Close fight would automatically mean robbery these days. Its a crying shame.
Close fight would automatically mean robbery these days. Its a crying shame.
Good post.
I agree 100%.
people won't change though.![]()
Agreed, robbery is the first Lewis v Holyfield, not Cotto v Clottey
Do not let success go to your head and do not let failure get to your heart.
Clottey could have fought more aggressive especially when you have for 9 rounds a badly cut Cotto. The fight was close and I personally was astonished how Clottey refused to capitalize on the cut. Cotto had vision problems and couldn't see the right hand all night. I think the heart Cotto showed and the lack of heart or intelligence Clottey showed played a part in the scoring of the judges. Clottey complained every chance he had while Cotto refused to let a very bad cut end the fight. I don't think many fighters would have fought on with that much of a disability. That cut was bad, Cotto fought on, and I think it played a part in the scoring. Not saying Cotto was given the fight because of that but in a close fight something like this plays a factor.
It won't change... One good example is, up to these days, we still hear people crying "robbery" in JMM's fights with PAC... Those were close fights...
.
If you want to talk about robberies in their career just take a look at Whittaker-Chavez or Whittaker-Delahoya.
Good post!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks