Tweet
Since everyone seems to think that every close fight is a robbery (and blatantly incorrectly so), I figured I would put a rulebook together to let everyone know when to use the word and when not to. Just a reminder to everyone that robbery means that someone intentionally took the fight away from the winner. That means a robbery cannot be based on someone being an idiot and not knowing how to effectively judge. The argument "Harold Lederman" can't score for ****, is not an effective defense for claiming robbery.
1. The fighter who is "robbed" has to win at least 7 rounds beyond any doubt whatsoever (barring any knockdowns or point deductions). These rounds that are won beyond any certainty are going to be called "lock rounds". This means that if there is any argument whatsoever that a certain fighter won the round at all, then it can't be used as a lock round.
2. You cannot watch and score the fight in question on sopcast. You need to have an actual, clear, unobstructed view of the fight to make such a bold statement.
3. Harold Lederman cannot agree with the judging panel if it is a robbery. Since the judging panel would need to intentionally take the fight away from a fighter, they would obviously be motivated against that person. Why the **** would Harold Lederman be motivated to rob someone when his scorecard doesn't mean anything? This also rings true for Showtime's press row scoring.
4. You have to have seen all 3 minutes of all 12 rounds in order to make a call on whether it is a robbery or not. For all you know, the 8th round that you missed was a 10-8 round against the guy you thought won. No judging may be made based on highlight videos either.
5. A knockdown is not an automatic victory. Just because one fighter got their ass kicked for one of the 12 rounds does not mean that they automatically lose the fight. Saying "How could Pacquiao lose? Did you see what he did to Marquez in the first round?" makes you an idiot. A 10-6 round can easily be negated by 4 10-9 rounds the other way. That would give a score of 46-46, and there are still 7 rounds to go.
With that said, quit ****ing calling every fight a robbery. Pavlik-Taylor II was not a robbery. Calzaghe-Hopkins was not a robbery. Casamayor-Santa Cruz was a robbery. See the difference?
1. The fighter who is "robbed" has to win at least 7 rounds beyond any doubt whatsoever (barring any knockdowns or point deductions). These rounds that are won beyond any certainty are going to be called "lock rounds". This means that if there is any argument whatsoever that a certain fighter won the round at all, then it can't be used as a lock round.
2. You cannot watch and score the fight in question on sopcast. You need to have an actual, clear, unobstructed view of the fight to make such a bold statement.
3. Harold Lederman cannot agree with the judging panel if it is a robbery. Since the judging panel would need to intentionally take the fight away from a fighter, they would obviously be motivated against that person. Why the **** would Harold Lederman be motivated to rob someone when his scorecard doesn't mean anything? This also rings true for Showtime's press row scoring.
4. You have to have seen all 3 minutes of all 12 rounds in order to make a call on whether it is a robbery or not. For all you know, the 8th round that you missed was a 10-8 round against the guy you thought won. No judging may be made based on highlight videos either.
5. A knockdown is not an automatic victory. Just because one fighter got their ass kicked for one of the 12 rounds does not mean that they automatically lose the fight. Saying "How could Pacquiao lose? Did you see what he did to Marquez in the first round?" makes you an idiot. A 10-6 round can easily be negated by 4 10-9 rounds the other way. That would give a score of 46-46, and there are still 7 rounds to go.
With that said, quit ****ing calling every fight a robbery. Pavlik-Taylor II was not a robbery. Calzaghe-Hopkins was not a robbery. Casamayor-Santa Cruz was a robbery. See the difference?
Comment