The truth is clear for those with eyes to see. The ones wanting to justify the robbery just make baseless claims about the videos like "they probably didn't include all of Haney's punches." Or they claim that they rewatched it themselves, but somehow didn't see all the low blows and elbows to the face from Haney. I pulled several just from the Top Tank highlights reel. They also rely heavily on the "you need to win 7 clear rounds" argument, but never can provide any 7 clear rounds that Haney won. Then they pivot to "to be the champ you need to beat the champ" and pretend you have to beat the champ on a wide margin to "deserve" the win, as if that's not a load of crap, and the saying doesn't ONLY mean that the champ retains in the case of a tie.
People need to look back at Sugar Ray Leonard's career. He won as the challenger against Hagler on a controversial split. If you needed to win a wide decision, he shouldn't get credit for that win. Then, two fights later, he retained his belt against Hearns because the fight was a tie. THAT'S what the saying means.
Fact is, the vast majority of cards were 115-113 Loma, and that means that Loma clearly won a close fight. A close fight that can go anyone's way has cards split all over the place for both people, not a majority of viewers all saying that the wrong person won.
If 115-113 means "anyone could have won that fight, even though the overwhelming majority scored it the same way for one of the fighters", EVERY 115-113 scorecard is suspect and could have gone to the other fighter, no matter what happened in the fight. Every part of the "It wasn't a robbery" argument is flat out ******.
What are you babbling on about?? If calling it a robbery makes you feel better so be it but Loma lost, end of conversation.
Tweet
Comment