Worst Decision in the last 20 years

You've looked at the fight and the wrong guy has won. It's as simple as that. Some people felt this way about the first "Lennox Lewis - Holfield fight." Some look at Trinidad and De La Hoya and have fits over Felix being given the decision. Regardless of what fight you pick, it's a frustrating feeling for the boxing fan to experience. Can you imagine how the robbed fighter feels? The guy who's put himself through torture for 6 to 8 weeks only to have his successful effort taken away by an incompetent or crooked judge? I'd like to hear some experiences from the board on bad decisions and even premature stoppages.

Chavez vs. Whitaker-that is the decision that resonates with me to this day. I knew they were going to cheat Whitaker, but it still strikes me as an unbelievable travesty.

I play a ton of poker;
Poker players remember the bad beats. You remember when AA gets sucked out on by a smaller pair. You forget that an 80% hand is supposed to lose 20% of the time. You remember the times it loses, but forget all the times it holds up.

Boxing fans can be the same: We remember the bad decisions, but forget that the judges get it right a high percentage of the time (not high enough in my view).

Chavez- Whitaker easy

Chavez-Whitaker
De la Hoya-Trinidad
Lewis-Holyfield
Campillo-Shumenov (wasn't a fight that anyone cared about, but Campillo had one at least 8 rounds, if not more against Borat)

yes chavez-whitaker no doubt..sweet pea i think was a victom another time of a bad decision..ive seen far worse though over the years...the worst ive ever seen was when a aging willie pep fought a top 10 fighter by the name of kid cadilli..pep won all ten rounds with ease and the entire fight i dont think cadili landed 6 punches yet willie lost a UD...hmmmm.

valuev vs hollyfeild my boy was robbed not that it mattered much with his age but im just sayin

collazo vs berto

well if Chavez Jr does fight Pavlik then his management easily just made the worst decision ever

bird lol very true indeed.

It's recent but the first Ali Funeka vs Joan Guzman decision was really bad.

How about these
Gollata v Bird
Floyd v JLC

ehh Gollota Byrd was draw worthy IMO

Just look at all the fights in Texas to see the worst decisions.

bet Sick cant name any after Diaz - Malignaggi or Whitaker CHavez

(dont look up) if you can theres a plus in it for you

Funeka-Guzman was the worst I saw recently.

agree Gumby FUneka won 9 rounds easy

Birdofthad wrote:

bet Sick cant name any after Diaz - Malignaggi or Whitaker CHavez

(dont look up) if you can theres a plus in it for you

Dont be butthurt.

John-Juarez I. Now where's my cookie?

cookie granted hahah

not butt hurt just wanted to see if you could

i thinkj many examples truly are poor ones for the topic is the worst dicision in the last 20 years not close ones or questionable ones.the hollifield-valuez fight was a case of one persuing the other running neighter one fighting at all.yes i felt evander won but he did nothing to win.. floyd vs jlc.yes floyd lost by a point maybe two but again no highway robery..ditto berto collazo..i had berto losing by a point im not sure but i think letterman had him wining by a point..a close fight.
a robbery is differnt..example carl the truth williams clearly and desisively beat holmes..i had it 9-5-1 or by 4 points.it could of easly been 5..when they announced a UD holmes knew he lost.his face spelled defeat and dispare..he and i were equaly shocked he was called the winner so were the announcers....oscar-felix another close won that oscar blew in the last few roundsa..a robery..nooo way.did he win..maybe yes maybe no..

completely agree dmar

some people say robbery cause they cant stand the guy that got a decision i.e. Floyd vs Castillo

yes a case can be given that hollifield won maybe all the rounds..by doing what though..running not fighting not throwing any punches.a case can be made for a valuez win attempting to fight.ineffective yes.agreeser .absolutely.in my mind thats a fight neither deserved to win..or get paid for for that matter..sorry.thoses are my thoughts.

bird i agree..objectivity at times is blinded by dislike.

Birdofthad wrote:

ehh Gollota Byrd was draw worthy IMO

Really? I thought Gollota won that fight easy.

Birdofthad wrote:

completely agree dmar

some people say robbery cause they cant stand the guy that got a decision i.e. Floyd vs Castillo

LOL you know I put that one up there just for you Bird.

dmar5143 wrote:

i thinkj many examples truly are poor ones for the topic is the worst dicision in the last 20 years not close ones or questionable ones.the hollifield-valuez fight was a case of one persuing the other running neighter one fighting at all.yes i felt evander won but he did nothing to win.. floyd vs jlc.yes floyd lost by a point maybe two but again no highway robery..ditto berto collazo..i had berto losing by a point im not sure but i think letterman had him wining by a point..a close fight.
a robbery is differnt..example carl the truth williams clearly and desisively beat holmes..i had it 9-5-1 or by 4 points.it could of easly been 5..when they announced a UD holmes knew he lost.his face spelled defeat and dispare..he and i were equaly shocked he was called the winner so were the announcers....oscar-felix another close won that oscar blew in the last few roundsa..a robery..nooo way.did he win..maybe yes maybe no..

I disagree on the Oscar vs Felix one. That is a robbery because of how it was scored. One of the judges gave the last round to Oscar. Why would he do that? Oscar never landed a punch in that round. He did that because he had Tito ahead by so much that it was going to look bad. The fix was in. That is why it was a robbery. There should have been an investigation of those judges.

BTW I do think that Oscar deserved to lose. One of the few times I was happy he lost.