Poll: if an athlete cheated and got away with it does it still count as a legit win?

[Zaroku]

Man, this is classic! Made my day. You successfully admitted Froid is an illusion. From a fl0mo admitting that is a if deal haha

Nice!

Floyd whips his women like a ****** mufti!

[Spoon23]

All the more impressive, Pacquiao got beat by Floyd "Phantom Punch" Mayweather who didn't even need to land a single slomo punch.

Floyd Mayweather - Lord of Illusions

Those phantom punch is a metaphor for the corruption in Vegas.

[Spoon23]

Floyd whips his women like a ****** mufti!

Hey Zaroku, sup homes!

I have a question for you.

If 2 boxers fought. One took peds the other one didn't. And the one who cheated won. Is that still count in your book?

[Zaroku]

Hey Zaroku, sup homes!

I have a question for you.

If 2 boxers fought. One took peds the other one didn't. And the one who cheated won. Is that still count in your book?

Nope! PAC cheated Marquez, Morales and Barrera!
Floyd cheated Manny! Maybe others!

[paulf]

They never changed the result of DLH-Mosley II, so yes. Absolutely.

[Spoon23]

They never changed the result of DLH-Mosley II, so yes. Absolutely.

It's not about does it count officially. In your opinion. Does it count in your book if you know the athlete cheated to win a fight?

[Spoon23]

Nope! PAC cheated Marquez, Morales and Barrera!
Floyd cheated Manny! Maybe others!

Nice! So it shouldn't count if only one cheated.

The thing is Zaroku, Pac didn't cheat during his fight with Floyd. Only Floyd did. So does that still count?

Pls be reminded you said nope, it doesn't count if only one cheated and won the fight.

So I guess Floyd's win with Pac doesn't count in your book.

You know Pac was clean in that fight. He can't even get a legal shot of Taradol, he got blood drawn excessively by USADA. So in that context. I guess Froid didn't deserve that win.

[Zaroku]

Nice! So it shouldn't count if only one cheated.

The thing is Zaroku, Pac didn't cheat during his fight with Floyd. Only Floyd did. So does that still count?

Pls be reminded you said nope, it doesn't count if only one cheated and won the fight.

So I guess Floyd's win with Pac doesn't count in your book.

You know Pac was clean in that fight. He can't even get a legal shot of Taradol, he got blood drawn excessively by USADA. So in that context. I guess Froid didn't deserve that win.

He cheated in my book. But got the win.
PAC also cheated... Maybe he didn't cheat in the Floyd fight??? Maybe he did.

It is going on a year..

Floyd hurt you bad. Your deep emotional connection to # 48 is getting out of hand???

[Fury4daWIN]

I don't get this question.

If an athlete cheated and no one knew he cheated then of course it still counts as a win. Maybe not in the athlete's mind, if he has any sort of moral apparatus at work there, but for everyone else it can't be accepted as anything else.

If someone is widely suspected of cheating but has not actually been caught then the meaningfulness of the win will necessarily be lessened. But you cannot just wholly dismiss the win since it did in fact take place and may, against all the odds, in fact be on the level.

I for one believe Scott took a dive against Wilder, but I have no proof to back that up. As such, I take very little away from the win, and don't give it much consideration among Wilder's best career victories. So in that case, yes, I'm not counting it as a meaningful win, though the fact that it's an official win with no subsequent fallout always assumes that it was in fact wholly legit.

[AllEyesOpen]

I don't get this question.

If an athlete cheated and no one knew he cheated then of course it still counts as a win. Maybe not in the athlete's mind, if he has any sort of moral apparatus at work there, but for everyone else it can't be accepted as anything else.

If someone is widely suspected of cheating but has not actually been caught then the meaningfulness of the win will necessarily be lessened. But you cannot just wholly dismiss the win since it did in fact take place and may, against all the odds, in fact be on the level.

I for one believe Scott took a dive against Wilder, but I have no proof to back that up. As such, I take very little away from the win, and don't give it much consideration among Wilder's best career victories. So in that case, yes, I'm not counting it as a meaningful win, though the fact that it's an official win with no subsequent fallout always assumes that it was in fact wholly legit.

Great post, but a little too much logic and common sense for spoon.