What was the biggest robbery in a fight?

[-Hyperion-]

In your opinion or what?

I don't know, I thought Barrera looked a lot sharper in a lot of the rounds, that coupled with a knockdown made it a big margin on my card, but I can't score fights for ****, so...

lol, yeah imo, Barrera was getting outworked and outlanded for 2:30 of most rounds, then came back with bombs to the body the last 30 secs, and that didnt even made morales stop coming forward.......round 5 is a great example of this fight IMO...1 st minute is pretty competitive, a clear edge to morales, 2 min is still competitive, but morales is winning now very clearly, next 20 secs all morales, then marco lands a good right, morales makes him miss everything else, next 30 secs marco very clearly, morales still throwing and landing, pretty even last 10 secs, small edge to morales.... IMO Morales clearly won that round, but almost everyone gives the round to marco cause of that one great right hand.... pretty much the story of the fight...

[-Hyperion-]

Only the second fight, Barrera easily took 1 and 3.

nope, theres shouldnt even had been a trilogy cus morales won the first 2....

BTW:

i was a Barrera fan the first time i saw the first fight and i had cought HBO's hype that Barrera was the good guy, so i was not biased for Morales te first time i saw the fight....and even then i thought erik won....

[Contenders]

Well we have different opinions on it. I say robbery you say controversial,well its both to me. Bottom line,it was fuuuuucked up.

It was a ****ed up ending...very controversial. Other bottom line is, Taylor took one hell of a beating in that fight...ruined his career. Plus, he eventually had his chance for redemption in the rematch.

Speaking of Chavez and robberies though: Chavez-Whitaker! Sweet Pea was robbed of the win by the fight being declared a draw.

[ßringer]

nope, theres shouldnt even had been a trilogy cus morales won the first 2....

BTW:

i was a Barrera fan the first time i saw the first fight and i had cought HBO's hype that Barrera was the good guy, so i was not biased for Morales te first time i saw the fight....and even then i thought erik won....

I'm weird with those fights, but I can see your opinion holding water as well. Both of the first two fights were amazing fights and could've gone either way. When they announced Morales the winner the first time I was already a fan of both men, but still felt Barrera deserved it.

Then when they announced Barrera the winner in the second fight, still being a fan of both men I felt that Morales deserved it. The only one I agree with was the third and final fight.

Those dudes can fight once a year for the next 20 years and I'd watch every damn time.

[robjr]

well i duno about biggest robbery.

but quartay vs forrest was brutal..

Sturm VS DLH decision disturbed me..

Mora VS Manfredo II was a joke decision..

there is alot more.. thats all that just comes to mind now..

[Contenders]

nope, theres shouldnt even had been a trilogy cus morales won the first 2....

BTW:

i was a Barrera fan the first time i saw the first fight and i had cought HBO's hype that Barrera was the good guy, so i was not biased for Morales te first time i saw the fight....and even then i thought erik won....

I thought the first one was a VERY close win for Barrera, the second a VERY close win for Morales and the third a CLEAR win for Barrera. So when it comes down to it, the first two being so close and with controversial decisions required a trilogy. In the end though, Barrera claimed the edge by winning clearly without any controversy to settle things out.

[-Hyperion-]

I'm weird with those fights, but I can see your opinion holding water as well. Both of the first two fights were amazing fights and could've gone either way. When they announced Morales the winner the first time I was already a fan of both men, but still felt Barrera deserved it.

Then when they announced Barrera the winner in the second fight, still being a fan of both men I felt that Morales deserved it. The only one I agree with was the third and final fight.

Those dudes can fight once a year for the next 20 years and I'd watch every damn time.

again even though i have the first fight for erik clearly, marco did ****ing great and i would not complain if he had gotten a draw, but calling it a robbery is very excessive IMO.....the second one i definatly thought erik won very clearly, but its not barrera's fault....the thrid one barrera beat erik pretty ****ing impressively and clearly.....


haha yeah, those guys are just made for each other...

[-Hyperion-]

Mora VS Manfredo II was a joke decision..

i actually think teddy atlas has a lot to do with this decision being as controversial as it was, he was talking so much about the progress of manfredo even when in the fight you could see mora catching up pretty clearly...i remember maxboxing had that fight for mora and they were ringside...

[Fox McCloud]

I'm weird with those fights, but I can see your opinion holding water as well. Both of the first two fights were amazing fights and could've gone either way. When they announced Morales the winner the first time I was already a fan of both men, but still felt Barrera deserved it.

Then when they announced Barrera the winner in the second fight, still being a fan of both men I felt that Morales deserved it. The only one I agree with was the third and final fight.

Those dudes can fight once a year for the next 20 years and I'd watch every damn time.

I've got the three the same as you. Probably why we got along so well, I don't disagree with you on a whole lot.

[Fox McCloud]

It was a ****ed up ending...very controversial. Other bottom line is, Taylor took one hell of a beating in that fight...ruined his career. Plus, he eventually had his chance for redemption in the rematch.

Speaking of Chavez and robberies though: Chavez-Whitaker! Sweet Pea was robbed of the win by the fight being declared a draw.

Haven't seen that one, really want to. Is it a good fight? Entertaining? Mayweather-Baldomir like? I'm curious.