boxing politics

what is your view?

I am an englishman and a supporter of David Haye - i dont think he beat Valuev, but it made more sense for boxing

I remember Jeff Lacy returning after the Calazaghi loss and clearly loosing against a russian (i think it was) but he was given the win, maybe that made more sense for boxing

Hatton lost to collazo, but won, i think that made more sense

I remember Craig Watson loosing to John ODonnel in a fight he won by 4 or 5 rounds if not more, ODonnell was the rising star tho, maybe it made more sense that he won

on Saturday night John Simpson lost to Stephen Smith in a fight he clearly won, smith the rising star

Did that make more sense for british boxing? are these all cases of boxing politics and judges perhaps being influenced by the Money fighter?

Saying John Smith clearly won didn't make sense...

pacquiao given a SD over marquez II, when he did not deserve the victory, is good for boxing because he's the bigger draw!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by milmascaras1

pacquiao given a SD over marquez II, when he did not deserve the victory, is good for boxing because he's the bigger draw!

---

http://forum.philboxing.com/download.php?id=2474

The big one for me was De la Hoya-Sturm when Felix outboxed the hell out of him but that was ruled in ODH's favor to make the Hopkins fight happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by koppas

Saying John Smith clearly won didn't make sense...

---

smith didnt win thicko

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

The big one for me was De la Hoya-Sturm when Felix outboxed the hell out of him but that was ruled in ODH's favor to make the Hopkins fight happen.

---

when it is right at the top, its almost understandable, i dont agree but i can accept it

giving odonnell over watson and smith over simpson i dont really get

I know Don King and the WBA have protected their heavyweights for the past 10 or so years

Speaking of Don King, he almost got the Tyson lost to Douglass overturned because of a supposedly long count. Now, that's boxing politics at it's finest!;D

Their is nothing more satisfying then an 'unknown' coming in and upsetting a favorite. Especially from another country,yep. Went there. And nothing worse than being blatantly robbed for the sake of a networks purse strings.

You're in the minority on some of those decisions, maybe your scoring isn't definitive

I don't think it's always politics, or even a fix like some might claim (although I have seen some absolute robberies) it's probably more fighter bias.

I find if I'm watching a fighter I like the look of, even if it's one I don't know, I seem to notice the stuff they do well easily. So if I was scoring they would have a clear advantage. I think that sub conciously judges just like certain boxers or styles.

You could have picked a few better examples! ;) Haye/ Valuev only ever had one winner. The robbery there was the fight itself!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

Their is nothing more satisfying then an 'unknown' coming in and upsetting a favorite. Especially from another country,yep. Went there. And nothing worse than being blatantly robbed for the sake of a networks purse strings.

---

I love that!

Watching Golden Boy have a latest star smashed up gives me great pleasure. Even Mitchell vs Katsidis to an extent because it was in his teams stadium.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

You're in the minority on some of those decisions, maybe your scoring isn't definitive

---

which ones do you disagree with?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by koppas

Saying John Smith clearly won didn't make sense...

---

smith didnt win thicko

---

a) Er, he did. He has the belt to prove it...

b) John Simpson didn't CLEARLY win - it could have gone either way. Even a draw would've been a fair result.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

You're in the minority on some of those decisions, maybe your scoring isn't definitive

---

which ones do you disagree with?

---

Haye won
Hatton won
Smith-Simpson could have gone either way

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

You're in the minority on some of those decisions, maybe your scoring isn't definitive

---

which ones do you disagree with?

---

Haye won
Hatton won
Smith-Simpson could have gone either way

---

you honestly think hatton won?

ive seen valuev loose to ruiz and hollyfield, i dont think he lost to haye, but i agree perhaps that one is a little less definate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by koppas

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by koppas

Saying John Smith clearly won didn't make sense...

---

smith didnt win thicko

---

a) Er, he did. He has the belt to prove it...

b) John Simpson didn't CLEARLY win - it could have gone either way. Even a draw would've been a fair result.

---

chill dude, its not an english lesson you knew what i meant

in my opinion simpson clearly won, perhaps that fight can be looked at by a none biast person and they might think simpson lost, unlikely but i can accept it