Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The Aftermath of Casamayor-Santa Cruz
FightHype Community > BOXING HYPE > Boxing
Jack 1000
To be fair,

I have not seen the fight, but will plan to get it in the near future. Where do you guys rank the verdict in terms of other bad decisions? I mean REALLY bad decisions of recent times, such as Burton-Augustus, Holyfield-Lewis I, and so forth? If you can, try not to compare it to "close" fights that you might have disagreed with the verdict, but those fights in which no one on the face of the planet saw who won other than at least two of the three official judges.

I wonder if Fightnews or any others might publish the master scoresheet?

Who promotes Santa Cruz? Is he also with Golden Boy Promotions?

Was there anything going into the fight or postfight before the decision was read that might suggest to the viewer that Santa Cruz was about to get robbed?

Any statements from the judges or Ron Stevens? The head of the New York State Athletic Commission? Post what is known.

Jack
BigG
Santa Cruz is with Top Rank.
The Original MrFactor
It was bad a making Tyson/Spinks, a Spinks UD. This robbery was so clearly cut. I dont think Casamayor won more than 1 round. And that 1 round is a stretch. I would certainly support an investigation on this one.
Chi-Town
As usual when someone is about to get robbed they took a longer time than usual to tabulate the scores and get them to Buffer.

QUOTE(Jack 1000 @ Nov 14 2007, 02:37 AM) [snapback]365135[/snapback]
To be fair,

I have not seen the fight, but will plan to get it in the near future. Where do you guys rank the verdict in terms of other bad decisions? I mean REALLY bad decisions of recent times, such as Burton-Augustus, Holyfield-Lewis I, and so forth? If you can, try not to compare it to "close" fights that you might have disagreed with the verdict, but those fights in which no one on the face of the planet saw who won other than at least two of the three official judges.

I wonder if Fightnews or any others might publish the master scoresheet?

Who promotes Santa Cruz? Is he also with Golden Boy Promotions?

Was there anything going into the fight or postfight before the decision was read that might suggest to the viewer that Santa Cruz was about to get robbed?
Any statements from the judges or Ron Stevens? The head of the New York State Athletic Commission? Post what is known.

Jack

Bazooka Limon
QUOTE(biggeorge89 @ Nov 14 2007, 02:44 AM) [snapback]365136[/snapback]
Santa Cruz is with Top Rank.

He is with golden boy, he left top rank few months ago
Jack 1000
The WBC at their convention has mandated a rematch. From what I remember, following that, the winner gets the first crack at their champion David Diaz.

Jack
BigJuicyHog
Well, if we are lucky we wont have to see much more of Casamayor. He is boring and dirty, although I have a feeling he will win the rematch clearly.
Fitz
One of the only fights I did enjoy of Casamayor is when he tore Corrales up in the first fight. That was a good fight.
BigG
That was prime Casa...this Casa that fought a finished Chico the 3rd time and Santa Cruz is a shell...
BrutalBodyShots
QUOTE(Fitz @ Nov 15 2007, 03:58 AM) [snapback]365237[/snapback]
One of the only fights I did enjoy of Casamayor is when he tore Corrales up in the first fight. That was a good fight.


That was a very exciting fight. I actually think it was very even at the time it was stopped, and I personally thought the momentum was shifting toward Corrales. I'll never forget Corrales begging for "1 more round" on his stool.

Jack 1000
Who DOESN'T want to see Casamayor KTFO in a rematch? Shit, his arrogance comes through in post fight interviews as he thinks he won!!!???? LOL! A decision considered to be the among the worst in the history of the sport? He'll probably find a way to win the rematch legit. OR they will rob Cassa and set up a third fight for "Revenge of the Robberies." or some shit.

But regardless, he is so painfully boring to watch now. As pointed out those few exciting fights were long ago.

What I want to add is that all this talk about changing scoring systems won't do shit. I don't want Open Scoring, half point rounds, consensus scoring, or any of that shit. I want BETTER ACCOUNTABILITY and severe repercussions for judges who submit hideous scorecards. I am not talking about "close fights" were the wrong guy according to 50% got the decision and the other 50% agree with the decision. I am talking about issues where 90% or more of boxing writers, historians, and ringside reporters disagree with the official verdict. I would propose:

1.) Mandatory meetings with the state commissions for the judges in question to explain their scoring and to review the fight before an investigative committee. Officials who don't show up for the meeting get their licenses revoked.

2.) A mandatory 1 year suspension from judging. You can reapply, after that, but you must take and pass judge training seminars and reappear before the commission who suspended you. You turn in another card that warrants an investigation, you are banned from judging for life.

3.) Judges sign a waiver statement before any fights stating that any findings of bribery or misconduct in scoring severe enough to be called before a review board could result in a suspension or revocation of license.

This way, officials would be held under a microscope more closely than they are now and would know that their conduct may be called into question at any time. Again this would not be for close decisions where a judge sided with the wrong fighter. But decisions severe to warrant such investigations need to be brought to the forefront. Jean Williams, who had Holyfield ahead in the first Lewis fight, where no one else had him winning, is still active and judging today. That's just not kosher. While there was no conclusive proof of wrongdoing other than her sheer incompetence, one has to question, why is she still being allowed to judge fights?

Jack
Snoop
QUOTE(BrutalBodyShots @ Nov 15 2007, 04:09 PM) [snapback]365281[/snapback]
That was a very exciting fight. I actually think it was very even at the time it was stopped, and I personally thought the momentum was shifting toward Corrales. I'll never forget Corrales begging for "1 more round" on his stool.

I wonder what woulda happened if they gave him that round..
Fitz
QUOTE(BrutalBodyShots @ Nov 16 2007, 03:09 AM) [snapback]365281[/snapback]
That was a very exciting fight. I actually think it was very even at the time it was stopped, and I personally thought the momentum was shifting toward Corrales. I'll never forget Corrales begging for "1 more round" on his stool.


It's been a while since I saw that fight but I think Casamayor dropped him 2-3 times (pretty sure it was 2) and Casamayor I believe got dropped as well in that fight, but the early rounds Casa won were pretty dominant off memory. I do remember Corrales having a bit more success in the last couple of rounds, but Casamayor was dominant early. Yeah I remember Corrales begging for one more round, he had a cut inside of his lip and was bleeding inside his mouth which was the major problem.
Elijah
New York State Athletic Commission Chairman Ron Scott Stevens has already spoken to judges Frank Lombardi and Ron McNair in regard to their controversial scoring in the November 10 WBC interim lightweight championship fight between Joel Casamayor and Jose Armando Santa Cruz at Madison Square Garden. Both McNair and Lombardi scored the bout 114-113 for Casamayor, although most observers had Santa-Cruz winning a wide decision. Stevens also plans to speak to judge Tony Paolillo, who scored an all too-close 114-113 for Santa Cruz. All three will be asked to come in to speak to the full commission (Chairman Stevens, and Commissioners Melvina Lathan and Marc Cornstein) to discuss their criteria for scoring a round. The scoring was particularly puzzling in the that the NYSAC has recently held two seminars on how to judge fights properly. Nothing can be done at this point to reverse the original verdict, but the WBC has already ordered a rematch between Casamayor and Santa-Cruz.
Big Slim Sweet
Casamayor did dominate the first three rounds of that fight with a knockdown to boot. Then he dropped Diego again right off to start the fourth only to get put down HARD a few seconds later. Casa's legs and arms were twitching for a second when he went down (ala Jones-Griffin 2) though he was still somehow sitting upright and did a nice job of recovering. The 5th was pretty uneventful but then in the 6th Diego had him in big trouble again the final 20 seconds before the doc stopped the fight between rounds.

Knowing now what we learned later about Corrales as a fighter (sounds kinda weird considering he's gone), it's not inconceivable at all to think that if given one more round he would have finished Casa off. Never know though.
BrutalBodyShots
QUOTE(Big Slim @ Nov 15 2007, 04:40 PM) [snapback]365322[/snapback]
Casamayor did dominate the first three rounds of that fight with a knockdown to boot. Then he dropped Diego again right off to start the fourth only to get put down HARD a few seconds later. Casa's legs and arms were twitching for a second when he went down (ala Jones-Griffin 2) though he was still somehow sitting upright and did a nice job of recovering. The 5th was pretty uneventful but then in the 6th Diego had him in big trouble again the final 20 seconds before the doc stopped the fight between rounds.

Knowing now what we learned later about Corrales as a fighter (sounds kinda weird considering he's gone), it's not inconceivable at all to think that if given one more round he would have finished Casa off. Never know though.


Yup. I remember Corrales putting Casamayor on stilts again toward the end of the last round right before it was stopped. That was one of the things that made the stoppage a little irritating because half a minute earlier it looked like Casamayor could be put out of there.

kidbazooka1
IMO the robbery ranks up there with the worst but because the fight was of little to no signifgance it will fly under the radar.
caneman
i always liked casa's skills but i think he is done, pacman & dias would destroy him IMO aggressive.gif
BrutalBodyShots
QUOTE(caneman @ Nov 16 2007, 05:31 AM) [snapback]365409[/snapback]
i always liked casa's skills but i think he is done, pacman & dias would destroy him IMO aggressive.gif


No doubt he doesn't see the end of the fight against either of those guys.

Boxingjunkie
This was a horable decision. Santa Cruz clearly won this fight. It has to rank up there towards the top of the biggest robberies in history. Casamayor will probably come in better shape for the rematch and win the decision. I was suprised by how slow Santa Cruz's hands were, but he still landed easily on Casamayor who was always a slick fighter. Maybe Larry Hazzard can get a job for the NY Athletic Commision and help clean them up.

Boxingjunkie
Imperius3
Okay,

I watched this fight (I've watched it about three times now), and I expected to see a dominant performance by Santa Cruz, a complete whitewashing. I did not see that at all though. I thought this fight was very close. It was a very ugly fight no doubt, and it was by far one of the worst fights I've seen Casamayor in. Casamayor looked very old, and he's not that hard to hit anymore (although he did still make Santa Cruz miss a lot). Santa Cruz's activity and timing was very good, but he was not that accurate and it cost him getting countered. There were rounds where Casamayor landed very clean shots to Santa Cruz's head (like rounds 5, 6, and 11), and there were rounds where Casamayor landed hard punches with more authority (like rounds 7, 10, and 12). I think the heavy negative commentary from HBO swayed some viewers, and the fact that the fight was pretty ugly might have skewed some viewers as well. Overall I was disappointed with the fight and even though Casamayor held a lot, he did land some good jabs and left straights to Santa Cruz's head and body, which I believe were subtle and overlooked. Here is my scorecard:

Round 1: Santa Cruz 10-9
Round 2: Santa Cruz 10-9
Round 3: Santa Cruz 10-9
Round 4: Santa Cruz 10-9
Round 5: Casamayor 10-9
Round 6: Casamayor 10-9
Round 7: Casamayor 10-9
Round 8: Santa Cruz 10-9
Round 9: Santa Cruz 10-9
Round 10: Casamayor 10-9
Round 11: Casamayor 10-9
Round 12: Casamayor 10-9

Six rounds each. 114-114.

I had the fight a draw. I don't have a problem with people scoring the fight for Santa Cruz since many of the rounds were close. I also don't think the fight was one of the worst robberies of all time like some are saying. This is my view on it, and I'd be more than happy to breakdown the rounds with anyone.
Southeastpaw
Wow Imperius.

Even the crowd knew who won and they can't hear the commentary. Trust me, I do not pay attention to these commentators. I even turn them down some of the time. But there is no commentary that would justify that decision. That was absolutely horrible. Santa-Cruz was the aggressor, landed more, and had a knockdown. You gotta love the way Casa was jumping into Santa-Cruz with both arms open wide lookin for a hug. That was entertaining right there.
Byrd Man
wasn't there a "knockdown" in round 1? A flash knockdown or something? If so that shoulda been a 10-8 round Imperius....
Imperius3
QUOTE(Byrd Man @ Nov 18 2007, 01:37 AM) [snapback]365680[/snapback]
wasn't there a "knockdown" in round 1? A flash knockdown or something? If so that shoulda been a 10-8 round Imperius....


I gave Santa Cruz a 10-9 round since it was a round Casamayor was winning and since the knockdown was more of a balance issue from a blocked punch.
Imperius3
QUOTE(Southeastpaw @ Nov 18 2007, 12:37 AM) [snapback]365673[/snapback]
Wow Imperius.

Even the crowd knew who won and they can't hear the commentary. Trust me, I do not pay attention to these commentators. I even turn them down some of the time. But there is no commentary that would justify that decision. That was absolutely horrible. Santa-Cruz was the aggressor, landed more, and had a knockdown. You gotta love the way Casa was jumping into Santa-Cruz with both arms open wide lookin for a hug. That was entertaining right there.


There were people clapping in the crowd too. Santa Cruz fought well, but he only won 6 rounds in my view. And no the fight was not entertaining, but we all know we don't score a fight based on that. What was your card?
Southeastpaw
I cannot remember the actual rounds. But I thought that Casamayor was winning the 1st round, but the ref scored the knockdown as just that, so you have to give it to Santa-Cruz. And if it was a ten must scoring system, it has to be 10-8.

I remember believing that Casamayor had a case for winning two more rounds. A case. But other than that I thought it was a pretty dominate, but boring performance for Santa-Cruz. I thought it was a very easy fight to score a winner for. There are even other writers from other sites saying it was the worst robbery they had seen in 25 years.
Jack 1000
QUOTE(Southeastpaw @ Nov 18 2007, 10:54 PM) [snapback]365917[/snapback]
I cannot remember the actual rounds. But I thought that Casamayor was winning the 1st round, but the ref scored the knockdown as just that, so you have to give it to Santa-Cruz. And if it was a ten must scoring system, it has to be 10-8.

I remember believing that Casamayor had a case for winning two more rounds. A case. But other than that I thought it was a pretty dominate, but boring performance for Santa-Cruz. I thought it was a very easy fight to score a winner for. There are even other writers from other sites saying it was the worst robbery they had seen in 25 years.


Press agents and writers, to echo what Southeast has said, have cited this fight as one of the worst decisions in boxing history.

Jack
Imperius3
QUOTE(Southeastpaw @ Nov 18 2007, 10:54 PM) [snapback]365917[/snapback]
I cannot remember the actual rounds. But I thought that Casamayor was winning the 1st round, but the ref scored the knockdown as just that, so you have to give it to Santa-Cruz. And if it was a ten must scoring system, it has to be 10-8.

I remember believing that Casamayor had a case for winning two more rounds. A case. But other than that I thought it was a pretty dominate, but boring performance for Santa-Cruz. I thought it was a very easy fight to score a winner for. There are even other writers from other sites saying it was the worst robbery they had seen in 25 years.


It doesn't have to be a 10-8 round. Even Kellerman and Steward were saying they would have scored that round 10-9 since it was not a dominant round by Santa Cruz, Casamayor was winning the round, and the knockdown was disputable. You have a 10-10 round, take away a point, and it's 10-9.

I have seen worse decisions.
Southeastpaw
It seems that you are the one listening to the commentators. lol. Just messin.

But for real. They aren't the officials. I thought that it was a rule that when a fighter is knocked down, which is what it was officially called, that the rules stated that the fighter that gets knocked down automatically gets 2 points deducted from the 10 no matter what in a 10 point-must system. Or did I miss something and have been led in the wrong direction this entire time I have been following the sport?

And out of curiosity, what decisions did you think was worse than this one?
Imperius3
QUOTE(Southeastpaw @ Nov 19 2007, 09:07 AM) [snapback]365953[/snapback]
It seems that you are the one listening to the commentators. lol. Just messin.

But for real. They aren't the officials. I thought that it was a rule that when a fighter is knocked down, which is what it was officially called, that the rules stated that the fighter that gets knocked down automatically gets 2 points deducted from the 10 no matter what in a 10 point-must system. Or did I miss something and have been led in the wrong direction this entire time I have been following the sport?

And out of curiosity, what decisions did you think was worse than this one?


You don't have to automatically deduct two points. It's been done before. I wouldn't have a problem with a 114-113 scorecard for Cruz though either.

Whitaker-Chavez, Lewis-Holyfield I, Augustus-Burton I, and Quartey-Forrest were worse decisions, IMO.
Southeastpaw
I hear ya. I still think this was a worse robbery than the ones you mentioned. But those were some bad ones as well. Some thought the Quartey fight was justified, but I thought it was a robbery as well.
BigG
I love Bazooka Quartey. I wanted him to knock Forrest Out...but that Forrest fight wasnt a robbery...Could've gone either way. But I feel he was robbed vs De La Hoya..
Southeastpaw
I wanted Ike to KO DLH so bad. But I had that fight pretty even going down the stretch. DLH sealed the deal in that last round IMO. In the Forrest fight. Ike was applying the pressure and was the aggressor landing the better shots, from what I remember anyhow. I thought it was a clear cut win for him. BUT it has been a while.
BigG
I had Quartey winning by 3 points. DLH just ate Bazookas jab for most of the rounds.
Big Slim Sweet
QUOTE(Imperius3 @ Nov 19 2007, 03:25 PM) [snapback]366011[/snapback]
Whitaker-Chavez, Lewis-Holyfield I, Augustus-Burton I, and Quartey-Forrest were worse decisions, IMO.

I wanted Ike to win too and thought that he did but that fight was fairly close. Nowhere near as bad a decision as this past one. The others you mention are all in the same league though. Whitaker-Chavez was terrible. Lewis-Holyfield I was even worse. And Augusus-Burton was the absolute worst decision I've ever seen.
Jack 1000
QUOTE(biggeorge89 @ Nov 19 2007, 02:02 PM) [snapback]366026[/snapback]
I had Quartey winning by 3 points. DLH just ate Bazookas jab for most of the rounds.



I had Ike by 1 point.

Jack
Southeastpaw
You know, this is just makin me appreciate how good a fighter Vargas actually was pre-Tito. Ike was Solid and Vargas won hands down and also beat Winky. I think Vargas gets a raw deal from most of these posters on here.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.