Comments Thread For: The Psychology of Conspiracy in Boxing: Why close decisions feel like robberies

[4truth]

Some fights are robberies and you can even see a promoter's fingerprints at the scene of the crime. For instance, Rolly needed to beat Marinez to set up his fight with Tank. It didn't matter that Marinez won that fight by a big margin, the promoter had plans.

[Butt stuff]

Excellent article. The cult of conspiracy thinking is one of the many reasons I don't use social media and it's often very apparent to me which forum posters have been allured by this way of thinking.

If there were dark forces behind every major boxing decision why would they stop at paying judges (is it one, two or all three?), why not have a sniper shoot the opponent boxer, poison him, etc.? Why is direct evidence of the corruption almost never seen?

Why would they kill the opponent when paying judges works just fine already, much easier, cheaper and less messy.

It’s well known that it’s that promoters can influence the selection of judges, and the same judges always seem to crop up on the those promoter’s shows. It would be foolish not to assume a clear yet unspoken bias is expected from the promoter towards their own fighter.

There are figures within the industry that have expressed this worry.