A fighters true record

So much talk, not only this weekend, but in general these days regarding robberies and perceived bad decisions. We do see our fair shar. So, name a fighter, who has benefited or been victim of some dodgy decisions, and tell me their true record.

Example

Mannys record is now 54-4-2

But if you think he won last night, and lost two of the three JMM fights it would be 53-5-2

You get my drift.

Here is your chance to put out a record that you think is true

I will do one.


Carl Froch

Just can't give him the Dirrell fight. I want to, but my eyes saw a loss.

So for me, his record should be 28-3

Manny should be 53.6.1 as I had his losing all 3 to JMM.

Brandon Rios - should be 31-1-1 after his "win" against Abril

mathysse should be 32-0-0 and zab and alexander should both have a extra L. bute should also have a extra L from the andrade fight

Its pretty marginal. I think there should be an acceptance that some fights are slose and go either way. In that instance I go with the decision. But there some fights that are hard to justify the scores. But if you just to concensus then I dont think Mayweather or Marciano would be unbeaten for example.

manos de piedra wrote:Its pretty marginal. I think there should be an acceptance that some fights are slose and go either way. In that instance I go with the decision. But there some fights that are hard to justify the scores. But if you just to concensus then I dont think Mayweather or Marciano would be unbeaten for example.

Come on man, it's like you're encouraging fence sitting. This is a bit of fun, a chance to correct scoring wrongs.

Mayweather arguably lost to Castillo, that 1 loss would have changed the whole of boxing IMO, fight wise that is.

Great shout that Davidemore

manos de piedra wrote:Its pretty marginal. I think there should be an acceptance that some fights are slose and go either way. In that instance I go with the decision. But there some fights that are hard to justify the scores. But if you just to concensus then I dont think Mayweather or Marciano would be unbeaten for example.

i agree, the first two manny v jmm both were very close while the third wasnt. similar with hopkins v calzaghe, where in my book calzaghe would have lost his 0, i had hopkins just like jmm in the second but cant grumble either way too much as they were so close.

Yeah Money Mayweather 41-1 in my opinion. Castillo beat him, very narrowly, first time round.

Tremendous idea for a thread, by the way.

I think there are a huge amount of fights that are innevetiabely capable of going either way and often enough I will see things differently from the judges.

Leonard is a pretty huge one because he could quite easily be carrying losses to all three other members of the fab four which would affect his standing drastically I think.

i take your point manos... but he'd have got credit for the closeness of the hagler fight even had the decision gone the other way, and the second hearns fight was part of the senior tour - not like he gained much credit (rightly) for winning the duran rubber.

Apologies sean, as I can't be bothered to check the records, but whittaker's should have been unblemished until at least the oscar fight or possibly trinidad. Depending on your take on the mosley, whittaker, trinidad and sturm fights, oscars could be significantly better or worse!

Ali's would look different with an alternative take on the norton fights

Good grief, could you imagine Glen Johnson's record!!!

If I remember correctly the poor chap was jobbed a few times, the Clinton Woods fight springs to mind.

good call badger, i guess johnson and augustus are the 2 guys of recent times whose records really don't flatter them. Johnson got clearly jobbed a fair few times, but was also in a stack of very close fights...none of which he got the decision!

Manos, when the big guns like Leonard put it all on the line the results are more often than not razor tight. Interstingly i think Lewis is one of the few ATG's that never won a dubious decision. In fact, apart from the robbery with Holybankrupt, his record, like the belts he held, is undistuped.

davidemore wrote:Manos, when the big guns like Leonard put it all on the line the results are more often than not razor tight. Interstingly i think Lewis is one of the few ATG's that never won a dubious decision. In fact, apart from the robbery with Holybankrupt, his record, like the belts he held, is undistuped.

Ray Mercer?

Andriy Kotelnyk should be viewed an awful lot better.

Should probably be 35-1 as opposed to 31-4-1 after being shafted a fair few times. Would probably still be active to if hadn't been for his shocking treatment. Especially against Alexander.

De la hoya would be about the same with a few changes

Whitaker- loss
Strum- loss
Trinidad- win
Mosley II- no contest

Interesting soldier, very interesting, I think i need to go see that fight again...

The worst judges I have seen were in he Lennox Lewis against Holyfield fight. That was a complete fix. Lewis won that by a mile! So I think that result should be changed in the record books. Its silly to call that fight a draw. Surely you should appeal to have scores like that overturned?

There was a fellow who fought Foreman that was also a con job fight. Foreman should have won. And the Polish guy that beat Bowe from pillar to post!

I dont care what anyone says, but Hagler beat Leonard in the 1980s. It wasnt even close! Didnt one of the judges admit to being biased?

Fists of Fury wrote:Tremendous idea for a thread, by the way.

cheers fists!

Pernell Whittaker never really lost until he was past it - against Trinidad.

I think if the Ramirez, JCC and De La Hoya (legitimately close one) fights had been scored correctly he'd make most peoples ATG top 10 p4p.

The problem with going down a road like this is with the passing of time fights that were in reality nothing more than close fights gain the repuation as highway robberies. A classiv example of this is Calzaghe Reid which was nothign more than a close fight that went the rigth way. Similarly there are actually far fewer outright robberies than we often claim, just to take some of the fights on here Hagler Leonard, DLH Trinidad and Calzaghe Hopkins all fall into the close enough to go either way category rather than robberies, evenwith Manny Marquez III I know of someone whose opinion I respect as much as anyone I know when it comes to boxing who had it a draw.

Whilst I would not argue we have not had our fair share of bad decisions recently would still maintain out and out robberies are far more infrequent than we often portray them.

And the Polish guy that beat Bowe from pillar to post!

Yeah, fancy disqualifying Golota for repeatedly punching Riddick in the 'nads. Bloody corrupt officials! It's political correctness gone mad, I tell you. FACT!

i agree rowley, i chucked de la hoya in as you can argue a case for him winning or losing all those fights, probably sturm is the only one where there is a strong consensus against him.

A poll on hagler leonard on the old bbc board, many moons ago, had a a slight edge to leonard, but near as dammit 50:50, with around 100 votes cast. But some (like gordy!) think the fight wasn't even close

milkyboy wrote:i agree rowley, i chucked de la hoya in as you can argue a case for him winning or losing all those fights, probably sturm is the only one where there is a strong consensus against him.

A poll on hagler leonard on the old bbc board, many moons ago, had a a slight edge to leonard, but near as dammit 50:50, with around 100 votes cast. But some (like gordy!) think the fight wasn't even close

The Ring magazine had the Hagler v Leonard fight 119-110 Leonard.

Atila wrote:

milkyboy wrote:i agree rowley, i chucked de la hoya in as you can argue a case for him winning or losing all those fights, probably sturm is the only one where there is a strong consensus against him.

A poll on hagler leonard on the old bbc board, many moons ago, had a a slight edge to leonard, but near as dammit 50:50, with around 100 votes cast. But some (like gordy!) think the fight wasn't even close

The Ring magazine had the Hagler v Leonard fight 119-110 Leonard.

shows what they know atila... and i'm fairly sure you didn't agree with them then or now

Atila wrote:

milkyboy wrote:i agree rowley, i chucked de la hoya in as you can argue a case for him winning or losing all those fights, probably sturm is the only one where there is a strong consensus against him.

A poll on hagler leonard on the old bbc board, many moons ago, had a a slight edge to leonard, but near as dammit 50:50, with around 100 votes cast. But some (like gordy!) think the fight wasn't even close

The Ring magazine had the Hagler v Leonard fight 119-110 Leonard.

The same Ring Magazine that fixed its own rankings to allow Don King to shoehorn his own fighters into the US Championships he arranged for ABC, if so you'll forgive me if I don't all this to sway my view of the outcome too greatly

Atila was just pointing out that there were some one eyed pro leonard views of the fight too, rowley. He thinks hagler won the flight and that leonard is an unpleasant stain on the duvet of humanity, so you can take it as read that he probably wasn't swayed by the ring's view either