An Expert’s Take the Day BEFORE Lomo-Rigo

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Have you read any of Farrell’s other articles yet? I scanned the one on the state of the heavyweight division. Good stuff, but a little outdated, as it's about a year and a half old. But the article on fixing fights was pure gold. I believe there’s truth in his stories, although one has to wonder exactly how much. It was almost like reading pulp fiction. In that respect, at least, it was highly entertaining.

I’ve said this before: professional boxing isn’t too far removed from professional wrestling. That piece not only confirmed my beliefs, but made it blindingly obvious.

Yeah, I think I'd read the one on fixing fights a while back.

Ah, you really never know, man.

I mean, we see set-ups and bad decisions fairly regularly, but at the same time, the human factor can really F those plans up sometimes. I think there are lots of factors at play and you never can tell what will happen in a fight.

I mean, I picked Canelo to beat GGG because I felt like he'd get the decision no matter what, with him being the younger man and with more of an investment in him and so forth, but they called it a draw. If they never fight again, I can see how this was rigged but really, since the rematch appears likely, I'm not so sure. On the other hand, they could just be milking it which makes sense, kind of like Lewis-Holyfield. I don't know, man. It's really hard to say for sure about any of it, but I've rarely seen a fight that didn't look real. Ali-Liston II and Wilder-Scott have been two but the others, even if fake, are hard to prove.

[CubanGuyNYC]

Yeah, I think I'd read the one on fixing fights a while back.

Ah, you really never know, man.

I mean, we see set-ups and bad decisions fairly regularly, but at the same time, the human factor can really F those plans up sometimes. I think there are lots of factors at play and you never can tell what will happen in a fight.

I mean, I picked Canelo to beat GGG because I felt like he'd get the decision no matter what, with him being the younger man and with more of an investment in him and so forth, but they called it a draw. If they never fight again, I can see how this was rigged but really, since the rematch appears likely, I'm not so sure. On the other hand, they could just be milking it which makes sense, kind of like Lewis-Holyfield. I don't know, man. It's really hard to say for sure about any of it, but I've rarely seen a fight that didn't look real. Ali-Liston II and Wilder-Scott have been two but the others, even if fake, are hard to prove.

I think fixing becomes less prevalent as you go up the ranks. At the very highest, the championship levels, it’s least prevalent, although not non-existent. At the club level, where prospects are being groomed, it must be wholesale. But we see corruption all the time. You take Williams-Lara, for example. There is no way anyone with a smidgen of boxing understanding would’ve scored that fight for Williams. Not for one second. Yet, three professional judges did just that. And that’s only one example. There are others at that level, which is already pretty high.

The article was very rich on information and touched on a lot of different angles. It’s not just about blatantly fixing fights, and corruption in general. It’s about the whole business of boxing, how fights and fighters are built. You can see how a guy like Canelo was manufactured, and although definitely a good fighter, how he was carefully groomed. You don’t have to scratch far below the surface before you hit the seedy underbelly of the sport.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

I think fixing becomes less prevalent as you go up the ranks. At the very highest, the championship levels, it’s least prevalent, although not non-existent. At the club level, where prospects are being groomed, it must be wholesale. But we see corruption all the time. You take Williams-Lara, for example. There is no way anyone with a smidgen of boxing understanding would’ve scored that fight for Williams. Not for one second. Yet, three professional judges did just that. And that’s only one example. There are others at that level, which is already pretty high.

The article was very rich on information and touched on a lot of different angles. It’s not just about blatantly fixing fights, and corruption in general. It’s about the whole business of boxing, how fights and fighters are built. You can see how a guy like Canelo was manufactured, and although definitely a good fighter, how he was carefully groomed. You don’t have to scratch far below the surface before you hit the seedy underbelly of the sport.

Well, that's the thing for me. We've seen how many bad decisions at the championship level and even with the crowd booing the decision and the ringside commentators damning the decision has ANY decision ever been overturned? No. Not even the first Pac-Bradley fight where they had new judges come in, watch and say that Pac won. Still, was the decision overturned? It was not. That right there is reason enough to turn a lot of people off from the sport itself.

[CubanGuyNYC]

Well, that's the thing for me. We've seen how many bad decisions at the championship level and even with the crowd booing the decision and the ringside commentators damning the decision has ANY decision ever been overturned? No. Not even the first Pac-Bradley fight where they had new judges come in, watch and say that Pac won. Still, was the decision overturned? It was not. That right there is reason enough to turn a lot of people off from the sport itself.

I agree 100%. I was gonna bring up Pac-Bradley as another example, but I wanted to shorten my post. There are so many in boxing history. The earliest one I can think of is Jack Johnson-Jess Willard, 1915. Johnson lay on his back, shielding his eyes from the hot Havana sun. Lol Ali-Liston II is an even more famous, high-level fix. I’m practically convinced at this point in my life that was a pre-determined outcome. To me, Farrell’s stories are a fascinating insider’s look at the real-world of boxing.