Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Are fights still fixed
FightHype Community > BOXING HYPE > Boxing
Allmenjoi8
I was wondering if anyone thinks that fights are fixed? There have been a couple of fights where I think the loser was clearly cheated. If fights are fixed how do the judges justify their scores? Do yawl think fights have been fixed within the last five years, if so what fights were they?
gravytrain
you're talking about bad scorecards, that isn't a fixed fight. it's just bias. a fixed fight would mean someone is losing on purpose.
Hops
Yes! 100%.
Hops
Whoops! I posted in the wrong site. I thought this was the WWF website.
Allmenjoi8
QUOTE (gravytrain @ Jul 6 2011, 10:20 AM) *
you're talking about bad scorecards, that isn't a fixed fight. it's just bias. a fixed fight would mean someone is losing on purpose.

Bad score cards yes, but can the judges purposely give bad score cards, fixed fights, whether a fighter takes a fall or a judge(s) have their scores ridged?
TheFonz
I think it happens more often anybody wouid like to admit.
D-MARV
I'm certain that Pacquiao-Clottey was a fixed fight!

That fight happen way to quick and the extra 1 million dollars that Clottey received for his efforts was laughable!

Not to mention, Clottey hasn't fought since... I don't even know if he plans on fighting again.
gravytrain
QUOTE (Allmenjoi8 @ Jul 6 2011, 11:28 AM) *
Bad score cards yes, but can the judges purposely give bad score cards, fixed fights, whether a fighter takes a fall or a judge(s) have their scores ridged?


they could, it's kind of hard to know whether they're just biased or not though. it's kind of like Malignaggi vs Diaz I, Gale Van Hoy scored that fight real bad. but since it's someone from Texas in the ring and the crowd was going to back Diaz you don't know whether he got paid or he was just going off of emotion.
Lil-lightsout
QUOTE (D-MARV @ Jul 6 2011, 12:15 PM) *
I'm certain that Pacquiao-Clottey was a fixed fight!

That fight happen way to quick and the extra 1 million dollars that Clottey received for his efforts was laughable!

Not to mention, Clottey hasn't fought since... I don't even know if he plans on fighting again.


I can not remember if I read it or someone told me it's a known fact in Ghana he took a dive and he told reporters it or something like that.

Also...man boxing fights are fixed all the times. You got guys coming up with a little popularity and ticket sellers who get opponents who know not to win.
Praximo
Baldomir vs Alvarez
JONdaCON817
Fights are fixed...

Clottey deff seemed fixed... but i dont think the scorecards are fixed i juss think some judges are dumbasses.. but ghost punches for a KO victory probably happen more often then not...
BoxingWizard23
Pacman vs Clottey

Tyson vs Douglass

Maidana vs Khan

etc.
Sunmanken
Tyson vs Douglass? Thats absurd. What would Tyson have to gain by throwing that fight in his prime?
BoxingWizard23
QUOTE (Sunmanken @ Jul 6 2011, 08:50 PM) *
Tyson vs Douglass? Thats absurd. What would Tyson have to gain by throwing that fight in his prime?

The sad thing is, he wasn't in his prime anymore. After prison and after Cus died and Atlas left he wasn't the same "IRON" Mike. That Mike before all that was heavily dedicated, much more disciplined, trained religiously, and actually had a healthy group of people in his corner that spurned him. That Mike would have destroyed Douglass, people say to beat Tyson you can't fear him but the same people said this forget that fact that THE VERY BEST in HW ducked him when he made his run. It was only after Prison and him showing signs of mental weaknesses even more after that fact more people stepped up and called him out. It was fixed for one, Tyson didn't train until 2 weeks before the fight or was it 3 weeks? Anyways, Tyson looked like he wasn't even really in the fight he looked like he wasn't even really serious about it. Rewatch the fight and you can sense it.
Jack 1000
I think judges giving the rounds to the fighter with the better record or more marketable status, happens at least 60% of the time. I think that journeymen fighters can't get a break against house names happens at least 75% of the time. (i.e The close score cards of two of the judges in Douglas-Tyson, 87-86 Tyson, and 86-96 even at the time of the KO in a fight that everyone thought Douglas was comfortably ahead.) For the record I had it 5-3-1 for Douglas and that was giving Tyson all the breaks, except for only a 10-9 round for Tyson with his 8th round knockdown, because Douglas was killing him in that round before the knockdown and Tyson did not deserve the 10-8. So I think that works out to 87-85 Douglas. (I had the 4th round even.)

And that there was Don King trying to get Tyson reinstated as champion because of the long count on the knockdown and the WBA and WBC said the title was vacant for about 48 hours pending an investigation. The IBF called Douglas champion immediately. They were looking for any way to keep Tyson as champion by ordering an immediate rematch, because Douglas was a journeymen, and to most officials and promoters, a journeymen is a POS who is brought in to lose.

Many believe that Pacquiao-Clottey was fixed with Clottey being bribed by someone or several someones not to throw punches. Clottey in need of money accepted the bribe. Remember in a bribe situation, there have to be at least two parties in on the take. After Don King was accused of involvement of a possible fix with Holyfield-Lewis' I's draw, he said that "You have to have a screwer, and a screwie!" LOL! I actually thought Bob Lee, President of the IBF may have been up to something with the way he defended judge Eugenia Williams, who gave the fight to Holyfield 115-113, in a match that most of the world had Lewis anywhere from a 3-6 point winner.

Most recent example of journeymen fight fixing with the hometown venue involved for the hometown guy I think is Burton-Augustus. That's the kind of situation where the poor SOB brought in to lose needs 4 knockdowns just to get a draw.

One of the few times I have actually seen a journeymen with a shit record get a decision, was Everett "Big Foot" Martin's win over Tim Witherspoon.

I think Liston tanked for Ali in the second fight. The first fight I think was legit. I think Bruce Seldon tanked for Tyson. But I think that overt fixing of fights, like some fighters who were connected to the mob years ago is pretty rare. You know, the type where a fighter is supposed to fall or some shit at a certain point in time for a pay-off? I think that 90-95% of the fights going in are legit. But as far as home town bias or favoritism, I would say about 60% of the time, you will have subtle things go against you. Neutral officials with all refs and judges not represented by either champion or challengers home country I think can reduce home court bias to about 45%

But a known journeymen fighter (say an Emanuel Augustus) with a shit record against an Arum, King, Delahoya, or Dibella top guy? You have only about a 25% chance of getting a fair shake. Neutral officials in that situation, might get you up to 40%. But in those cases the promoter and his fighter still has a 60%-75% chance of fucking against the journeymen where he will not get the decision. And I base this data on watching thousands of fights and officials for almost forty years.

Hey this is a good topic! I want to add a sub-topic. What fights have you seen where a proven journeymen got a decision in a close fight?

Jack
Allmenjoi8
Does anyone feel/think Mosely and Pacaquio fight might of been fixed? I did not see the fight so I can not say anything, but from what people told me the fight was horrible Shane was smiling the whole time and they were touching gloves every second. What do yawl say? I would say Kevin Kelly vs. Prince Naseem was fixed. I always felt that.
Lil-lightsout
QUOTE (Allmenjoi8 @ Jul 6 2011, 09:58 PM) *
Does anyone feel/think Mosely and Pacaquio fight might of been fixed? I did not see the fight so I can not say anything, but from what people told me the fight was horrible Shane was smiling the whole time and they were touching gloves every second. What do yawl say? I would say Kevin Kelly vs. Prince Naseem was fixed. I always felt that.


Holy smokes what makes you think Hamed vs. Kelly was fixed? That fight was an awesome give and take affair from what I remember and Naseem got a legit KO. Naseem hit hard as hell!
King Eugene
QUOTE (Lil-lightsout @ Jul 6 2011, 10:05 PM) *
Holy smokes what makes you think Hamed vs. Kelly was fixed? That fight was an awesome give and take affair from what I remember and Naseem got a legit KO. Naseem hit hard as hell!

Yea that fight was not fix. Kelly just couldn't take as much as he was giving that fight.
zucrates
QUOTE (Jack 1000 @ Jul 6 2011, 08:46 PM) *
I think judges giving the rounds to the fighter with the better record or more marketable status, happens at least 60% of the time. I think that journeymen fighters can't get a break against house names happens at least 75% of the time. (i.e The close score cards of two of the judges in Douglas-Tyson, 87-86 Tyson, and 86-96 even at the time of the KO in a fight that everyone thought Douglas was comfortably ahead.) For the record I had it 5-3-1 for Douglas and that was giving Tyson all the breaks, except for only a 10-9 round for Tyson with his 8th round knockdown, because Douglas was killing him in that round before the knockdown and Tyson did not deserve the 10-8. So I think that works out to 87-85 Douglas. (I had the 4th round even.)

And that there was Don King trying to get Tyson reinstated as champion because of the long count on the knockdown and the WBA and WBC said the title was vacant for about 48 hours pending an investigation. The IBF called Douglas champion immediately. They were looking for any way to keep Tyson as champion by ordering an immediate rematch, because Douglas was a journeymen, and to most officials and promoters, a journeymen is a POS who is brought in to lose.

Many believe that Pacquiao-Clottey was fixed with Clottey being bribed by someone or several someones not to throw punches. Clottey in need of money accepted the bribe. Remember in a bribe situation, there have to be at least two parties in on the take. After Don King was accused of involvement of a possible fix with Holyfield-Lewis' I's draw, he said that "You have to have a screwer, and a screwie!" LOL! I actually thought Bob Lee, President of the IBF may have been up to something with the way he defended judge Eugenia Williams, who gave the fight to Holyfield 115-113, in a match that most of the world had Lewis anywhere from a 3-6 point winner.

Most recent example of journeymen fight fixing with the hometown venue involved for the hometown guy I think is Burton-Augustus. That's the kind of situation where the poor SOB brought in to lose needs 4 knockdowns just to get a draw.

One of the few times I have actually seen a journeymen with a shit record get a decision, was Everett "Big Foot" Martin's win over Tim Witherspoon.

I think Liston tanked for Ali in the second fight. The first fight I think was legit. I think Bruce Seldon tanked for Tyson. But I think that overt fixing of fights, like some fighters who were connected to the mob years ago is pretty rare. You know, the type where a fighter is supposed to fall or some shit at a certain point in time for a pay-off? I think that 90-95% of the fights going in are legit. But as far as home town bias or favoritism, I would say about 60% of the time, you will have subtle things go against you. Neutral officials with all refs and judges not represented by either champion or challengers home country I think can reduce home court bias to about 45%

But a known journeymen fighter (say an Emanuel Augustus) with a shit record against an Arum, King, Delahoya, or Dibella top guy? You have only about a 25% chance of getting a fair shake. Neutral officials in that situation, might get you up to 40%. But in those cases the promoter and his fighter still has a 60%-75% chance of fucking against the journeymen where he will not get the decision. And I base this data on watching thousands of fights and officials for almost forty years.

Hey this is a good topic! I want to add a sub-topic. What fights have you seen where a proven journeymen got a decision in a close fight?

Jack

The Roy vs Joe Fight Looked crazy too with Joe doing Roy's own moves on him looked like a movie
King Eugene
QUOTE (zucrates @ Jul 6 2011, 11:51 PM) *
The Roy vs Joe Fight Looked crazy too with Joe doing Roy's own moves on him looked like a movie

Nah.....Roy is my boy but he just got his ass whooped!
gravytrain
QUOTE (Fitz @ Jul 7 2011, 01:25 AM) *
Ummm., Tyson went to jail after Douglas.


it can be hard to keep all the Tyson excuses straight sometimes
D-MARV
QUOTE (Fitz @ Jul 7 2011, 01:25 AM) *
Ummm., Tyson went to jail after Douglas.

lmfao!!!
Allmenjoi8
QUOTE (Lil-lightsout @ Jul 6 2011, 10:05 PM) *
Holy smokes what makes you think Hamed vs. Kelly was fixed? That fight was an awesome give and take affair from what I remember and Naseem got a legit KO. Naseem hit hard as hell!


It was a great fight do not get me wrong. Kelly had Naseem a couple of times and it seemed as the fight went on he took less shots and just stood there. It was a long time ago, I may had been a teenager when the fight took place but I just remember Naseem all of a sudden kicking Kelly's butt in the later rounds, it made no sense to me. Then after the bell rung they are hugging each other and saying they are the best fighters they ever fought. Weird. Really weird.
The CEO
Fights have been, are, and will always BE fixed...the nature of The Fight Game is too conducive for them not to be...


This may come across harsh....but if you DON'T factor Corruption, Politics, Hometown Decisions, etc. into your predictions...OR into your plans as a fighter (i.e. Martinez knowing he had to KO Williams)...you're either naive or a God Damn fool.

All of those negative aspects are integral parts of Boxing and MUST be considered...especially in higher profile fights.


"May the best man win." is nothing but an idealistic thought....because as we are reminded year after year, the best man doesn't always get the win...and from time to time, if you pay close attention, you'll watch an opponent ALLOW that "best man" to win...
The CEO
or perhaps you'll see some judges screw the definite winner and give it to the more marketable guy.......

FUCK.
Lil-lightsout
QUOTE (The CEO @ Jul 10 2011, 12:25 AM) *
or perhaps you'll see some judges screw the definite winner and give it to the more marketable guy.......

FUCK.


Sad but so true.

I am going to tune in to watch PW. I ain't watching Lara fight, his style is boring.
mexi-cutioner
The promoters, casinos, tv networks etc have a lot more power over the outcome than most ppl want to believe. At the end of the day, boxing is a business and the ppl involved are going to do what is best for their business regardless of whether we agree with it or not. A case in point: the handling of Pacquiao's career since the DLH victory.
caneman
THE MORAL OF THE STORY? ALWAYS GO FOR THE KO!!!!
SmartyBeardo
QUOTE (caneman @ Jul 9 2011, 09:33 PM) *
THE MORAL OF THE STORY? ALWAYS GO FOR THE KO!!!!

Indeed.
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.