Thread: Chavez/Randall 2

Just got done watching the first 2 Chavez/Randall fights on youtube.


The ending of the second fight seemed odd to me.

Towards the end of the 8th round an accidental headbutt occurred. The result was a big cut on Chavez' brow. The doctor stopped the fight. Mills Lane ordered a point deduction because of the headbutt and then ordered the fight to the scorecards because the fight had progressed beyond the third. Now here are my concerns:-

1) Why did the WBC rules state that, in the event of an accidental headbutt, a point shall be deducted from the fighter who 'initiated the butt'? This seems harsh, since by it's definition an accidental headbutt means that no party was blatantly at fault. Certainly this butt occurred due to Randall leaning in attempting to throw an uppercut, but it was certainly not worthy of a point deduction.

2) Ringside physician Flip Homansky stated that Chavez indicated he did not want to continue and so, as the cut was bad, he instructed Lane to stop the fight. Under questioning he admitted that if Chavez had expressed a desire continue, he would have let him. To my knowledge, the role of the ringside doctor is to simply examine the wound and decide if, as a result of that wound, the fighter is endangered because of it - not to respond to the negative body language of a tiring and beaten fighter.

3) If the point deduction rule had not been in effect, Randall would have retained his title by majority decision.

4) At the post fight interview, Don King virtually assures a third meeting between the two - it never eventuated until 2004 when Randall was a name trial horse looking for any payday.

5) Chavez went on to big money fights with Meldrick Taylor, ODLH and Kostya Tszyu while Randall toiled for the rest of his career in relative obscurity.


I know boxing isn't always fair - but it seems 'The Surgeon' really got shafted here...

No doubt about it Greig.This was one of the biggest S!!!! calls in the sport and Randall was on his way to whipping Chavez again.Chavez actually was thumping the body and turned boxer to cope with Randall.Randall staggerd him up (3rd?) and Chavez contributed to the head butt as much as Randall.
At the time of fight I knew King would not let Chavez near Randall again anytime soon
Great points Greig,CC to ya.

Thanks Spicoli... CC returned.


I agree that Randall was starting to take control of the second fight when the butt occurred.

It amazed me to see just how staggered he had Chavez at different times throughout both fights. He could really crack, because Chavez had been in with a lot of punchers and nobody really seemed to hurt him, but after the knockdown in round 11 of the first fight you could see Chavez instantly go into retreat to try and get the cobwebs out.

Both fights are great, by the way - really good action. But I don't think anyone would dispute that Frankie had Chavez's number.

Originally Posted by Greig

Just got done watching the first 2 Chavez/Randall fights on youtube.


The ending of the second fight seemed odd to me.

Towards the end of the 8th round an accidental headbutt occurred. The result was a big cut on Chavez' brow. The doctor stopped the fight. Mills Lane ordered a point deduction because of the headbutt and then ordered the fight to the scorecards because the fight had progressed beyond the third. Now here are my concerns:-

1) Why did the WBC rules state that, in the event of an accidental headbutt, a point shall be deducted from the fighter who 'initiated the butt'? This seems harsh, since by it's definition an accidental headbutt means that no party was blatantly at fault. Certainly this butt occurred due to Randall leaning in attempting to throw an uppercut, but it was certainly not worthy of a point deduction.

2) Ringside physician Flip Homansky stated that Chavez indicated he did not want to continue and so, as the cut was bad, he instructed Lane to stop the fight. Under questioning he admitted that if Chavez had expressed a desire continue, he would have let him. To my knowledge, the role of the ringside doctor is to simply examine the wound and decide if, as a result of that wound, the fighter is endangered because of it - not to respond to the negative body language of a tiring and beaten fighter.

3) If the point deduction rule had not been in effect, Randall would have retained his title by majority decision.

4) At the post fight interview, Don King virtually assures a third meeting between the two - it never eventuated until 2004 when Randall was a name trial horse looking for any payday.

5) Chavez went on to big money fights with Meldrick Taylor, ODLH and Kostya Tszyu while Randall toiled for the rest of his career in relative obscurity.


I know boxing isn't always fair - but it seems 'The Surgeon' really got shafted here...

The same happened to Llyod Honeygan against Jorge Vaca. Honeygan lost a point and his title due to this rule.

The point deduction rule has always been in effect it's been used from the begining.
This same situation happened with Lopez-Alvarez, Lloyd-Vaca and as you stated JCC-Randall.

It's not the fairest of rules but it wasn't just made up out of the blue.

About the doctor asking JCC. If you watch Arce-Hussein, JMM-Jaca or any other bout with a head butt the doctor more times then often will ask a serious of questions raging from how he feels to if he can see or if his head hurts, can he continue..... The questions he asked IMO were not out of line and or something that's ilegal. Ultimately the doctor has the final saying. I think the doctor should have told Mills he's OK to continue THEN once JCC turned to Mills and would say something like 'I can't go on' or whatever then Mills would have had to call the fight off on retirement by JCC. Thus making Randall the winner. I do think that situation was not handled accordingly.

A similar situtation BUT really blatant and full on robbery can be seen in Armando Muniz vs. Jose Napoles I, when Napoles suffers a cut and the fight is stopped by the doctor. They go to the scorecards and Sulaiman, the judges and the ref. get together and huddle up and award the victory to Napoles.

About the 3rd fight how can you say he was a name trial horse. Randall went on to have one of the best trilogies with Coggi. Have you ever seen the fights? Randall went on to become the WBA Champ.
His career went on the decline when he was upset by Khali.

You can't blame JCC for rematching Taylor I mean he fought Randall twice back to back, and needed to get back in with Taylor after the way their fight ended.

I am a huge JCC fan but he was helped out against Randall. When he changed tactics mid way into the fight and tried to box he was going to loose, he just could not take the punches any longer. That moment was effectively the end of the invincible superstar. He won fights after but he was never the same. Randall has his number but was also at the right place at the right time.

Originally Posted by CutMeMick

The point deduction rule has always been in effect it's been used from the begining.
This same situation happened with Lopez-Alvarez, Lloyd-Vaca and as you stated JCC-Randall.

It's not the fairest of rules but it wasn't just made up out of the blue.

About the doctor asking JCC. If you watch Arce-Hussein, JMM-Jaca or any other bout with a head butt the doctor more times then often will ask a serious of questions raging from how he feels to if he can see or if his head hurts, can he continue..... The questions he asked IMO were not out of line and or something that's ilegal. Ultimately the doctor has the final saying. I think the doctor should have told Mills he's OK to continue THEN once JCC turned to Mills and would say something like 'I can't go on' or whatever then Mills would have had to call the fight off on retirement by JCC. Thus making Randall the winner. I do think that situation was not handled accordingly.

A similar situtation BUT really blatant and full on robbery can be seen in Armando Muniz vs. Jose Napoles I, when Napoles suffers a cut and the fight is stopped by the doctor. They go to the scorecards and Sulaiman, the judges and the ref. get together and huddle up and award the victory to Napoles.

About the 3rd fight how can you say he was a name trial horse. Randall went on to have one of the best trilogies with Coggi. Have you ever seen the fights? Randall went on to become the WBA Champ.
His career went on the decline when he was upset by Khali.

You can't blame JCC for rematching Taylor I mean he fought Randall twice back to back, and needed to get back in with Taylor after the way their fight ended.

After the Khali fight, in 1997, Randall fought 14 times before the Chavez fight in 2004 - he lost 9 of them.

Both guys were shot to shit before that third fight Mick.

Originally Posted by Greig

Originally Posted by CutMeMick

The point deduction rule has always been in effect it's been used from the begining.
This same situation happened with Lopez-Alvarez, Lloyd-Vaca and as you stated JCC-Randall.

It's not the fairest of rules but it wasn't just made up out of the blue.

About the doctor asking JCC. If you watch Arce-Hussein, JMM-Jaca or any other bout with a head butt the doctor more times then often will ask a serious of questions raging from how he feels to if he can see or if his head hurts, can he continue..... The questions he asked IMO were not out of line and or something that's ilegal. Ultimately the doctor has the final saying. I think the doctor should have told Mills he's OK to continue THEN once JCC turned to Mills and would say something like 'I can't go on' or whatever then Mills would have had to call the fight off on retirement by JCC. Thus making Randall the winner. I do think that situation was not handled accordingly.

A similar situtation BUT really blatant and full on robbery can be seen in Armando Muniz vs. Jose Napoles I, when Napoles suffers a cut and the fight is stopped by the doctor. They go to the scorecards and Sulaiman, the judges and the ref. get together and huddle up and award the victory to Napoles.

About the 3rd fight how can you say he was a name trial horse. Randall went on to have one of the best trilogies with Coggi. Have you ever seen the fights? Randall went on to become the WBA Champ.
His career went on the decline when he was upset by Khali.

You can't blame JCC for rematching Taylor I mean he fought Randall twice back to back, and needed to get back in with Taylor after the way their fight ended.

After the Khali fight, in 1997, Randall fought 14 times before the Chavez fight in 2004 - he lost 9 of them.

Both guys were shot to shit before that third fight Mick.

I missunderstood your comment I thought you meant Randall became a trial horse right after the fight....
I see now that you meant that when they fought the 3rd fight Randall was already a trial horse.

CC

Great topic, this fight has always bothered me. I do believe at the time the WBC had this ridiculous rule if you sustained a cut due to a headbut you would get a point deducted. It was supposed to "even things out" being that one guy was penalized with a cut. Nevertheless, Randall was completley dominating the fight. The thing that always got me was the ring doctor said Chavez could continue but Chavez said he didn't want to continue. I would think this should be a victory for Randall.

Originally Posted by CutMeMick

Originally Posted by Greig

Originally Posted by CutMeMick

The point deduction rule has always been in effect it's been used from the begining.
This same situation happened with Lopez-Alvarez, Lloyd-Vaca and as you stated JCC-Randall.

It's not the fairest of rules but it wasn't just made up out of the blue.

About the doctor asking JCC. If you watch Arce-Hussein, JMM-Jaca or any other bout with a head butt the doctor more times then often will ask a serious of questions raging from how he feels to if he can see or if his head hurts, can he continue..... The questions he asked IMO were not out of line and or something that's ilegal. Ultimately the doctor has the final saying. I think the doctor should have told Mills he's OK to continue THEN once JCC turned to Mills and would say something like 'I can't go on' or whatever then Mills would have had to call the fight off on retirement by JCC. Thus making Randall the winner. I do think that situation was not handled accordingly.

A similar situtation BUT really blatant and full on robbery can be seen in Armando Muniz vs. Jose Napoles I, when Napoles suffers a cut and the fight is stopped by the doctor. They go to the scorecards and Sulaiman, the judges and the ref. get together and huddle up and award the victory to Napoles.

About the 3rd fight how can you say he was a name trial horse. Randall went on to have one of the best trilogies with Coggi. Have you ever seen the fights? Randall went on to become the WBA Champ.
His career went on the decline when he was upset by Khali.

You can't blame JCC for rematching Taylor I mean he fought Randall twice back to back, and needed to get back in with Taylor after the way their fight ended.

After the Khali fight, in 1997, Randall fought 14 times before the Chavez fight in 2004 - he lost 9 of them.

Both guys were shot to shit before that third fight Mick.

I missunderstood your comment I thought you meant Randall became a trial horse right after the fight....
I see now that you meant that when they fought the 3rd fight Randall was already a trial horse.

No worries Mick. I guess where I feel for Randall is that Chavez went onto make big money while he was toiling against Coggi and Khali in what were undoubtedly good fights but were not see by anyone other than hardcore fans. Also, I don't know what Frankie made for those fights but you can bet it wasn't what Chavez made for DLH.

DLH/Randall was a fight that definitely should have been made. I remember watching a telecast of a DLH fight and Buddy McGirt was doing some commentary (I think it was Oscar/Ruelas or Oscar/Leija??)
Somebody brings up Frankies name as a potential DLH fight and McGirt just laughs and goes 'Frankie would take him to school'

Originally Posted by the wiz

CC

Great topic, this fight has always bothered me. I do believe at the time the WBC had this ridiculous rule if you sustained a cut due to a headbut you would get a point deducted. It was supposed to "even things out" being that one guy was penalized with a cut. Nevertheless, Randall was completley dominating the fight. The thing that always got me was the ring doctor said Chavez could continue but Chavez said he didn't want to continue. I would think this should be a victory for Randall.

Thanks Wiz. CC.

I agree, if the doctor deemed the cut ok, which he said he did, and Chavez quits - then it's TKO to Randall, end of story.

Still - it was Don King's card, Don King's fight and Don King's fighter - good bet it was Don King's doctor as well...

CC You are right good fight but very unjust. It reminded of Tyson later trying to do the same thing against Holyfield in their first fight as a way to get out. I am sure he must have seen this fight and was hoping Don would help him out. The doctor and referee would not buy it so then Tyson just took the beating.