What is it with close decisions and crying robbery?

[Thread Stealer]

People always do that after close decisions that they disagree with.

"Tarver got robbed against Jones!!" (no, Jones won fairly 7-5)
"De La Hoya-Whitaker and Mayweather-Castillo are two of the worst robberies ever!"


Decisions like Escalera-Everett, Spinks-Holmes 2, Holyfield-Lewis 1, Nelson-Fenech I, those are real robberies.

And a fight like Coggi-Gonzalez I is a worse robbery than ALL of them.

[Mr. Ryan]

Don't take my threads, adding some apt words speaking the truth and showing your knowledge. I agree fully, close fights aren't robberies, I think that post fight speech certainly had some people jumping on that Glen bandwagon, but the truth is the fight was close and I had Chad winning.

Sorry, I didn't realize there was a thread about this. Here's the problem, most people who call close fights robberies have an agenda. They think their fighter should get the close decision and not vice versa.

[Jim Jeffries]

Good post. People crying robbery after a fight like that are doing a disservice to fighters who are really robbed like Santa Cruz or Forbes. If you had a fight within two points, it wasn't a robbery.

I agree. I scored the fight a draw, in which case Dawson keeps his title so it doesn't change him keeping his title. The term robbery is throw around much too often these days and Johnson was a bit of a cry baby after the fight.

[Scott9945]

I think it is legitimate to be puzzled by all three judges having exactly the same scores. That says to me that they all gave every close round to Dawson which is unusual at least.

The three guest judges on Showtime all had it 116-112 Dawson as well.

[Don Corleone]

It wasn't close like the judges and some biased ppl had it. It was 8-4 glen johnson, he picked dawsons punches off and deserve the win. Glen had the better offense and defense, landing more punches per round and blocking more often then dawson.

Yo listen son, you need to get of Johnsons nuts man. It was a good fight and he didn't end up winning. We ain't the ones who made the decision, the judges did and its what they do. You need to accept it and move on. You act like Johnson was the greatest fighter who lost. He was a really good fighter yesterday but he just couldn't pull off a win. Leave it at that now

[Mr. Ryan]

It wasn't close like the judges and some biased ppl had it. It was 8-4 glen johnson, he picked dawsons punches off and deserve the win. Glen had the better offense and defense, landing more punches per round and blocking more often then dawson.

For the fight to be close chad dawson needs to learn not to punch Glen johnsons gloves because your not suppose to get points by punching the other boxers gloves yet ppl seem to score it for him even though thats where the majority of dawsons punches landed.

**** was robbery, if Nate Campbell didn't get the decision over Juan Diaz. And one corrupt judge had it for Diaz, then that would be bull**** too.

Now, what is your definition of biased? Surely if you are a fan of Glen Johnson, like your avatar suggests, wouldn't you be considered biased as well?

[2501]

the only true travesty is the judge's scoring. other than that, Johnson lost a close fight just like Marquez lost a close fight.

[Kball15]

It wasn't close like the judges and some biased ppl had it. It was 8-4 glen johnson, he picked dawsons punches off and deserve the win. Glen had the better offense and defense, landing more punches per round and blocking more often then dawson.

For the fight to be close chad dawson needs to learn not to punch Glen johnsons gloves because your not suppose to get points by punching the other boxers gloves yet ppl seem to score it for him even though thats where the majority of dawsons punches landed.

**** was robbery, if Nate Campbell didn't get the decision over Juan Diaz. And one corrupt judge had it for Diaz, then that would be bull**** too.

idk which fight u were watching. Dawsons right to the body was DEADLY. And he was more accurate and threw more punches. His combinations were beautiful.

Johnson won 3 or 4 rounds BIG, and the rest of the rounds he won were close. I give him 6 rounds at the VERY VERY most.

I thought Dawson was the clear victor in a competitive fight. Great fight

[Gareth Ivanovic]

Now, what is your definition of biased? Surely if you are a fan of Glen Johnson, like your avatar suggests, wouldn't you be considered biased as well?

I think if having a score of 8-4 for Johnson means he's probably pretty biased. It's like that guy last night in the Tarver/Woods fight having Tarver only winning by one point and he was from some London newspaper.

[Thread Stealer]

the only true travesty is the judge's scoring. other than that, Johnson lost a close fight just like Marquez lost a close fight.

A lot of times, the amount that a fighter wins by bothers me more than who won.

DLH-Whitaker was very close, but DLH winning 9-3 was insane. SRL-Hagler was very close, but SRL winning 10-2 was ridiculous.

What about those judges having Marquez beating Barrera 10-2?