View Full Version : Is it possible for a fight to be close and still be a robbery
thewoo
08-23-2007, 11:49 AM
Every time that we talk about robberies people mention fights that were close and someone says, that was not a robbery that was a close fight. Isn't it possible for a fight to be close and still be a robbery. Say guys trade rounds back and forth. Each guy clearly wins his rounds. One guy wins 7 and the other guy wins 5. I would still call that a robbery if it went to the guy whom I thought clearly won only 5 rounds.
LogDog69
08-23-2007, 11:55 AM
Trinidad/De La Hoya
DamonD
08-23-2007, 11:56 AM
I say absolutely not...it's one thing if a guy wins, say, nine rounds clear but loses.
But there's no such thing as a 7-5 robbery (or thereabouts).
Basically, here on ESB robberies are close fights in which YOUR favorite fighter loses.
Executioner
08-23-2007, 12:04 PM
Basically, here on ESB robberies are close fights in which YOUR favorite fighter loses.
:lol: :yep
Thread Stealer
08-23-2007, 12:07 PM
Yeah, maybe if a guy wins 7 rounds clearly and the other guy wins 5 rounds clearly, it's a robbery.
IntentionalButt
08-23-2007, 12:07 PM
Basically, here on ESB robberies are close fights in which YOUR favorite fighter loses.
:oops:
thewoo
08-23-2007, 12:09 PM
I say absolutely not...it's one thing if a guy wins, say, nine rounds clear but loses.
But there's no such thing as a 7-5 robbery (or thereabouts).
So suppose a guy completly dominates 7 rounds of a 12 round fight but loses the other 5 you wouldn't call it a robbery if the judges gave it to the other guy? I would that means that 2 rounds that one guy clearly won went to the wrong guy
Fab2333
08-23-2007, 12:15 PM
Basically, here on ESB robberies are close fights in which YOUR favorite fighter loses.:yep:rofl:rofl:deal:thumbsup yup. acb is right 90 of how people view it on here. I dont though. If its a close fight and one person wins I will admit they won. wont call it a robbery
Amsterdam
08-23-2007, 12:17 PM
I say absolutely not...it's one thing if a guy wins, say, nine rounds clear but loses.
But there's no such thing as a 7-5 robbery (or thereabouts).
How is there not? If one guy CLEARLY wins 7 rounds, and I mean clear in every sense of the word and the other gets 5 and then it goes to the 5 round guy, how is that fair?
That's robbing the man who clearly won the fucking fight.
How is there not? If one guy CLEARLY wins 7 rounds, and I mean clear in every sense of the word and the other gets 5 and then it goes to the 5 round guy, how is that fair?
That's robbing the man who clearly won the fucking fight.
I guess everyone has their own subjectivities when deciphering between a robbery and a bad decision.
I would call a 7-5 fight that went the wrong way a bad decision.
A robbery to me is a blatent bad, arguably corrupt decision in which shortly thereafter Don King may be seen circling the auditorium.
I guess everyone has their own subjectivities when deciphering between a robbery and a bad decision.
I would call a 7-5 fight that went the wrong way a bad decision.
A robbery to me is a blatent bad, arguably corrupt decision in which shortly thereafter Don King may be seen circling the auditorium.
:lol: :yep
klion22
08-23-2007, 12:22 PM
Every time that we talk about robberies people mention fights that were close and someone says, that was not a robbery that was a close fight. Isn't it possible for a fight to be close and still be a robbery. Say guys trade rounds back and forth. Each guy clearly wins his rounds. One guy wins 7 and the other guy wins 5. I would still call that a robbery if it went to the guy whom I thought clearly won only 5 rounds.
If the rounds were that easy to score in that one guy CLEARLY won 7 rounds while the other guy CLEARLY won 5 rounds and there is no dispute whatsoever, i would say you can call it a robbery. The problem is, no fight is that clear cut. Some rounds are harder to score and that when people's biased comes in.
Fab2333
08-23-2007, 12:24 PM
I guess everyone has their own subjectivities when deciphering between a robbery and a bad decision.
I would call a 7-5 fight that went the wrong way a bad decision.
A robbery to me is a blatent bad, arguably corrupt decision in which shortly thereafter Don King may be seen circling the auditorium.
same here, even though when it all comes down to it it kinda means the same thing. But i agree with you acb
TBooze
08-23-2007, 12:24 PM
You rarely get a robbery in boxing. Even something like Lewis/HolyfieldI IMO was not a robbery. Sure Lewis was unlucky, but he did not do himself any favours by giving Holyfield too much respect.
The last mainstream robbery was probably Whitaker/RamirezI. I would include maybe Cogg/GonzalesI, but I suspect that was a fix, which is a different kettle of fish...
Amsterdam
08-23-2007, 12:25 PM
I guess everyone has their own subjectivities when deciphering between a robbery and a bad decision.
I would call a 7-5 fight that went the wrong way a bad decision.
A robbery to me is a blatent bad, arguably corrupt decision in which shortly thereafter Don King may be seen circling the auditorium.
I am not talking about a close 7-5. I'm talking as if one guy wins the first 5 clear, then gets fucking blasted the next 7, if that doesn't go to the 7, then that's a robbery.
Then there are of course horrific robberies, like the one Sven Ottke recieved over Robin Reid.
I am not talking about a close 7-5. I'm talking as if one guy wins the first 5 clear, then gets fucking blasted the next 7, if that doesn't go to the 7, then that's a robbery.
Then there are of course horrific robberies, like the one Sven Ottke recieved over Robin Reid.
Fair enough.
brooklyn1550
08-23-2007, 12:36 PM
A fight can be close, but clear that one fighter one. I don't like to use the term "robbery" in close fights, but I don't like to see one fighter get the nod in a close affair when the fight was close, but clear for the other fighter.
This is why we all loved Mike Tyson when he first came around, and other fighters with erasers. :good
Fab2333
08-23-2007, 12:39 PM
I am not talking about a close 7-5. I'm talking as if one guy wins the first 5 clear, then gets fucking blasted the next 7, if that doesn't go to the 7, then that's a robbery.
Then there are of course horrific robberies, like the one Sven Ottke recieved over Robin Reid.
yeah I can agree with that. If the rounds were clear.
Not like in the sense where I see people saying Winky got robbed against B-Hop
Amsterdam
08-23-2007, 12:40 PM
yeah I can agree with that. If the rounds were clear.
Not like in the sense where I see people saying Winky got robbed against B-Hop
No, and B=hop clearly closed the final rounds and sealed it, if that had gone to Wright, it would have been a robbery on Hopkins in my opinion. I had it 116-112 Hopkins, close early but Bernard closed it with very clearly won rounds.
And B-hop/Taylor was not a robbery, but it was a 'gift'. A 'robbery' is something universally considered as a bullshit win, robbing the opponent, a 'gift' is getting a lucky decision.
Fab2333
08-23-2007, 12:43 PM
No, and B=hop clearly closed the final rounds and sealed it, if that had gone to Wright, it would have been a robbery on Hopkins in my opinion. I had it 116-112 Hopkins, close early but Bernard closed it with very clearly won rounds.
And B-hop/Taylor was not a robbery, but it was a 'gift'. A 'robbery' is something universally considered as a bullshit win, robbing the opponent, a 'gift' is getting a lucky decision.
I had B-Hop winning the fight, my friends that were watchin it with me, were cryin out that they robbed winky. Im just sayin wat they were sayin not wat i believed. Yeah and i agree about the gift thing
Amsterdam
08-23-2007, 12:46 PM
I had B-Hop winning the fight, my friends that were watchin it with me, were cryin out that they robbed winky. Im just sayin wat they were sayin not wat i believed. Yeah and i agree about the gift thing
If they scored it for Winky...
Teach them the criteria for scoring a round:
Ring Generalship
Clean Punching
Effective punching*
Defence
Clean and effective punching being the most significant, but defence also scores if you're making him miss but using a much lower workrate.
Fab2333
08-23-2007, 12:49 PM
If they scored it for Winky...
Teach them the criteria for scoring a round:
Ring Generalship
Clean Punching
Effective punching*
Defence
Clean and effective punching being the most significant, but defence also scores if you're making him miss but using a much lower workrate.
its like pulling teeth with them, theyd ont understand, they all wanted winky to win, they all winky fans, so unless it dont look like a blatant ass wooping they are going to think otherwise, and b/c leddermans card scored it a draw I think. They were outraged sayin "when has his card ever been so far off". All kind of bs. They were mad b/c I have been tellin them for months that WInk was gonna take an L. But they didnt wana listen.
DoumB
08-23-2007, 01:11 PM
same here, even though when it all comes down to it it kinda means the same thing. But i agree with you acb
whats the name of this babe fab???
TroubleLurks
08-23-2007, 01:14 PM
Every time that we talk about robberies people mention fights that were close and someone says, that was not a robbery that was a close fight. Isn't it possible for a fight to be close and still be a robbery. Say guys trade rounds back and forth. Each guy clearly wins his rounds. One guy wins 7 and the other guy wins 5. I would still call that a robbery if it went to the guy whom I thought clearly won only 5 rounds.Without a doubt, yes.
jecxbox
08-23-2007, 01:25 PM
If the fight is within 1 or 2 points. It isn't a robbery in my books. If the fight is like Morales/Diaz..That shit is a robbery...Close fights shouldn't be considered robberys thats why I don't give a shit about Taylor/Hopkins I II and Taylor/Winky...Hopkins/Winky and all you Taylorh8torz love to cry about how taylor robbed those fights..Man give me a break it doesn't f'n matter..the fight was close so neither fighters have the right to complain about it.If they wanted to win they woulda closed the show but they didn't...
jecxbox
08-23-2007, 01:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thewoo
Every time that we talk about robberies people mention fights that were close and someone says, that was not a robbery that was a close fight. Isn't it possible for a fight to be close and still be a robbery. Say guys trade rounds back and forth. Each guy clearly wins his rounds. One guy wins 7 and the other guy wins 5. I would still call that a robbery if it went to the guy whom I thought clearly won only 5 rounds.
Without a doubt, yes.
well no I'd disagree..Because there are always close rounds in boxing..And if a ref sees or feels something that we don't see on our TV such as the impact of these punches..These judges are literally next to these fighters hearing and feeling the impact of these shots..They can see things differently when these rounds are "close"...The cards can be so random because of that and that sometimes gives us a shocking unexpected score card. Its not like they can change their mind once they decide who they think won it.
Zakman
08-23-2007, 01:31 PM
You rarely get a robbery in boxing. Even something like Lewis/HolyfieldI IMO was not a robbery. Sure Lewis was unlucky, but he did not do himself any favours by giving Holyfield too much respect.
The last mainstream robbery was probably Whitaker/RamirezI. I would include maybe Cogg/GonzalesI, but I suspect that was a fix, which is a different kettle of fish...
I would agree with this. Which is why I think there is a distinction to be made here between a "robbery" - which IS rare - and the "gift decision," which is what a lot of people are talking about here, fights where it's close, but one guy clearly should've gotten the verdict, but didn't. Those are a LOT more common.
Shotgun
08-23-2007, 01:31 PM
Sometimes there can be, when someone clearly and decisively won 6 or more rounds and still loses for example
Like STRUM-De La Hoya. It wasn't a blowout but it was still very obvious STRUM won and got robbed by the judges
Guru_Too_You
08-23-2007, 01:33 PM
How is there not? If one guy CLEARLY wins 7 rounds, and I mean clear in every sense of the word and the other gets 5 and then it goes to the 5 round guy, how is that fair?
That's robbing the man who clearly won the fucking fight.
Correct.
A Close but CLEAR decision can still be a robbery.
AREA 53
08-23-2007, 01:35 PM
When John Conteh tried to reclaim the Title he had previously been stripped of by fighting National Hero Mate Parlov ...In Belgrade, Parlov's back yard, and in front of a stadium full of his supporters, he seemed to have done enough to win, and the Ref himself certainly thought that Conteh had Won clearly, but was apprently outvoted by his fellow judges, the scorecard were not read out from the ring, as soon as parlov was announced as winner he was out in the stadium amongst his thousands of supporters, if the judges had gone against Parlov perhaps they would not of got out of the stadium in one peice ?
It Seems on this occassion Parlov'a Ametuer Fiddle-Faddle was more appreciated on the scorecards then Contehs more Professional application, and Conteh seemed to get little reward for his work to Parlov's body, ( Marvin Johnson later continued this and sunk Parlov )
It did look to be a close fight with some round hard to score ( maybe these were given to Parlov ?)
The British Trade Paper Boxing News did indeed cover the fight
with the front page headline " ROBBERY......"
The British Boxing Trade paper
TroubleLurks
08-23-2007, 04:26 PM
Correct.
A Close but CLEAR decision can still be a robbery.
Just ask OUR good buddy Emmett.:yep :tong
BewareofDawg
08-23-2007, 04:28 PM
.:yep :tong
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
TroubleLurks
08-23-2007, 04:30 PM
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
:lol: You're like a damn ninja lurking in the trees ready to swoosh in with damn Viper pics. It's on now.:lol:
Brickhaus
08-23-2007, 05:07 PM
If it's controversial, then it's not a robbery (see: Hopkins-Taylor). If it's 7 lopsided rounds for one fighter and 5 lopsided rounds for the other, and the guy with the 5 rounds wins, then it's a robbery (see: Diamond-Huerta). If a guy is winning a fight, but gets rocked and clearly can't defend himself any longer and the ref stops it (or it's stopped on cuts that are FUBAR, then it's not a robbery (see: Lewis-Klitschko). If someone is winning a fight, gets rocked, and the ref stops it early, that's a robbery (see: Tua-Rahman).
maciek4
08-23-2007, 06:24 PM
Robbery is when a guy clearly wins more rounds, doesnt matter if its only 7. A great example would be DLH Sturm, Sturm won 7 rounds clearly and was robbed.
psychopath
08-23-2007, 07:12 PM
Every time that we talk about robberies people mention fights that were close and someone says, that was not a robbery that was a close fight. Isn't it possible for a fight to be close and still be a robbery. Say guys trade rounds back and forth. Each guy clearly wins his rounds. One guy wins 7 and the other guy wins 5. I would still call that a robbery if it went to the guy whom I thought clearly won only 5 rounds.
Close and still be a robbery? :lol:
Nah nah nah :nono . . . I've posted this and I'll post it again.
When the fight is not even close and the rightful winner loses . . . that's a robbery
When the fight is closely contested and the fight can go either way . . . then the agitated fans who doesn't agree with the results . . . call's it a gift decission :D
:hi: :good
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.