I actually think it ranks with:
Mayweather v Castillo I, Barerra v Morales I and Holyfield v Lewis I
As one of the worst dec ive seen live.
Printable View
I actually think it ranks with:
Mayweather v Castillo I, Barerra v Morales I and Holyfield v Lewis I
As one of the worst dec ive seen live.
Youre right those 3 were terrible decisions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Markusdarkus
I dont think Oscar - Tito ranks with them though
How was Mayweather vs Castillo 1 a terrible decision ? i only had Castillo winning by 1 point, but there were quite alot of close rounds. And you could make an arguement that either fight won 7 rounds. And i think Mayweather done very well considering he had a bad soulder injury.Quote:
Originally Posted by Markusdarkus
Barerra is one of my favorites but again how was it a terrible decision ? the knockdown was BS and shouldn't have been called, but even with the knockdown its still a very close fight. I had Barrera winning because he landed the harder shots.
But in no way was it a terrible decision. And considering Barerra got a controversial win in the 2nd fight, i think it was fair that were 1-1 until the 3rd fight which Barrera proved he was the better man without any controversy.
I totally agree with Lewis vs Holyfield 1 that was indeed a robbery, Holyfield at best only won 3 rounds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBHow was Mayweather vs Castillo 1 a terrible decision ? i only had Castillo winning by 1 point, but there were quite alot of close rounds. And you could make an arguement that either fight won 7 rounds. And i think Mayweather done very well considering he had a bad soulder injury.Quote:
Originally Posted by Markusdarkus
Barerra is one of my favorites but again how was it a terrible decision ? the knockdown was BS and shouldn't have been called, but even with the knockdown its still a very close fight. I had Barrera winning because he landed the harder shots.
But in no way was it a terrible decision. And considering Barerra got a controversial win in the 2nd fight, i think it was fair that were 1-1 until the 3rd fight which Barrera proved he was the better man without any controversy.
I totally agree with Lewis vs Holyfield 1 that was indeed a robbery, Holyfield at best only won 3 rounds.
I love how subjective scoring is.
But because Barerra got a gift in the rematch doesnt mean the first result was in anyway just.
And i thought Castillo was up 4pts maybe 5. 100 more power shots 150 more shots landed. i know compubox is not to be taken as a sure but mahone!
4 or 5 points is a joke i've never seen anyone have that score, except for Harold Ledderman and his scoring is very questionable to say the least. Castillo done nothing in the first 5 rounds. You could make an argument that Mayweather swept the first 5 rounds, then won atleast another 2 rounds.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkusdarkusQuote:
Originally Posted by ICBHow was Mayweather vs Castillo 1 a terrible decision ? i only had Castillo winning by 1 point, but there were quite alot of close rounds. And you could make an arguement that either fight won 7 rounds. And i think Mayweather done very well considering he had a bad soulder injury.Quote:
Originally Posted by Markusdarkus
Barerra is one of my favorites but again how was it a terrible decision ? the knockdown was BS and shouldn't have been called, but even with the knockdown its still a very close fight. I had Barrera winning because he landed the harder shots.
But in no way was it a terrible decision. And considering Barerra got a controversial win in the 2nd fight, i think it was fair that were 1-1 until the 3rd fight which Barrera proved he was the better man without any controversy.
I totally agree with Lewis vs Holyfield 1 that was indeed a robbery, Holyfield at best only won 3 rounds.
I love how subjective scoring is.
But because Barerra got a gift in the rematch doesnt mean the first result was in anyway just.
And i thought Castillo was up 4pts maybe 5. 100 more power shots 150 more shots landed. i know compubox is not to be taken as a sure but mahone!
Especially the 11th which was very close, i had Mayweather winning 4 out of the first 5 rounds by the way, and i would love to know these so called 100 more power shots, because Castillo mostly threw arm punches on the inside. Im not saying he didn't land more power shots which he clearly did, but not as many as punchstats gave him credit for IMO. But Mayweather also used his jab to good effect, which some fans might of liked more.
Barerrea vs Morales 1 was a very close fight and without the KD, you could make an arguement that Morales may have won or earned a draw. Because even though Barrera landed the harder shots, he got out punched in some rounds, and some people might like the higher workrate of Morales. Rather than the more accurate harder shots of Barrera. But Barrera won by no more than 2 rounds, i only had him winning by 1 point.
The point im making is that none of these fights were terrible decision, and i hate it when people label close fights as robberies or bad decision's. Your 3rd example was the best because that clearly was a robbery.