Posted:
#1
Upon further review, the fight stands as poorly called. That is, my assertion that Paul Williams’ majority decision win over Erislandy Lara in their 12-round junior lightweight Saturday in Atlantic City on HBO’s card has to be the worst high-profile boxing scorecard travesty I’ve seen in years.
And it should be the last. The sports needs to clean up such blatant injustices before casual fans, some of whom already are skeptical, place it alongside professional wrestling in terms of credibility.
I watched the replay of the fight Sunday morning just to confirm that my perception when watching it live Saturday night wasn’t skewed by comments from the broadcasters or any other factors.
It looked just as bad, if not worse, upon a second viewing. One judge had it tied, and the other two gave Williams the nod.
At best, I gave Williams four rounds, and that was with the idea of giving him the benefit of the doubt in the close rounds.
For those of you who missed it, Williams (who was around a -300 favorite) was trying to make a comeback against Lara (+280) after Williams was knocked out by Sergio Martinez in his previous fight last year. I had never seen Lara, though I heard he was a good prospect, but I tuned in to see Williams, who once looked unbeatable but recently has appeared woefully vulnerable.
The strong and aggressive Lara dominated from the opening bell, repeatedly walloping Williams with an overhand left as if his opponent had stolen something from him. He wobbled and nearly knocked Williams down in the second round, and had him in trouble a couple of other times.
Williams (40-2, 27 KOs) remained active and threw more punches than Lara, but there was no doubt Lara (15-1, 10 KOs) landed the more punishing blows. It was almost painful to watch.
Probably nobody watching in person or at home would have argued had the fight been stopped including Williams’ trainer, who conceded during a live in-round interview that his fighter was taking the worst of it.
HBO analyst Max Kellerman correctly pointed out that this type of prolonged beating for Williams was worse than his KO loss to Martinez, which happened in the second round, because the onslaught of blows could threaten his career and long-term health.
Among those who agreed was Kellerman’s colleague Roy Jones Jr., and he should know. Jones himself is a poster boy for the long-term effect of such a beating, as he was hospitalized by journeymen such as Glen Johnson and Danny Green in an all-too-long career in which he was denial about his fading defensive skills.
But as the fight wore on, I got a sick suspicion that the scores were going to be much closer than most ringside viewers anticipated. At the final bell, Williams wobbled to corner, bloody and beaten. A few minutes later, his name was read as the winner.
What’s so puzzling about these God-awful decisions – Shane Mosley-Oscar De La Hoya II also comes to mind – is how easy a potential remedy would seem. Once the scores are published, the commissioner of the fight’s governing body should sit down with the offending judge or judges, watch the fight round-by-round and ask them exactly what they saw.
If their answers are insufficient, they should have their payment withheld and their licenses revoked indefinitely, only getting them back after showing prolonged competence in judging amateur fights.
The HBO guys incorrectly chalked up the bad decision to inexperience on the part of the judges. You don’t have to be Mario Andretti to know it’s not a good idea to drive a car into a wall, and you don’t need to have 50 championship bouts on your resume in order to accurately judge a fight.
Not to mention a fight that’s as easy to score as Lara’s thrashing of Williams. I’ve judged a handful of college and other amateur bouts, and it’s not that difficult. You take into account clean and effective punching, ring generalship, defense and variable scoring factors such as knockdowns and point deductions for fouls.
Yes, it’s an inexact science, but that doesn’t make it rocket science. We’ve all seen bouts that were so close that you can’t really argue either way, but there are many more in which the outcome should hold no mystery.
Even the idea that the title-holder or better-known fighter should get the nod in close rounds has some merit to it, but you can’t flat-out rob a guy. That’s the problem with the Lara-Williams judges; they were so absorbed by their preconceived notions that, by the time they realized Williams was getting obliterated, it was too late.
That’s a shame, and they should be held accountable.
And it should be the last. The sports needs to clean up such blatant injustices before casual fans, some of whom already are skeptical, place it alongside professional wrestling in terms of credibility.
I watched the replay of the fight Sunday morning just to confirm that my perception when watching it live Saturday night wasn’t skewed by comments from the broadcasters or any other factors.
It looked just as bad, if not worse, upon a second viewing. One judge had it tied, and the other two gave Williams the nod.
At best, I gave Williams four rounds, and that was with the idea of giving him the benefit of the doubt in the close rounds.
For those of you who missed it, Williams (who was around a -300 favorite) was trying to make a comeback against Lara (+280) after Williams was knocked out by Sergio Martinez in his previous fight last year. I had never seen Lara, though I heard he was a good prospect, but I tuned in to see Williams, who once looked unbeatable but recently has appeared woefully vulnerable.
The strong and aggressive Lara dominated from the opening bell, repeatedly walloping Williams with an overhand left as if his opponent had stolen something from him. He wobbled and nearly knocked Williams down in the second round, and had him in trouble a couple of other times.
Williams (40-2, 27 KOs) remained active and threw more punches than Lara, but there was no doubt Lara (15-1, 10 KOs) landed the more punishing blows. It was almost painful to watch.
Probably nobody watching in person or at home would have argued had the fight been stopped including Williams’ trainer, who conceded during a live in-round interview that his fighter was taking the worst of it.
HBO analyst Max Kellerman correctly pointed out that this type of prolonged beating for Williams was worse than his KO loss to Martinez, which happened in the second round, because the onslaught of blows could threaten his career and long-term health.
Among those who agreed was Kellerman’s colleague Roy Jones Jr., and he should know. Jones himself is a poster boy for the long-term effect of such a beating, as he was hospitalized by journeymen such as Glen Johnson and Danny Green in an all-too-long career in which he was denial about his fading defensive skills.
But as the fight wore on, I got a sick suspicion that the scores were going to be much closer than most ringside viewers anticipated. At the final bell, Williams wobbled to corner, bloody and beaten. A few minutes later, his name was read as the winner.
What’s so puzzling about these God-awful decisions – Shane Mosley-Oscar De La Hoya II also comes to mind – is how easy a potential remedy would seem. Once the scores are published, the commissioner of the fight’s governing body should sit down with the offending judge or judges, watch the fight round-by-round and ask them exactly what they saw.
If their answers are insufficient, they should have their payment withheld and their licenses revoked indefinitely, only getting them back after showing prolonged competence in judging amateur fights.
The HBO guys incorrectly chalked up the bad decision to inexperience on the part of the judges. You don’t have to be Mario Andretti to know it’s not a good idea to drive a car into a wall, and you don’t need to have 50 championship bouts on your resume in order to accurately judge a fight.
Not to mention a fight that’s as easy to score as Lara’s thrashing of Williams. I’ve judged a handful of college and other amateur bouts, and it’s not that difficult. You take into account clean and effective punching, ring generalship, defense and variable scoring factors such as knockdowns and point deductions for fouls.
Yes, it’s an inexact science, but that doesn’t make it rocket science. We’ve all seen bouts that were so close that you can’t really argue either way, but there are many more in which the outcome should hold no mystery.
Even the idea that the title-holder or better-known fighter should get the nod in close rounds has some merit to it, but you can’t flat-out rob a guy. That’s the problem with the Lara-Williams judges; they were so absorbed by their preconceived notions that, by the time they realized Williams was getting obliterated, it was too late.
That’s a shame, and they should be held accountable.
Huh? Yes, and his tune-up before Felix was Antonio Ojeda at 1-5-0. What? Yes, I did say one win. Finally when Carr met Trinidad, Carr dropped Felix in round two, then he got dropped twice in round eight and losing by TKO that round. Notice after Bramble, Carr's management took little chances before getting a payday fight. It was a disgrace to boxing after a decision then the caliber of opponents was a joke. The combined record of the 11 fighters after Bramble to before Trinidad was 163-86-10. Taking away 2 decent of those opponents and the record for nine opponents was 109-82-7, for the opponents win rate was a staggering 57%!
Hot Forum Topics
