Why do you cry about robberies, yet condone them?

[Hi-Dro]

I always hear people (myself included) cry about robberies, and complain about them. Why not? Robberies are bad for the sport of boxing, and they hurt the image of the sport, as well as the fighters. Boxers go through great lengths to train, and give it their all in camp, and within the fight itself. Yet despite the work that they put in some of them still end up getting robbed. And that is frustrating for a fan, as we deserve a better sport then this. There is no doubt in anyone's mind that boxing is sometimes corrupted, and controlled, by money hungry people. Now as I write this I want to make it clear that when I speak of robberies I am not speaking of close fights. I think it is evidently clear when a fight is close.


I am talking about clear robberies. They are bad for the sport, yet we condone them. I'll give you a couple of examples, which I will deploy through quotes. Btw I am merely paraphrasing what I have heard others say on here, and what I've heard personally.


"Trinidad got the win so Yes he beat Oscar"

So the fact that he got the nod by some idiotic judges makes it acceptable for us to condone this robbery?



"Mosley beat Oscar twice"

Seriously? If anyone saw the second fight they would know that there is no way in hell that Oscar got beat by Mosley in that fight. Oscar outboxed the **** out of him.



"Marquez lost to Chris John in Indonesia"


Again another one, which I hear people say in order to take away from Marquez's accomplishments. No John didn't beat Marquez he simply got a gift. Marquez outboxed him, yet he got robbed.


"Froch beat Direll"

Again as much as I hated that performance there is no way in hell that Froch could have won that fight. Direll clearly outpointed him, despite his coward behavior in the fight. Oh but its alright that he got robbed because he displayed such behavior. Right?


There are many more examples, which I won't elaborate on right now. Yet, I think I made my question clear. As I wonder why people condone robberies just because the real winner didn't get the nod. So despite our usual bitching about robberies we still condone them through our written opinions on boxingscene.


Why is that?

[Hi-Dro]

Btw feel free to add your own examples

[Counter Punch]

Example: Oscar's career minus the fights you mentioned

[starjammer]

Great post and topic I feel strongly on too. People will use anything as ammunition to support their fighters in heated debates, even bull**** wins, stating that the 'judges scored it for x, press row scored it for x, that dude on youtube scored it for x', when its clear as day that those people don't know how to score a fight.

Your Dirrell - Froch example was great, because like you say, people feel justified Froch won because of Dirrell's 'cowardly behaviour'. Yet this isn't a criteria for scoring or deducting points.

[-Rab]

Why didn't you use Pacquiao-JMM as an example?

[catalinul]

Not necessarily related to the thread but I just love when fighters don't cry over spilt milk in the post fight interview after they get robbed thus I have in my heard Big George's interview after he got robbed with Briggs.
I just loved him there.

[Hi-Dro]

Why didn't you use Pacquiao-JMM as an example?

lol be quite foo

Not necessarily related to the thread but I just love when fighters don't cry over spilt milk in the post fight interview after they get robbed thus I have in my heard Big George's interview after he got robbed with Briggs.
I just loved him there.

Chea. Like Martinez smiling in the post fight interview against cintron

Great post and topic I feel strongly on too. People will use anything as ammunition to support their fighters in heated debates, even bull**** wins, stating that the 'judges scored it for x, press row scored it for x, that dude on youtube scored it for x', when its clear as day that those people don't know how to score a fight.
thats what im sayin
Your Dirrell - Froch example was great, because like you say, people feel justified Froch won because of Dirrell's 'cowardly behaviour'. Yet this isn't a criteria for scoring or deducting points.

so true

[Kagami Taiga]

i dont think u guys understand what a robbery is. close fights where the fighters are separated by 1 or 2 points arent robberies. they are close fights that could have goin either way. dirrell vs. froch was a robbery. p will vs. martinez was not a robbery.

[Dambala]

Good thread. People won't complain when their fighter get the gift, but I hate it, for example I'm from Cupey Alto (Trinidad's hometown) and I really think he got beaten by Oscar and it sucks what happened that night.

On the other hand some people are used to call robberies some close fights like Williams/Martinez for example, I think Martinez won but I wouldn't call it a robbery since the fight was so close.

[Hi-Dro]

i dont think u guys understand what a robbery is. close fights where the fighters are separated by 1 or 2 points arent robberies. they are close fights that could have goin either way. dirrell vs. froch was a robbery. p will vs. martinez was not a robbery.

thats what i was saying