Holyfield-Lewis in '98: Would it make a difference

[Pastrano]

Holyfield that fought Moorer in '97 beats Lewis.

[StarshipTrooper]

Haha well put,people dont seem too understand what the term 'robbed' means

Close fight that could go either way = Not a robbery.
One fighter clearly wins but the other guy gets the decision = Robbery.

In the case of the second Lewis - Holyfield fight it was a close one that could have gone either way. Now the FIRST Lewis - Holyfield fight I'd call a robbery since Lewis clearly one that fight but it was scored a draw.

Poet

[Mugwump]

I think if a boxer wins 7 or 8 rounds and his opponent is given the decision the boxer who won most of the rounds was robbed of the win.

Again, not necessarily. YOU might think a boxer won seven or eight rounds. But if they were close rounds, which could have been scored either way depending on the criteria you are applying and the boxer lost it could in no way count as a robbery. A good example of this is the Calzaghe v Hopkins bout which is very difficult to score.

[quote[It is very hard to win two thirds of a fight against elite compitition. To have to win all but three rounds of a fight to get a decision is rediculous.[/QUOTE]

You do know that a boxer can decision a fight with only one winning round?

[Holtol]

Again, not necessarily. YOU might think a boxer won seven or eight rounds. But if they were close rounds, which could have been scored either way depending on the criteria you are applying and the boxer lost it could in no way count as a robbery. A good example of this is the Calzaghe v Hopkins bout which is very difficult to score.

[quote[It is very hard to win two thirds of a fight against elite compitition. To have to win all but three rounds of a fight to get a decision is rediculous.

You do know that a boxer can decision a fight with only one winning round?[/QUOTE]

Calzaghe won that fight fair and square. If it had of gone to Hopkins it would have been bad Jugging imo. I think Holyfield deserved the decision in the second fight. If you are not going to call it a robbery you could call it something else I suppose. Something was taken away from Holfield that should have been his. The fights bettween Lewis and Holyfield should be one win a piece.

Yeah, I know that a boxer could win a decision by only winning one round.

[Mugwump]

Calzaghe won that fight fair and square. If it had of gone to Hopkins it would have been bad Jugging imo. I think Holyfield deserved the decision in the second fight. If you are not going to call it a robbery you could call it something else I suppose.

I think the word you are looking for is "unfortunate". I know it seems like I'm being fussy here but words really do matter. Far too many people these days seem to think it's perfectly okay to hyper-emphasize a point - usually leading to confusion, misinterpretation and, occasionally, anger. I've no idea why this is so. Perhaps people think it separates them from the crowd but all that really happens is everyone else follows suit leading to a surreal kind of arms race of descriptive prose where words and meaning part company completely.

[Quarry]

Close fight that could go either way = Not a robbery.
One fighter clearly wins but the other guy gets the decision = Robbery.

In the case of the second Lewis - Holyfield fight it was a close one that could have gone either way. Now the FIRST Lewis - Holyfield fight I'd call a robbery since Lewis clearly one that fight but it was scored a draw.

Poet

Holy - Lewis I was a draw not a robbery, the british judge who travelled over to the states on the plane with Lewis scored it a draw 6rds each. Lewis had opportunities in the fight when Holy seemed hurt but never took those opportunities, i had Lewis winning by 1 round and Holy winning the rematch by 3 rounds. the 24rds these two fought i had Holy the clear winner 14-10rds

[StarshipTrooper]

Holy - Lewis I was a draw not a robbery, the british judge who travelled over to the states on the plane with Lewis scored it a draw 6rds each. Lewis had opportunities in the fight when Holy seemed hurt but never took those opportunities, i had Lewis winning by 1 round and Holy winning the rematch by 3 rounds. the 24rds these two fought i had Holy the clear winner 14-10rds

I watched the first Lewis - Holyfield fight when it happend and have watched it a number of times since. At no time have I ever been able to give Evander more than four rounds and that's with me being my most charitable and cutting him every break possible. And btw I happend to have been rooting for Holyfield in that fight.

I really could care less what a blind minor-league Brit judge scored it. He should stay home and find a new line of work.

Poet

[Quarry]

I watched the first Lewis - Holyfield fight when it happend and have watched it a number of times since. At no time have I ever been able to give Evander more than four rounds and that's with me being my most charitable and cutting him every break possible. And btw I happend to have been rooting for Holyfield in that fight.

I really could care less what a blind minor-league Brit judge scored it. He should stay home and find a new line of work.

Poet

you are entitled to your opinion and your scorecard yet none of the three judges saw the fight anything like you saw it and they was 3 highly respected judges who scored 116-113, 115-115 and 113-115 so your 4rds at best for Holy is way off the mark compared to professional judges who between them have refereed and judged hundreds of world title fights and was sitting ringside compiling their scorecards whereas you scored it watching your television coverage. so maybe it is you who needs to find the new line of work because scoring prizefights is not something you excel at so my advice to you is, Don't give up your day job.

[StarshipTrooper]

you are entitled to your opinion and your scorecard yet none of the three judges saw the fight anything like you saw it and they was 3 highly respected judges who scored 116-113, 115-115 and 113-115 so your 4rds at best for Holy is way off the mark compared to professional judges who between them have refereed and judged hundreds of world title fights and was sitting ringside compiling their scorecards whereas you scored it watching your television coverage.

"Professional" judges get it wrong all the time. Do we need to type a litany of the bad decisions handed down over the last 20 years? Professional referees in football and basketball blow calls all the time. Professional umpires in baseball blow calls all the time. This is nothing new. You can pretend that everyone connected to boxing is the highest level of competency and are le bon chevalier sans peur sans reproach but that would make you a fool.

so maybe it is you who needs to find the new line of work because scoring prizefights is not something you excel at so my advice to you is, Don't give up your day job.

Hmmmmm. I do believe you said the following:

the 24rds these two fought i had Holy the clear winner 14-10rds

Quite frankly that makes you look like a crank and someone who seriously needs to find a new sport since it's clear you haven't figured out boxing yet. Don't quit your day job Junior.

Poet

[Quarry]

"Professional" judges get it wrong all the time. Do we need to type a litany of the bad decisions handed down over the last 20 years? Professional referees in football and basketball blow calls all the time. Professional umpires in baseball blow calls all the time. This is nothing new. You can pretend that everyone connected to boxing is the highest level of competency and are le bon chevalier sans peur sans reproach but that would make you a fool.




Hmmmmm. I do believe you said the following:


Quite frankly that makes you look like a crank and someone who seriously needs to find a new sport since it's clear you haven't figured out boxing yet. Don't quit your day job Junior.

Poet

the professionals make mistakes but you don't, is that what you are saying?

The only person looking like a crank is yourself