By Paul Magno | December 06, 2018

In the wake of last Saturday’s big heavyweight clash, my sack was crammed with Wilder-Fury stuff…so, I’d be remiss if I didn’t dedicate my salty wisdom this week to addressing the big men and the ensuing controversy from their split decision draw. I’ll be as brief with my answers as possible because there was a lot shoved into my sack this time around. Here we go…

Judging the Judging

This my first time writing to you, but I stay reading. I hope all is blessed with you and you keep pumping out reality to us readers. 

I just wanted your understanding of judging in fights, especially after Wilder's "controversial" win [draw]. I'm a Wilder fan and was rooting for my guy, but even I thought he lost a close one. 

Most people I know seem to think the judges have a monitor and same views we as fans have, but they sit on a side of the ring and look up. 

I've seen fights at this angle, and it can have a crazy impact on how an individual perceived a fight. 

If fighter B is leaning against the ropes, and judge A can only see his back, it can often look like he's taking an ass whipping, though he may not be. 

Is it just me, or does there need to be a more effective way for judges to watch a fight, i.e. use monitors, quiet rooms with no noise/volume.

Sorry so long my dude. Once again, stay blessed 

-- J MeeZy

Hi J MeeZy

There’ve been a lot of theories on what could be done to “clean up” the judging in boxing. None of it’s going to work—not extra judges, quiet rooms, TV monitors, lifeguard platforms overlooking the ring, etc. The reality is that we see bad judging because those judges who err in favor of house fighters (lead promoter fighters) are a valued commodity. Whether there is some direct corruption or simply an embracing of useful idiotry is beside the point. The fact of the matter is that judges who tend to favor house fighters get consistent gigs and there’s nothing that will get you left off the “acceptable judges” list quicker than someone who takes a cushy high-profile judging gig (with a nice fee, travel expenses, per diems, and other perks), but sticks a thumb in the eye of the business entity paying his salary. Gale Van Hoy, for example, had a run of over seven years where he never once voted against a house fighter in a major bout, even when the house fighter clearly didn’t win (like in the Juan Diaz-Paulie Malignaggi debacle in 2009). And that run may have gone longer, but I only started tracking his judging patterns back from 2007 to his 2014 retirement. Post Diaz-Malignaggi mess, Van Hoy actually got rewarded for his bad jobs by getting consistent judging appointments, often overseas, where he could do his thing (presumably to the benefit of the paying promoters’ interests). 

And Van Hoy is just one of many like him. Flat-out corrupt or not, the understanding is that if you judge in favor of those hooking you up with gigs, you stay in the good graces of the business. Subliminally, this has to register and color the judging. It has to. 

The Mexican judge, Rochin, turned in a bad card this past Saturday in an otherwise decent decision, but that does not excuse him at all. 

The good thing is that fans and media are more aggressively vocal about clearly horrible scorecards and bad judges, as well as those who appoint them. There’s more pressure to sit the offending judges down nowadays. 

But this problem won’t be truly fixed until boxing stops letting those with a vested interest in the outcome of a fight have so much power in selecting and approving officials for their own fights. 

Reality, Controversy, and a Raging Double Standard

What up ma Brown Brotha? I’m just gone get straight to the point. 

I’m sick of people claiming robbery when fights don’t go for their fighter of choice! I’m also just as tired of fans over exaggerating what did or didn’t happen in a fight. 

Last night the boxer was the better boxer, and the puncher was the better puncher. Big props to Fury for just taking the fight and of course not just laying down. However, he boxed well but he did not school Wilder. How can the vastly more skilled boxer be said to have schooled a technically limited fighter after that fighter dropped the boxer twice? Wilder was landing in those exchanges and if a judge gave Wilder two rounds outside of the 9th and 12th that’s how it became a draw! 

Where was the robbery? And when we throw in the fact that the puncher was out-weighed by 50 pounds, to say Fury schooled him is farfetched and a complete exaggeration of what happened! 

And why are some acting as though they were surprised Fury was the better boxer? It’s like no matter what Wilder does or accomplishes, no one wants to give the man his due credit! I know you don’t much care for him but even you gotta admit that Deontay Wilder is the Lion Heart of the division. The very skill-set-limited Wilder just fought the two best Boxers in the Division B2B! He KO’d the boxer-puncher, and the slick big man barely escaped being KO’d by what he called a basketball player/dosser, whatever the hell that means! Fury is now one of all our favorites, he won all our hearts and deserves tons of credit, but so does Wilder IMO! 

And what about that long time before the ref started the count? 

Lastly, can you smell the double standards because Fury, like Billy Saunders is being praised to the rafters for being slick, elusive and using his legs! While the Brothers get mad crapped on for the same abilities! 

I can’t wait to see them fight again! However, I think Wilder should forgo the immediate rematch and try to unify the titles. Then, whoever wins that fight can fight Fury for the lineal title! 

Hit me back Brah, tell me what you think Terrell straight out of Bompton deuces!

-- Yusuf Muhammad

Hey Yusuf. 

You just slung a lot of truth there. There’s not a whole lot to add.

Wilder looks awful and is an eyesore to a lot of us who like finer ring technicians, but you can’t dig at him too hard anymore because, like you said, he’s just gone back-to-back with two top 3 heavyweights and stopped one while taking the other to the brink of a KO. 

As for the “robbery?” I think a lot of people were influenced by Fury’s backstory and several other factors. This was not a dominant performance from Fury and it wasn’t a one-sided fight as many seemed to have scored it. I had it 114-112 for Fury. That means one close round given to Wilder along the way would’ve made it a draw—and there were at least 2-3 rounds that could’ve been given to either man. 

Kudos to both men, but I hope one of these guys steps up in the rematch to truly take the fight and not leave it close and up to interpretation once again. 

I don’t embrace that long count stuff, though. I think it was a fair nine count and I don’t see anything shady in how ref Jack Reiss handled anything Saturday night.

And, yeah, how about that double standard? I brought this up on social media. Mayweather and other black fighters got perpetually crapped on for being “scared” and fighting “negative” by using their legs and some crafty defense, yet Fury and Saunders are lauded as ring geniuses and master craftsmen for borrowing that same ring mentality. Incredible. 

Again…No Controversy

Hey Man,

Sentimentality aside Fury is a crafty slickster and Wilder didn't have the skills Fury had.

But it's rare in the history of championship fighting for a challenger to be knocked down twice and be victorious.

All championship level fights end this way, if the challenger hits the canvas 2 times.

I can't wait for the rematch.


Hi Beast.

To me, the two knockdowns are only two points—but those two points took a 116-112 fight down to a 114-112 fight. And it put things definitely into draw territory. Let’s face it, there was not a whole lot going on in the first six rounds, so it would be easy to imagine rounds flipping in either direction early on. 

Robbed of a Storybook Ending

Hi Paul. I always enjoy reading your mailbag and only really read your stuff on Fighthype. However, I have to disagree with Fury-Wilder. In my opinion, Fury won 115-111. I scored round 2 for Wilder and the two 10-8 rounds. I thought before the fight Wilder would KO Fury once Fury slowed down but was silenced. I didn’t really like Fury much before the fight, but he has now won my respect. Coming back from where he’s been, he almost had a fitting storybook ending, but was robbed of it in my opinion.

-- Scott

Hi Scott.

Like I said, I think that storybook tale of redemption may have influenced some of the home judging in this fight. Certainly enough, IMO, to turn a close fight into a one-sided romp on many fan scorecards. I’ll stand firm on my take, though—close 114-112 fight that easily could’ve gone 113-113. 

But definitely much praise goes to Fury for coming back from where he was and for doing as well as he did in the fight. Nothing I say about the closeness of the fight or the lack of real controversy should be seen as a reflection on him. I have nothing but respect for Tyson Fury. 

No Robbery

The idea that Fury got robbed is so subjective and depends on who you were rooting for.  There were some very close rounds in that fight, 3 maybe 4.  I do believe the judges gave those rounds to Wilder because he pressed the action.  We all know judging in boxing is so subjective, but 10 seconds is not subjective. Fury was given more than 10 seconds to get up from the canvas. Anyone who watches the replay can time it and there was no debate about that. Hats off to both guys though, anyone who paid for this fight got more than their money’s worth.

-- Nail Rahman

Hi Nail.

The funny thing is that, in most fights, it’s the aggressor who gets the benefit of the doubt in close rounds. This fight was different—because of Fury’s emotional backstory of overcoming mental illness and substance abuse issues and because of some inherent animosity towards Wilder (maybe other issues were at play, too)—and the fighter moving forward, trying to engage just did not get that level of favoritism.

But, again, when it comes to that long count stuff—I don’t buy it. I went back and watched that last knockdown and I counted nine seconds each time, even when trying to see the Wilder side of things.

Magno= BS, clown

Just read your stupid article. And its absolute BULLSHIT! How the fook did you see the fight like that you clown.


Hey Shaun!

Thanks for reading and taking the time to drop me a line. Here’s a post-Wilder-Fury hanky for you—Dry your eyes, then wipe your ass…or wipe your ass, then dry your ass…Whatever you find most convenient. 

Got a question (or hate mail) for Magno’s Bulging Mail Sack? The best of the best gets included in the weekly mailbag segment right here at FightHype. Send your stuff here:

MAY 24, 2019
MAY 23, 2019
MAY 22, 2019