Bleacher report's - 5 worst decisions of alltime !!

5. Pernell Whittaker v Jose Ramirez.............

4. Manny v Bradley.............

3. Lewis V Holy..............

2. Pernell Whittaker v Julio Cesar Chavez...........

1. Jones v Kim.............

Geez..............Have these guys seen Whittaker v Ramirez ?????????????................He won every round..............HTF can Bradley v Manny be above that or Whittaker v Chavez............

What is Manny v Bradley doing in a Top 10 ????..............JMM v Manny was worse.........Has he seen Gomez v Lockridge If you gave Gomez five rounds out of 15 you'd be being generous !!...........Foreman v Schultz...........

Reckon Bleacher report has One direction as the best group ever......

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Reckon Bleacher report has One direction as the best group ever......

Thats says it all about the Bleacher reports credentials.

As many will remember, I got a kicking back in 2012 on here for arguing that Bradley-Pacquiao I was more of a questionable or dubious decision, rather than a huge, flat out highway job like just about everyone else saw (and still sees) it as. It did my head in that I was so dratically out of line with everyone else and was wondering if I was just being a bit thick, so revisited the fight two or three times since....And for whatever reason, I still can't get it any wider than two rounds for Manny at best, no matter how hard I try. For whatever reason it's just a fight I see differently to the rest of the boxing world (or most of it). The fight more or less everyone else saw first time out was the one I saw in their rematch.

Either way, never in a million years cut out for a top five spot in this kind of list in my opinion. Personally, just from the last twenty-odd years alone in terms of world title fights / big names I'd put Whitaker-Ramirez I / Chavez, Tiberi-Toney, Zunega-Inkin, Marquez-Pacquiao III, Schulz-Foreman, Lara-Williams, Quartey-Forrest, Spadafora-Dorin, Reggie Johnson-Castro I (maybe even Reggie's loss to John David Jackson as well, albeit that's more borderline), Reid-Ottke, Darchinyan-Gorres, Beltran-Burns, Abril-Rios, Fenech-Nelson I, Hopkins-Pascal I and a few others as being worse....But again I'll stress, I'm very much in the minority on that one!

Still haven't seen David Barnes-Jimmy Vincent yet, so this statement could yet change, but Jesse Burnett only getting a draw against Conteh might be the worst one I've seen to ever take place in a UK ring. Although at least they had the decency to give Burnett a share of the spoils rather than making him take the 'L' on his record.

Less high profile but Chisora-Helenius was one of the worst recent ones.

Am I imagining this Scott, or can I recall you having a bit of back and forth over that one with another poster (can't remember who) who claimed that it wasn't a robbery and looked worse than it actually was simply because Helenius had long hair which swished back and forth all over the place whenever Chisora even brushed him, hence giving the appearance that all of Chisora's shots were a lot cleaner and harder than they actually were or something!?

Might be imagining it!

I didnt think it was too bad a decision. I could see the fight either way to be honest - Chis barely did anything in the later rounds from memory.

Adam D wrote:I didnt think it was too bad a decision. I could see the fight either way to be honest - Chis barely did anything in the later rounds from memory.

http://www.specsavers.co.uk/

Odds swung towards Chisora in the later rounds. Even the judges had Chisora winning rounds 10 and 11. It was a horror decision. Not that stats are everything but:

Total Punches Helenius Chisora
Landed           140          278
Thrown           647         672
Pct.                    22%  41%

@Chris, I'm not sure.

Never got the furor surrounding the Helenius Chisora decision.

Didn't think it was that bad a decision at the time, with Helenius maybe holding on for the win, just.

I'll have to watch it again.

Whittaker Ramirez usually tops this on most debates. I thought manny beat Bradley with some comfort but don't have it in the same league as some of these others.

Didn't have a problem so much with the judges in Reid ottke... Well the 115-113 cards you could just about make a case for if you gave ottke the benefit of all doubt. The ref was the biggest disgrace I've ever witnessed.

Barnes Vincent, Burnett conteh were indeed two shockers in the uk, Chris, as was fidel smith v Henry Wharton and more recently burns Beltran.

Chisora/Helenius was a shocker, think I had 117-111 and that was being fairly generous to Helenius.

Williams vs Lara and Rios vs Abril were both shockers too, the latter wasn't helped by stinking the joint out but he still won by shut out.

88Chris05 wrote:As many will remember, I got a kicking back in 2012 on here for arguing that Bradley-Pacquiao I was more of a questionable or dubious decision, rather than a huge, flat out highway job like just about everyone else saw (and still sees) it as. It did my head in that I was so dratically out of line with everyone else and was wondering if I was just being a bit thick, so revisited the fight two or three times since....And for whatever reason, I still can't get it any wider than two rounds for Manny at best, no matter how hard I try. For whatever reason it's just a fight I see differently to the rest of the boxing world (or most of it). The fight more or less everyone else saw first time out was the one I saw in their rematch.

Either way, never in a million years cut out for a top five spot in this kind of list in my opinion. Personally, just from the last twenty-odd years alone in terms of world title fights / big names I'd put Whitaker-Ramirez I / Chavez, Tiberi-Toney, Zunega-Inkin, Marquez-Pacquiao III, Schulz-Foreman, Lara-Williams, Quartey-Forrest, Spadafora-Dorin, Reggie Johnson-Castro I (maybe even Reggie's loss to John David Jackson as well, albeit that's more borderline), Reid-Ottke, Darchinyan-Gorres, Beltran-Burns, Abril-Rios, Fenech-Nelson I, Hopkins-Pascal I and a few others as being worse....But again I'll stress, I'm very much in the minority on that one!

Still haven't seen David Barnes-Jimmy Vincent yet, so this statement could yet change, but Jesse Burnett only getting a draw against Conteh might be the worst one I've seen to ever take place in a UK ring. Although at least they had the decency to give Burnett a share of the spoils rather than making him take the 'L' on his record.

Hopkins vs Pascal? Strange example that one - certainly no robbery.

How about Funeka vs Guzman and Santa Cruz vs Casamayor?

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Chisora/Helenius was a shocker, think I had 117-111 and that was being fairly generous to Helenius.

Williams vs Lara and Rios vs Abril were both shockers too, the latter wasn't helped by stinking the joint out but he still won by shut out.

I did go into the kitchen mind half way through to make a sandwich.

If you find a particular fighter repellent I suppose the eye can play tricks too.

Strum v De La Hoya stands out recently for me.

Tillerman's refereeing performance was definitely the most horrendous part of it all, milky. Suspect that a lot will agree with you in the sense that, in theory, it's a fight that could be scored closely on the cards aside from all that, but I can't really put myself in that group. I really can't see how it could be scored for Ottke, no matter how narrowly, or even a draw.

That fight did have a few very scrappy, close rounds. Neither guy really boxed particularly well and it was a low-quality affair. I had Reid by about five or six rounds but would concede it could be closer, maybe even as close as a couple. But to get it that close I'd need to give Ottke every single round which was anything less than clearly in Reid's favour.

I feel it could conceivably be in the same bracket as De la Hoya-Mosley II or Matthysse-Alexander. In theory, impossible to say with massive conviction that it's a robbery, as there's a realistic claim that the majority might only score the fights to Reid, De la Hoya or Matthysse by something like a couple of rounds and no more, and it only takes a small swing from that to reverse the winner on your card. But when everyone (give or take) has it by a small margin and the judges don't, it takes on a different angle. Tillerman's corruption gives them a pretty big scandal to hide behind and deflect the attention away from themselves, but I still think the judges have to take some accountability for that farce, too.

Haz, for me in that fight (the first Hopkins-Pascal one) there were only two rounds in the whole fight that could be argued over or weren't clearly one man or the other's - rounds two and five. I gave the second to Pascal, so along with his two knockdowns he was five points up after three rounds, for me. But I gave Bernard every single round after that, and as I say of all of them it's only the fifth that I'd consider close. Even if I gave Pascal that one, he'd still be two rounds down on my card, but I saw it as a 115-111 score in Hopkins' favour. Genuinely can't see how Pascal got a share of the spoils - Hopkins completely dominated him more and more as the fight went on. When he and Brother Nazswitched up the tactics and started taking the fight to Pascal poor old Jean hardly got a look in.

I scored it wider in Hopkins' favour than I have ever managed to score Bradley-Pacquiao I in Manny's, so from a personal point of view it was definitely a worse judging call. But remember, precious few agree with my view of Bradley-Pacquiao I.

Holmes - Spinks was as bad If not worse than Manny-Bradley..........I had it 9-5-1....

I saw Vincent - Barnes..........Two/three rounds probably more contentious than a robbery...

Thought Ochieng got the shaft the other night.........Especially with a 10-7 chucked in...

Though I only had it 7-5...........I thought Oscar got a clear 7 rounds against Trinidad..

But then again Foster was refereeing for Ochieng..

I can see an argument for Hopkins but with two knockdowns against him in a close, scrappy fight, the cries of robbery were a bit off the mark.

I've never watched it again since I saw it at the time Chris, and ain't going to do it again so my memory may be playing tricks. I was outraged by the ref, but felt that Reid got so frustrated after being warned for punching ottke that he, quite understandably, got dispirited and seemed to mentally check out. There were a stack of nothing rounds in the second half of the fight that ottke was probably winning 2 jabs to nil.

Felt something similar about macklin sturm. Macklin won his clearly and sturm nicked his, but when you add up the rounds it's close.

milkyboy wrote:I've never watched it again since I saw it at the time Chris, and ain't going to do it again so my memory may be playing tricks. I was outraged by the ref, but felt that Reid got so frustrated after being warned for punching ottke that he, quite understandably, got dispirited and seemed to mentally check out. There were a stack of nothing rounds in the second half of the fight that ottke was probably winning 2 jabs to nil.

Felt something similar about macklin sturm. Macklin won his clearly and sturm nicked his, but when you add up the rounds it's close.

Referee wasn't quite as bad as the Mexican w**ker Mayweather got in Chavez 2.........Absolutely appalling...........Points off for this and that.........But ok for Chavez to smash him at the end of every round and stick his head in........

Funniest moment of the fight was when the one and only Jesse reid got sick of the amount of dirty work Chavez was doing and picked him up at the end of the 7th .....and chucked him in to his own corner. Which got him expelled..

Loved to have had Reid as a cornerman If I'd been a fighter..........His speech at the end of the 8th to Tate v Nunn was one of the best I ever heard..

Referee was a disgrace.............The guy that refereed lewis - Tyson wasn't far behind..

milkyboy wrote:I've never watched it again since I saw it at the time Chris, and ain't going to do it again so my memory may be playing tricks. I was outraged by the ref, but felt that Reid got so frustrated after being warned for punching ottke that he, quite understandably, got dispirited and seemed to mentally check out. There were a stack of nothing rounds in the second half of the fight that ottke was probably winning 2 jabs to nil.

Reid is a knob, Milky. Or a milky knob, if you prefer.

He got what he deserved.

Rumors that Reid is going to be Wolverine in the next X-Men film..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Rumors that Reid is going to be Wolverine in the next X-Men film..

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

milkyboy wrote:I've never watched it again since I saw it at the time Chris, and ain't going to do it again so my memory may be playing tricks. I was outraged by the ref, but felt that Reid got so frustrated after being warned for punching ottke that he, quite understandably, got dispirited and seemed to mentally check out. There were a stack of nothing rounds in the second half of the fight that ottke was probably winning 2 jabs to nil.

Reid is a knob, Milky.  Or a milky knob, if you prefer.  

He got what he deserved.  

Maybe the judges had seen him 'act'