Now that Fenech's loss to Nelson has been overturned.....

[QueensburyRules]

What pray tell is the 'official record keeper'?

I know the Library of Congress has got a dude like that, but boxing? Isn't this a business where multiple, maybe close to a score, believe they are the 'official' scationing body.

The whole idea of changing the results is silly.

I think the guy above nailed it. They just gave Fenech a belt. Made a whole bunch Ausies (sp) happy.

Didn't the WBC have two different LW Champions running around at the same time with WBC LW Championship belts claiming to be the rightful title holder, Lopez and Haney?

And it was not even like it was a scantioning body war between the WBA and the WBC. They were both wearing WBC belts.

Whole things a joke and whatever they did with Fenech looks like politics and has nothing to do with seeking justice.

I think it is all was PR.

- - Boxrec the official record keeper for what, 5 years now if not more?

[JAB5239]

- - Boxrec the official record keeper for what, 5 years now if not more?

Who appointed them the official record keeper?

[Willie Pep 229]

- - Boxrec the official record keeper for what, 5 years now if not more?

Ok I'll go with that - it probably trumps all other arguments - guess we should call it like Harold Letterman --> 'the unofficial, official . . .'

But I guess big negotiations now use Boxrec as their source arguments.

So is it the new 'Bible of Boxing'?

Especially since The Ring magazine, that died a decade ago, finally decided to lay down dead. It's been a zombie publication for sometime now. Its subscription, circulation, and clout were gone long before this past yesterday.

[ShoulderRoll]

I think, and this is just me spitballing, that King held sway over the ABC orgs, particularly the WBC. They in turn held sway over the judges and referees they appointed to work they're sanctioned fights. I'm guessing King could pay off who ever he needed to to get a favorable referee and judges. I'm sure you remember Eugenia Williams just to name one such judge who's scoring was highly questionable during her career. There are others I'm sure, but she was the first to spring to mind.

Also, let's not forget United States boxing championships fiasco King orchestrated.

https://www.sportscasting.com/don-ki...dal-unscathed/

Either Don King or the WBC had to have gotten to Richard Steele when he bailed out Chavez on a separate occasion, by not letting Meldrick Taylor finish out the last few seconds of the 12th round.

[JAB5239]

Either Don King or the WBC had to have gotten to Richard Steele when he bailed out Chavez on a separate occasion, by not letting Meldrick Taylor finish out the last few seconds of the 12th round.

I've always thought that a fair stoppage. A fight isn't over until the final bell. But I can certainly understand how conspiracy theories were and are still abundant with King being involved. Can we ever really trust a Don King fight that is controversial?

[Willie Pep 229]

I've always thought that a fair stoppage. A fight isn't over until the final bell. But I can certainly understand how conspiracy theories were and are still abundant with King being involved. Can we ever really trust a Don King fight that is controversial?

Taylor never let go of the ring rope. He held it to steady himself. Technically speaking he never regained his feet.

A referee should never make a decision based on how much time is left, whether in rounds or seconds.

A referee should never make a decision based on who he thinks is winning.

In both cases the referee is altering the outcome of the fight and shouldn't.

If Steele had decided/said --> "I let the fight go on because I knew the kid was winning and there were only seconds left on the clock so I knew he wouldn't get further hurt." --> That would be a crooked referee!

[JAB5239]

Taylor never let go of the ring rope. He held it to steady himself. Technically speaking he never regained his feet.

A referee should never make a decision based on how much time is left, whether in rounds or seconds.

A referee should never make a decision based on who he thinks is winning.

In both cases the referee is altering the outcome of the fight and shouldn't.

If Steele had decided/said --> "I let the fight go on because I knew the kid was winning and there were only seconds left on the clock so I knew he wouldn't get further hurt." --> That would be a crooked referee!

That's exactly how I see it as well. I argued for YEARS with Scott9945 about this on AOL and here. We never came to an agreement but it was always respectful. I personally don't see how you can look at it another way, but we're all entitled our opinion.

[ShoulderRoll]

In a big fight like that you let the fighter go out on his shield. Taylor had fought his ass off and deserved that, in my opinion.

[JAB5239]

In a big fight like that you let the fighter go out on his shield. Taylor had fought his ass off and deserved that, in my opinion.

What if there were a minute left? The ref's job shouldn't concern the clock. Taylor didn't respond. If he didn't respond with a minute left would it be a bad stoppage?

[ShoulderRoll]

What if there were a minute left? The ref's job shouldn't concern the clock. Taylor didn't respond. If he didn't respond with a minute left would it be a bad stoppage?

When it's a big, meaningful championship fight my view is you let the fighters decide it. The ref should never stick his nose in to influence the outcome.