I have to take issue with 3 of the 5 listed in this column.

There's a big difference between a robbery and a controversial decision.

Robberies occur when one fighter dominates another and doesn't get the decision. Robberies occur when there is no way you could make a logical argument for the other guy winning. Robberies are the worst boxing decisions.

Mayweather-Castillo, Oscar-Pernell, Oscar-Tito.... those weren't robberies, they were close fights where you could make an argument that the right guy won. For example, I thought Pernell beat Oscar 114-112, but there were a ton of close rounds in that fight that could have gone either way. Oscar winning the fight didn't constitute a robbery.

Lewis-Holyfield I was an outright robbery and a much worse decision than fights like Mayweather-Castillo and Oscar-Pernell.