Will people stop with the "take it from the champ" BS?

[_Maxi]

And yeah I used the phrase in the past but I see now it's totally wrong.

If you don't "take it from the champ" it's already considered in the rules. If the fight goes to a draw, the champ remains the champ.

Fights are decided on round by round.

If a round is close will you score it for the champ because he's the champ? no...

So what more do you want? the champ already has the nod.

[Loque-san]

No they won't. This expression makes no sense whatsoever but a lot of boxing fans love using it even though they ignore its origins and what it means exactly. They simply repeat what they've heard or been told. I cringe everytime I read or hear this nonsense thinking. Note that this expression is only used in boxing.

You see it used a lot when someone's favorite fighter, whom is also a world champion, gets a controversial decision in a close fight. "115-113 for the challenger? Hell no!! You gotta TAKE IT from the champ!!". The worst thing is new fans of boxing being introduced to this retrograde nonsense by older fans and believing they learn something valuable.

[_Maxi]

No they won't. This expression makes no sense whatsoever but a lot of boxing fans love using it even though they ignore its origins and what it means exactly. They simply repeat what they've heard or been told. I cringe everytime I read or hear this nonsense thinking. Note that this expression is only used in boxing.

You see it used a lot when someone's favorite fighter, whom is also a world champion, gets a controversial decision in a close fight. "115-113 for the challenger? Hell no!! You gotta TAKE IT from the champ!!". The worst thing is new fans of boxing being introduced to this retrograde nonsense by older fans and believing they learn something valuable.

Or the other thing is "But he won the championship rounds!"... so what???

[Kezzer]

It’s usually used in relation to fighting away from home. You can’t expect a decision unless you clearly win, obviously if judging was completely fair then that wouldn’t be an issue but it is often known for the champs to get benefit of the doubts from the judges in close fights

[Cobra Curry]

Frustrating isn't it? A fight between two world class guys is supposed to close. Giving it to the champ just because is lazy.

[jglvz256]

This was probably out of date about 100 years ago when they introduced scoring to decide fights that went the distance instead of calling them draws. But it still persists.

[_Maxi]

It’s usually used in relation to fighting away from home. You can’t expect a decision unless you clearly win, obviously if judging was completely fair then that wouldn’t be an issue but it is often known for the champs to get benefit of the doubts from the judges in close fights

In close rounds, you mean, because they score round by round. They don't score "fights". So, basically, they give the close rounds to the A-side. And it's totally wrong.

[Curt Henning]

ya I hate that...always have

its like the challenger is already in a 4-0 hole before it starts or something....close rounds don't auto go to the champ either...I hate that....score the fight fair

[IronDanHamza]

Yeah it's by far the most ridiculous logic used in Boxing.

[Madison Boxing]

Its especially ****** when there are 4 'champs' in a division