Cj Ross:Most corrupt judge in my lifetime.

[joseph5620]

Have you any evidence of corruption apart from bad scorecards? It was an incompetent scorecard which certainly calls into question her getting to judge the biggest fights but what corruption are you seeing? What sort of corruption do you think there is when only one of the judges saw it a draw and the other two for the correct man? I don't think you have thought this through.

No I don't. Not anymore than I have for the judges in the Lewis-Holyfield 1 fight. Or the Whitaker-Chavez fight and it's not my job to find it.

When it happens more than once I'm comfortable calling it corruption. Two extremely bad scorecards in two big fights? That's something beyond incompetence and enough "evidence" for corruption which doesn't take a rocket scientist to see it. If she is incompetent she has no business judging fights which would make the choice to use her corrupt in itself.

And yes, I have thought it through.

[Humean]

No I don't and it's not my job to find out. When it happens more than once I'm comfortable calling it corruption. Two extremely bad scorecards in two big fights? That's something beyond incompetence and enough "evidence" for corruption which doesn't take a rocket scientist to see it. If she is incompetent she has no business judging fights which would make the choice to use her corrupt in itself.

And yes, I have thought it through.

No you haven't thought it through because if there is corruption with judges then surely it would be a bribe to the judges to score for one fighter but having one judge in your pocket is not sufficient to get the desired result, you need two. On top of that she didn't score for Canelo, she scored a draw. Thus incompetence is surely the correct view, for no other reason than Ockham's razor.

[joseph5620]

No you haven't thought it through because if there is corruption with judges then surely it would be a bribe to the judges to score for one fighter but having one judge in your pocket is not sufficient to get the desired result, you need two. On top of that she didn't score for Canelo, she scored a draw. Thus incompetence is surely the correct view, for no other reason than Ockham's razor.

Having one judge in your pocket is better than having no judges in your pocket. Especially if there is a good chance that the fight is close or can go either way, one card can tip the balance. One of the other two cards in the fight was ridiculously close as well.. Scoring it a draw guarantees Canelo doesn't lose the fight on her card. If Canelo had done even slightly better in any round she would have given him the fight. As one sided as it was, he still came out with a draw on that card.

I think you are the one who needs to think that through.

[Humean]

Having one judge in your pocket is better than having no judges in your pocket. Especially if there is a good chance that the fight is close or can go either way, one card can tip the balance. One of the other two cards in the fight was ridiculously close as well.. Scoring it a draw guarantees Canelo doesn't lose the fight on her card. If Canelo had done even slightly better in any round she would have given him the fight. As one sided as it was, he still came out with a draw on that card.

I think you are the one who needs to think that through.

If you really think that this makes much sense then there nothing I can say to you.

[joseph5620]

If you really think that this makes much sense then there nothing I can say to you.

It's really pretty basic and has happened throughout the history of the sport. I'll leave it at that.

[Humean]

It's really pretty basic and has happened throughout the history of the sport. I'll leave it at that.

Bribing judges was certainly common in the US at least in the 1940s and 50s when Frankie Carbo and the mob effectively controlled boxing but your previous post makes very little sense. If you are actually going to the bother of fixing a fight then you do not bribe only one judge and bribe her to score it a draw. If there was corruption here then it would have to be a candidate for the dumbest and least effective form of boxing corruption imaginable. Are you acquainted with Ockham's razor?

C.J Ross produced an incompetent scorecard, a claim that perhaps no reasonable person can dispute but there are more rational explanations for why that was possible. In her mind she probably saw the fight the way she scored it, but maybe she had some prejudices, probably unconscious. Maybe she dislikes wife beaters or has a penchant for red headed men. Who knows, but out and out corruption seems the least likely explanation.

[greeh]

A mod who happens to be one of the worst, most ignorant posters on this site. If you're not competent enough to contribute to the discussion, stay out of my threads.


Actually, when you did contribute, you claimed Alfonso Zamora never beat anybody good. Would you like to continue that debate? Didn't think so, clown.

So he's the ****head who said that!

/greeh

[Uturn]

Agreed. Her card was frankly amazing. I was astonished her conclusion was a draw. Floyd Mayweather put on a boxing clinic. Canelo won 3 rounds at most. It was a disgrace to see.

[IronDanHamza]

Inexcusable scorecard.

Such a clearly one sided fight. Who knows what she was watching.

[IronDanHamza]

Couple of things...

(a) You're pretty biased in favour of Mayweather so that argument on your behalf falls flat.

(a) I didn't say it was a draw, I had Mayweather winning, but there enough close rounds to argue the case for a draw even though it would be the wrong result.

(c) Two people in this thread alone felt a draw could be argued so there are likely a lot more out there.

It's definitely not the worst scorecard I've ever seen.

Now Pacquiao v Bradley...there weren't enough close rounds in that fight to argue a draw never mind a Bradley win. She deserves criticism for that one.

No, there likely is not.

Not a single press row score had Canelo winning more than 3 rounds. Literally not a single one. The ones that had Canelo winning 3 rounds were seldom.

The average score on press row was 119-109.

Her scorecard is inexcusable.