every close fight. The common phrase has been"oh yeah I can see it being a draw but Chocolatito got robbed" or "I scored it for Chocolatito by 1 rd but he got robbed",& what makes it even more cringe is the countless msm articles crying robbery like fanbois scorned like they do every fight. Then if it wasn't bad enough I read breadmans mailbag & hes trotting out the same tropes where he says "it could've been a draw but Chocolatito got robbed" & this gem"the judges need to score fights the same way all the fans & everybody do in close fights like this" in other words the judges who are trained pros who literally do this for a living for their entire life need to score razor thin fights for your guy(you could even read the biased emotions flowing because he's already a fan ) remember that if 1 fighter is throwing & landing a lil more but the other fighters punches are cleaner, accuracy wins the rd,& unlike most fans judges aren't supposed to swap rds just to try being fair in a razor fight, they're supposed to score each rd as a fight,& unlike fans judges aren't watching for entertainment (they're actually jotting down scoring pts) Do fans/writer's etc realize they sound like babies? Do they realize that every know nothing,novice has a voice these days & make the most noise,& that most commentators suck at scoring fights & get distracted easily,yet heaven forbid that the pro judges didn't give YOUR guy the W in a fight you thought could be a draw or your guy barely won. What makes it even worse is that the majority of the time it wasn't even a robbery but the less popular fighter won(ffs the commentators were blowing Chocolatito before the fight started & during & after,they are not the authority on honest judging, they're just mad their guy didn't win fair & square no matter how much they cry) Even dumber the sanctioning orgs are suspending that judge which will further dumb down boxing & make every judge score fights by swapping rds in close matches just to not get suspended & they already do that due to fake outrage in close fights Anyways what do you think? Am I blowing smoke? Is suspending that judge going to make judges score close everytime?

Comments (20)

Of course it fake and biased as Estrada is Mexican. Mexican boxers get hate from both sides of the spectrum, from blacks and from whites. Heck, Mexicans get hate from even some other non Mexican Latinos. Choco is basically black, so the blacks obviously side with him against any Mexican. And, the whites just plain will go against Mexicans in general—especially since Mexicans have been dominating the sport (another reason blacks hate against Mexicans) and wrecking euros. On that note blacks also hate canelo cuz he’s a white Mexican, so it’s doubly hate, and they can’t stand another minority dominating the sport. But at the same time they’re torn because maywether best canelo, so they want to hype mayweather at all costs...it must be hard for them to find the right balance on that one lol. Do you hear a peep from blacks about choco robbing Cuadras? Of course not, because choco is black and Cuadras is a white Mexican. Back on topic tho, yes, it is hypocrisy at its best, because in reality choco/Cuadras was close as hell and the judges gave it to the boxer they thought edged it. Imagine if the winner of a fight was determined by the opinion of biased fanboys? Boxing history would be a whole lot different lol. Agreed, everyone hates mexicans and is out to get them. Everyone else is the problem except for you. (Just LOL at 'whitey' still getting the blame when it has nothing to do with them, haha!)

5y ago

Kezzer

Please tell which 6 rounds Estrada could have won. I would have to rewatch it to tell you specifically which rounds. But from memory, round 12 was obvious but otherwise majority you could give both ways. I’ll rewatch maybe later this week anyway

5y ago

just_the_facts

I think ppl are more outraged with that single scorecard, it definitely was t a robbery as it could be easily gone either way. I felt the 1 round difference was about right Please tell which 6 rounds Estrada could have won.

5y ago

just_the_facts

Estrada vs Chocolatito in a close fight. The fight was a toss up! Anyone that doesn't concur don't know chit about boxing. The problem arose with the crazy (one) score card. Adalaide Byrd all over again. Please tell me which 6 rounds you gave to Estrada.

5y ago

DaNeutral

It was a close fight. I saw it both ways... Fuk one judge casuals always only care about that. How about how did you score it?? I saw crack heads say Choc. won by at least 8 rounds. I gave it to Choc by 2 and I feel I was generous to Estrada in a couple of the swing rounds.

5y ago

Kezzer

I don't think you should be suspended for 7-5 Estrada. Event though I really don't understand how you don't score 2,3, 9, 10, 11, 12 for Gonzalez. I thought he clearly won those 6 rounds. But 117-111 you definitely have to be suspended. That is corruption period. I think ppl are more outraged with that single scorecard, it definitely was t a robbery as it could be easily gone either way. I felt the 1 round difference was about right

5y ago

TJ_highway

5y ago

kushking

You're an idiot. There have been literally millions of fights that were close but clear and this was one of them. Its obvious you're the idiot. By definition a close fight means it is hard to score in other words because close means even.:dunce: Hows this,show me which fight was considered close that didn't have ppl picking both fighters to have won,or that wasn't controversial.(1 single fight)(with known champs) If you can't do that then admit that close split dec. fights are not robberies.

5y ago

just_the_facts

You literally just contradicted yourself in your response & proved my point. How can the fight be very close yet you in the same breathe say theirs a clear winner?(this happens in every closish fight because everyone scores differently & most due to not having trained how to do it properly like the rules dictate(1 must also of course read the rules of boxing too which most haven't) You can't admit a fight was very close but then say there was a clear winner,if there was a clear winner then the fight wasn't close,that fight was not Floyd vs Guerrero or Nelo vs Jacobs even,that was morales vs Barrera war for 12 rds. Its absurd imo to say that a close war has to be scored for the guy you saw win,what makes your card or any other the authority (unless you have watched every rd scoring pts properly while not paying attention to whos winning the fight & not watching for entertainment whatsoever,but just scoring each rd as its own fight & only watching for what fighter lands the most effective accurate shots & doesn't get hit as cleanly as often) Chocolatito has a style that lends itself to losing in fights like this. Like he did rungvasai, bottom line is nobody can cry robbery about that fight regardless of the wide card. You're an idiot. There have been literally millions of fights that were close but clear and this was one of them.

5y ago

just_the_facts

I scored it a draw fwiw. People saying it was a robbery are crazy dumb. The 117-111 or whatever scorecard was crap, but there is nothing wrong scoring it a close win for either fighter. Pretty sure they'll have a 3rd fight anyways. Please tell me which 6 rounds you gave to Estrada.

5y ago

just_the_facts

They b1tch about Gallo's W yet crickets during Roman Gonzalez being gifted vs Cuadras, SSR gift against Estrada, Marquez Pacquiao III robbery. Reminds myself of GolovTards when Alvarez took his 0 This is pure bu!!shyte. The only one of those fights that you could make a case for is Marquez Pac 3. The rest were scored correctly.

5y ago

just_the_facts

Aren't you the guy who gave GGG every round against Canelo and even made up another few??? Yeah I'll pass on your advice. You absolutely got me mixed up with someone else but fa ck you anyway.

5y ago

kushking

Who gives a shyte about racial biased garbage. The straight up fact is that anyone with even a small boxing IQ (this leaves you out) saw Choco win this fight. Just because it was close doesn't mean it wasn't clear. I dare anyone to tell me which 6 rounds (let alone 7) they scored for Estrada. You literally just contradicted yourself in your response & proved my point. How can the fight be very close yet you in the same breathe say theirs a clear winner?(this happens in every closish fight because everyone scores differently & most due to not having trained how to do it properly like the rules dictate(1 must also of course read the rules of boxing too which most haven't) You can't admit a fight was very close but then say there was a clear winner,if there was a clear winner then the fight wasn't close,that fight was not Floyd vs Guerrero or Nelo vs Jacobs even,that was morales vs Barrera war for 12 rds. Its absurd imo to say that a close war has to be scored for the guy you saw win,what makes your card or any other the authority (unless you have watched every rd scoring pts properly while not paying attention to whos winning the fight & not watching for entertainment whatsoever,but just scoring each rd as its own fight & only watching for what fighter lands the most effective accurate shots & doesn't get hit as cleanly as often) Chocolatito has a style that lends itself to losing in fights like this. Like he did rungvasai, bottom line is nobody can cry robbery about that fight regardless of the wide card.

5y ago

Azteka

5y ago

Mr365

Yup! They hypocrites... What's good Shadow ? Dope you're on BoxingScene after update. Plenty retired lol

5y ago

Mr365

They b1tch about Gallo's W yet crickets during Roman Gonzalez being gifted vs Cuadras, SSR gift against Estrada, Marquez Pacquiao III robbery. Reminds myself of GolovTards when Alvarez took his 0

5y ago

just_the_facts

I'm still trying to figure out how anyone calls a straight Classic Fight or Fight of the Year a robbery??? Because the obvious winner didn't get the decision. It's that .

5y ago

just_the_facts

Of course it fake and biased as Estrada is Mexican. Mexican boxers get hate from both sides of the spectrum, from blacks and from whites. Heck, Mexicans get hate from even some other non Mexican Latinos. Choco is basically black, so the blacks obviously side with him against any Mexican. And, the whites just plain will go against Mexicans in general—especially since Mexicans have been dominating the sport (another reason blacks hate against Mexicans) and wrecking euros. On that note blacks also hate canelo cuz he’s a white Mexican, so it’s doubly hate, and they can’t stand another minority dominating the sport. But at the same time they’re torn because maywether best canelo, so they want to hype mayweather at all costs...it must be hard for them to find the right balance on that one lol. Do you hear a peep from blacks about choco robbing Cuadras? Of course not, because choco is black and Cuadras is a white Mexican. Back on topic tho, yes, it is hypocrisy at its best, because in reality choco/Cuadras was close as hell and the judges gave it to the boxer they thought edged it. Imagine if the winner of a fight was determined by the opinion of biased fanboys? Boxing history would be a whole lot different lol. Who gives a shyte about racial biased garbage. The straight up fact is that anyone with even a small boxing IQ (this leaves you out) saw Choco win this fight. Just because it was close doesn't mean it wasn't clear. I dare anyone to tell me which 6 rounds (let alone 7) they scored for Estrada.

5y ago

DaNeutral

Estrada did not do enough to win that fight, it was a close fight but there was a clear winner. Was it a robbery? I dunno but 117-111 was a crime. When ppl claim robbery I take it as they mean regardless of how wide or close the actual fight was they had pretty much pre picked their winner.

5y ago

buddyr

On every boxing forum the internet has, a close fight is always a robbery lol. This will always occur.

5y ago