Comments Thread For: BScene's 2011 Year End Awards: Robbery Of The Year

[Joe2608]

It's very worrying how many robberies there have been this year, judges are getting worse and it really is tarnishing the sport's reputation imo. Hopefully next year is better.

[JakeNDaBox]

^^^^
Oh I just realised that pro boxing was scored on number of punches landed only.....silly me.

Where is the Pac Marquez fight?

It may be my judgement but if they are putting in Sturm Macklin which I thought was pretty close then Pac Marquez should be nailed on. I don't think Macklin Sturm was an absolute shocker of a decision bearing in mind it was Germany (can't remember the cards though) Murray getting a draw against Sturm is a different story though.

Smith Simpson was pretty close (I had Simpson) but I think Simpsons little terrier style has never held much regard with judges as he's been on the back of a few stinkers.

I'm not going to comment on Alexander/Matthsse, Williams/Lara or the Chisora/Helenais fights as I've not seen them HOWEVER there is no way there could have been a worse refereeing performance or score card than in the Cox/Sai fight. I was disgusted. I know it can't make the top as it was a small fight but I'm hoping I never see such outrageous scoring and officiating ever again. I genuinely felt so sorry for Sai and felt ashamed of what I just watched. I know it's not really Cox's fault (ref should have stopped the fight)but I'll hate on him for the rest of his career for that. I've never seen so many low blows in a fight ever. Been a while since I seen it but I'm pretty sure they are well in double figure and maybe into the 20's! Shocking.

Just so it's clear - these awards are based on staff votes. Not everyone gets to see every fight - live or after the fact. Therefore, writers vote on what they see/know.

Cox-Sai is a fight that flew WAY under the radar, and I'd be surprised if most American writers - hell, anyone outside of the UK or Ghana - even heard of either fighter, much less seen them in action. That's the only reason it was limited to the (dis)honorable mention section.

Had more people seen it, I'm sure more talk would've generated from it. On a weekend where greater attention was paid to Gamboa-Ponce de Leon and (in the UK) McCloskey-Prescott, it landed in the overlooked pile.

[JakeNDaBox]

Furthermore - and this is for everyone reading:

Close fights are NOT robberies.

Pac-Marquez III was a close fight w/ a disputed decision. That Marquez did far better than expected is what sparked the debate. Whether or not he won is open for debate, not an indisputable fact.

I thought McCloskey-Prescott was a "worse" decision, and even that was damn close.

Honestly, Alexander-Matthysse came dangerously close to not making the list. But I can find far more people who had Matthysse winning outright than was the case for Marquez against Pacquiao.

I'm surprised that anyone would debate Sturm-Macklin. In fact, I'm surprised it didn't receive more votes. I thought it was almost as bad as the top two.

No argument from me with those who felt Helenius-Chisora was worse than Williams-Lara. I voted for the latter, but certainly respect any case to be made for the judging in the HVY fight being the greater heist.

The saddest part in Williams-Lara: While Macklin and Chisora were outright robbed, they're receiving bigger opportunities (Macklin presumably facing Sergio Martinez, while Chisora is facing Vitali), whereas Lara was - and still is - left out in the cold altogether.

[ADP02]

Mostly every professional in the sport of boxing has went on record to say JMM beat Manny the 3rd time and that fight is not mentioned on here?

Did the judges? Did HBO analysts? Harold Lederman?

The fight was too close to call it the most controversial of the year.

If you are not biased, I'm pretty sure you could have scored a few of those rounds that you THOUGHT Marquez won for Manny.

How can you call a close fight the most controversial fight UNLESS you are biased. Judging by your posts, I would say you are VERY BIASED!!!

[BattlingNelson]

The top 2 are right on the money. Lara - Williams was terrible.

Agree. Even though I didnt watch Williams-lara live, i found the decision terrible.

I scored the Helenius-Chisora live and I cannot remember turning in a card that differed so much from the judges scoring. I had it 116-112 for the brit, so that was a dreadful decision as well.

[BattlingNelson]

Furthermore - and this is for everyone reading:

Close fights are NOT robberies.

Pac-Marquez III was a close fight w/ a disputed decision. That Marquez did far better than expected is what sparked the debate. Whether or not he won is open for debate, not an indisputable fact.

I thought McCloskey-Prescott was a "worse" decision, and even that was damn close.

Honestly, Alexander-Matthysse came dangerously close to not making the list. But I can find far more people who had Matthysse winning outright than was the case for Marquez against Pacquiao.

I'm surprised that anyone would debate Sturm-Macklin. In fact, I'm surprised it didn't receive more votes. I thought it was almost as bad as the top two.

No argument from me with those who felt Helenius-Chisora was worse than Williams-Lara. I voted for the latter, but certainly respect any case to be made for the judging in the HVY fight being the greater heist.

The saddest part in Williams-Lara: While Macklin and Chisora were outright robbed, they're receiving bigger opportunities (Macklin presumably facing Sergio Martinez, while Chisora is facing Vitali), whereas Lara was - and still is - left out in the cold altogether.

I Think i had Sturm-Mac 7-5 for Mac. That Can never constitute a robbery. Controversial perhaps, but not a robbery.

Jake I heard Sturm's draw with Murray was a terrible decision. I havent seen the fight, but I believe most people Think it was a clear Sturm win. What's your take on that fight?

[The Devil]

Robbery of the Decade : LaFraud Peturdson w12 Amir Khan

[Konstantin]

Bunch of irrational Pac haters are claiming robbery. It was a close fight. Marquez did not win in a convincing manner. Certainly not as convincingly as the others mentioned in the list.

[JakeNDaBox]

I Think i had Sturm-Mac 7-5 for Mac. That Can never constitute a robbery. Controversial perhaps, but not a robbery.

Jake I heard Sturm's draw with Murray was a terrible decision. I havent seen the fight, but I believe most people Think it was a clear Sturm win. What's your take on that fight?

I honestly thought Macklin beat Sturm far more convincingly than Sturm beat Murray. I didn't take great issue w/ the Sturm-Murray verdict, though agree that Sturm should've been awarded the bout.

My beef with the Sturm-Macklin fight is that I honestly don't know a single person outside of Sturm's camp that had him winning, yet not one judge but two managed to find eight rounds to give to him. That absolutely reeks of corruption. I think I had the fight in the exact opposite direction of those two, scoring it 116-112 or so for Macklin.

[dorruel2.0]

Theres NO WAY pacquiao won 7 rounds of his last fight. If you say the Alexander Matt fight was a robbery then how can you say Pac Marquez wasnt. Marquez looked even more dominant than lucas. Marquez deserved a DRAW at best.