How I define a robbery

[Seano]

Today, a robbery is any score that not identical to the one you came up with or when the guy from your country doesn't win on the road.

 

[Seano]

A lot of people had it either 115-111 or 114-112 for Fury, almost every media score I saw was one of those two.

I posted media scores yesterday and they were all over the place. More had it even than for Fury.

 

[NoBiasJustMMA]

I posted media scores yesterday and they were all over the place. More had it even than for Fury.

I'm at work so I can't post from Reddit but the media scores listed on r/boxing were heavily, heavily in favor of 115-111, and 114-112 for Fury. There was like 2-3 draw scores and like 2-3 scores for Wilder and like 20+ for Fury.

I have read what you have to say about the match and I don't really value your opinion on boxing cause I don't think you're very good at scoring boxing matches.

 

[XThe GreatestX]

Based on your criteria, Fury got robbed. Wilder only won rounds 2, 9 and 12. If you want to be super generous and give him the next closest round he lost then he would have won 2, 7, 9 and 12 and still lost by 2 points. Fury got robbed.

Thats fine. Your opinion and your entitled to it

Like i said in the op...i had fury winning 9-3. The issue is from rounds 2-to like 6 or 7 there were quite a few rounds where not a lot happened other then wilder missing punches and fury showboating

Scoring it with the 4 criteria, it becomes a lot more interesting. And closer

 

[aries]

The "robbery" in the fury fight does not rise from the end result quite like you wrote but how Rochino ended there. He scored the first 4 rounds for Wilder and would have had a Wilder win even without the knockdowns. It is a clear pattern of corrupted scoring. He had an agenda to get Wilder ahead.

Most people dont cry out against the end result but him. Lets call it as it is. A corrupt judge paid to guarantee one scoring vote. No other way around.

Exactly. There were some people on here scoring it for Wilder 115-111. I can't see what fight they were watching to achieve that score. Nobody is saying that the judge who had it even was corrupt as 113-113 is possible as a variation. But 115-111 Wilder is fucking ridiculous.

 

[Seano]

Thats fine. Your opinion and your entitled to it

Like i said in the op...i had fury winning 9-3. The issue is from rounds 2-to like 6 or 7 there were quite a few rounds where not a lot happened other then wilder missing punches and fury showboating

Scoring it with the 4 criteria, it becomes a lot more interesting. And closer

So how do KDs factor into your definition?

 

[XThe GreatestX]

So how do KDs factor into your definition?

makes it much more muddled up. I think there is a margin of error tbh where if its close enough you can't complain about someones card. Depends on the fight

To bring it to the Fury-Wilder fight.

Yeah I thought it was 9-3. But with 2 Kd's, and at least 3 rounds from the early-mid portion of the fight, where not much happened you get into that margin of error where its not inconceivable to have it a draw. I still don't think Wilder won. But a draw is not out of the question.

 

[djacobox372]

I define a robbery if a scorecard shows that a judge was obviously gotten to or biased. Which is true in this case, 115-111 wilder is unexcusable.

So even though I don't mind the outcome of a draw, it was obviously a robbery.

 

[TeenageMutantLesnarTurtle]

I had Fury winning 9 or 10 rounds.

 

[PeakyBlinder]

I haven't been screaming robbery, but fury definitely won that fight