The new rule of Boxingscene:

[Parody]

Whenever a close fight happens, lets all say the winner got the gift decision and the loser got robbed.






Oh wait, this happens on boxingscene after every big fight...

[The Critic]

People who have little experience in boxing, never trained or been a trainer, have watched on TV for two years . . . . suddenly they watch a fight on a 3 x 3 screen on their computer and complain that professionals sitting RINGSIDE couldn't "get it right."

And the same factors are always in play, the same shortcomings in the ring being misinterpreted by message board posters. It's always the less aggressive, flashier guy who did less damage getting "robbed" in the eyes of people who don't know what they're doing and are watching a sopcast

If you frequently disagree with official scores, it's probably BECAUSE YOU CAN'T SCORE FIGHTS, and you should probably WATCH WITHOUT KEEPING SCORE

[joecrappy]

Agreed with kayjay.

I watched the fight on a 52 inch screen, not on a silly computer screen.

The judges are trained professionals. And in this case, they got it right.

[Mr. Ryan]

Three guys sitting on three different sides of the ring can conceivably come back with three different scores. I remember being close, maybe third row, when Sechew Powell fought Ishe Smith in New York City. I remember thinking Ishe Smith was landing the cleaner shots and had a scorecard that had Smith winning 97-93. When they gave the fight to Powell, I thought it was a clear hometown decision.

Then I watched the fight on HBO and was amazed at the difference between what I was viewing and what I remembered first hand. Powell was winning the fight clearly and Smith's punches weren't even landing. They were flashier with the arc and made a better sound, but Powell's punches were much more effective. I couldn't believe what I was seeing.

Watching a fight ringside, there are so many things going on around you. The ropes obstruct your view. If they fight on the other side of the ring, you might not be able to see what is going on over there. There isn't instant replay live as there is on TV. I can understand when there is a situation when a few judges will disagree on a few close rounds. But when judges score fights like the one who gave Taylor-Spinks to Spinks, those guys should be held over the weekend in lockup awaiting a court date.

Then again, most people calling robbery are JMM fans, the same who spoke hypothetically in saying that Juan Diaz would've won if not for the cut.

[T-97]

If its a close fight i don;t mind ( like taylor pavlik 2, i had jermain winning by 1 round but i dont think its a robbery) i only say a fight is a robbery if one guy clearly wins then the decision is called against him. \paople who constantly call close fights robberies should be banned imo

[rj_ct]

also, about scoring fights on your tv/computer-

there are clear advantages, such as replays and different angles (though i score my rounds before they show replays). but sometimes the camera cuts to a different angle right as a punch lands. this happened at least twice last night. you hear the announcers say a punch lands, but that split second where you need to refocus your eyes on the fighters because of the new angle can make you miss it. also, sometimes the referee steps in front of the camera which causes you to miss something.

of course there are obvious drawbacks to watching the fight right up close at ringside from only one point of view.

basically what i'm getting at is it was a close fight. not only is boxing scoring subjective in itself, but there are other factors that can cause variations in the scoring.

[sterling]

god jus leave it lol only idiots keep on complaining about robberies worse when its a close great fight.

[Sin City]

Three guys sitting on three different sides of the ring can conceivably come back with three different scores. I remember being close, maybe third row, when Sechew Powell fought Ishe Smith in New York City. I remember thinking Ishe Smith was landing the cleaner shots and had a scorecard that had Smith winning 97-93. When they gave the fight to Powell, I thought it was a clear hometown decision.

Then I watched the fight on HBO and was amazed at the difference between what I was viewing and what I remembered first hand. Powell was winning the fight clearly and Smith's punches weren't even landing. They were flashier with the arc and made a better sound, but Powell's punches were much more effective. I couldn't believe what I was seeing.

Watching a fight ringside, there are so many things going on around you. The ropes obstruct your view. If they fight on the other side of the ring, you might not be able to see what is going on over there. There isn't instant replay live as there is on TV. I can understand when there is a situation when a few judges will disagree on a few close rounds. But when judges score fights like the one who gave Taylor-Spinks to Spinks, those guys should be held over the weekend in lockup awaiting a court date.

Then again, most people calling robbery are JMM fans, the same who spoke hypothetically in saying that Juan Diaz would've won if not for the cut.

same here.. I watched Pavlik Taylor II live and thought Taylor won.. after watching it on T.V. though I had it for Pavlik.

[JaNnO]

People who have little experience in boxing, never trained or been a trainer, have watched on TV for two years . . . . suddenly they watch a fight on a 3 x 3 screen on their computer and complain that professionals sitting RINGSIDE couldn't "get it right."

And the same factors are always in play, the same shortcomings in the ring being misinterpreted by message board posters. It's always the less aggressive, flashier guy who did less damage getting "robbed" in the eyes of people who don't know what they're doing and are watching a sopcast

If you frequently disagree with official scores, it's probably BECAUSE YOU CAN'T SCORE FIGHTS, and you should probably WATCH WITHOUT KEEPING SCORE

WOW...I couldn't have said it better myself.

The best ****in' post I've read for years!

[GooGoo]

People who have little experience in boxing, never trained or been a trainer, have watched on TV for two years . . . . suddenly they watch a fight on a 3 x 3 screen on their computer and complain that professionals sitting RINGSIDE couldn't "get it right."

And the same factors are always in play, the same shortcomings in the ring being misinterpreted by message board posters. It's always the less aggressive, flashier guy who did less damage getting "robbed" in the eyes of people who don't know what they're doing and are watching a sopcast

If you frequently disagree with official scores, it's probably BECAUSE YOU CAN'T SCORE FIGHTS, and you should probably WATCH WITHOUT KEEPING SCORE

KJ, I know for a fact that I've more boxing experience then 99% of this site, I also have a monster size TV. I agree when it's close fight we shouldn't call it a robbery, I was one of the first people to complain about people bitching about close fights. But if one of your favorite fighters lose a close fight, most of us will say it was a robbery.

I have a problem, when I see haters that don't give a **** about either fighter saying it's robbery, just cause they hate a fighter more. That to me is just ****ed up.