Jump to content

How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?


BoztheMadman
 Share

Recommended Posts

I was just having a discussion about that on FB. The thread was about who REALLY won the DLH-Whitaker fight and all the black guys there were behind Whitaker, saying he clearly won. Now that made me wonder, how biased are we all when it comes to supporting fighters and judging stuff like this, wether they really won or lost a fight? So I'd like you all to give me your true, straightforward answer, no sugarcoating. ;-) Of course we all would rather support a fighter from our own country, but when they lose a fight that was close, do we see it as it was or do we claim robbery because we are biased?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

I'm a huge Naz fan and followed him up and down the country and across the pond on numerous occasions for fights........I was there for the Barrera fight and it's very clear he lost that fight. I said at the time he went in there thinking he could have knocked Barrera out and when he found he couldn't he didn't have a plan B.

 

A true fan will be critical and I tell it how it is...........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

I think the way fights are promoted has a hand in swaying the opinions of a fighter's performance in the ring in the minds of the fans that follow that boxer. Go to any big Puerto Rico vs Mexico fight, and you'll see one nationality blindly saying their countrymen won regardless. I try to stay neutral as possible. Although i'm guilty of betting with my heart, instead of my head in some instances. Marquez vs Bradley comes to mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

Boz, it's a really good question.

 

 

Sadly, it's also pretty much like asking someone if they have an accent.

:mlol: Quite true. I however always try to see it neutrally, even if I like and support a fighter that lost or should have lost. Such was the case with Marco Huck, who comes from the same country as I, more or less. But I say he did lose to Lebedev back then, 115-113. I was however glad he got the decision, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

:mlol: Quite true. I however always try to see it neutrally, even if I like and support a fighter that lost or should have lost. Such was the case with Marco Huck, who comes from the same country as I, more or less. But I say he did lose to Lebedev back then, 115-113. I was however glad he got the decision, lol.

True. I was a huge James Toney fan in the 90s but by the time he lost to Jones he should have had two losses on his record. Tiberi and Reggie Johnson both beat him but I was glad when he got the nod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

He also lost the two McCallum fights if we look at it as we should, in an unbiased way. He landed 100 more punches than Toney and even if you tried to say that Toneys punches were harder, that would be taking away all the wins of people like Nunn, Pernell Whittaker, Ali, Mayweather. People need to realize that it is called a boxing match and not hard hitting match...otherwise we might as well not bother letting Earnie Shavers fight for the title, just give it to him. I typed in worst decisions in history and the McCallum bouts and Tiberi one were on the short list. Compubox showed that McCallum landed 100 more punches, yet the guy I was arguing with on youtube is so biased that he said compubox got it wrong, McCallum landed a handful of touches!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

I have been on youtube and various other sites, and agree totally, that black guys always side with black boxers. It was like when O.J Simpson got away with double murder, all the whites were like, WTF???? Whilst blacks were whoopin for joy.

Please don't anyone try to start an argument that I am racist. The godfather to my three daughters is black, and I have many black friends and boxers that I idolize, but they really are biased, just like Mexicans and Puerto Ricans are. There may be exceptions of course, but they would be as rare as a snowman in Bermuda.

I am the worlds biggest Holyfield fan, and was probably the only Brit, who traveled to New York, to support Evander against my fellow Brit Lewis.

I would not want a white guy to win or a Brit to win, just because that is what I am. Wilder fights Fury, I am in with Deontay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

Yes, unfortunately that is so. I can see it comes from the racism they were dealing with for centuries, but now it is time to let that be. But many still can't. I don't root for race, I root for country and for the fighter I simply like better or feel is better, if I don't have a special bond with any fighter in the ring. Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

He also lost the two McCallum fights if we look at it as we should, in an unbiased way. He landed 100 more punches than Toney and even if you tried to say that Toneys punches were harder, that would be taking away all the wins of people like Nunn, Pernell Whittaker, Ali, Mayweather. People need to realize that it is called a boxing match and not hard hitting match...otherwise we might as well not bother letting Earnie Shavers fight for the title, just give it to him. I typed in worst decisions in history and the McCallum bouts and Tiberi one were on the short list. Compubox showed that McCallum landed 100 more punches, yet the guy I was arguing with on youtube is so biased that he said compubox got it wrong, McCallum landed a handful of touches!

The American media had him winning both fights at the time but Mike won both for me. I've never seen their third match but don't recall any controversy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

When I got into boxing at the age of 10/11, I had favourite fighters and would cheer them on like Lloyd Honeyghan, Barry McGuigan and Frank Bruno. Later on, I was a big supporter of Lennox Lewis. Over the years it's obvious that you will favour a certain boxer, if you have an emotional interest.

 

I've covered fights from ringside for Ringnews24, Boxrec News and Bocsio magazine. Often in local shows there is the 'home' fighter against an import, and often I will know the 'home' fighter. But it is imperative that I stay neutral and watch what both fighters are doing in the ring and not just the 'home' fighter.

 

I think alot of boxing fans make the mistake of only watching what their favourite boxer is doing rather than the opponent aswell - hence some of the crazy scoring they come up with. You can not score a fight correctly, if you are cheering on one fighter.

 

For those that know their boxing, enter our Prediction League, runs for 10 weeks and has a cash prize. Good fun against stiff opposition. Fight picks need to be in by Jan 16th.

Ringnews24 Prediction League 28 Week 1 - $100 Prize

http://www.koboxingforum.com/showthread.php?t=107085

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

Check out how bias Paul Smith is during the end of the Luke Campbell fight against Mendy. He scores the fight for Mendy by 2 points, then says "I hope i'm wrong, hope the judges scored it completely different."

 

So he prefers to be an incompetent commentator? or feels Mendy deserves to get the shaft by the judges, well thats great. Eat shit Paul, with a spoon.

 

Starts at the 49min mark. https://youtu.be/nkxh8CNAICk?t=2941

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

The American media had him winning both fights at the time but Mike won both for me. I've never seen their third match but don't recall any controversy.

 

I know most people think Mike won the second for sure. But the first one was scored a draw so...I guess it was also his. I have to rewatch those fights, esp the first, haven't seen that in ages. Btw, Bodysnatcher is one of my very favorite boxers. :thumb:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

I know most people think Mike won the second for sure. But the first one was scored a draw so...I guess it was also his. I have to rewatch those fights, esp the first, haven't seen that in ages. Btw, Bodysnatcher is one of my very favorite boxers. :thumb:

In the dark days before the internet and my being able to afford Sky the reports in the press led me to believe that Toney was a handy winner. I was stunned when I saw the bouts and saw McCallum as a clear winner. I seem to recall the commentary teams had Toney was winning clearly. He was literally out punched for two and a half minutes of every round, exploded for a quick burst of punches at the end of the round and the commentators would say "That's won the round for Toney". No wonder Mike had a bit of a chip on his shoulder!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

In the dark days before the internet and my being able to afford Sky the reports in the press led me to believe that Toney was a handy winner. I was stunned when I saw the bouts and saw McCallum as a clear winner. I seem to recall the commentary teams had Toney was winning clearly. He was literally out punched for two and a half minutes of every round, exploded for a quick burst of punches at the end of the round and the commentators would say "That's won the round for Toney". No wonder Mike had a bit of a chip on his shoulder!!!

Yea man...as I already said, none of the Fab Four would fight him. Duran vacated his title so he didn't have to fight him and fought Hearns instead (he figured, if I'm getting koed, might as well do it for the big money), Hearns also avoided him, Leonard just ignored him and Hagler...well, we've done that discussion already. ;-) He wasn't really keen on fighting him either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

To the best of my knowledge, I've remained unbiased when it came to results - I have no interest in the nonsense offered up by Compubox or pundits - I'll watch a fight and name the winner, even if I don't like the result. I wanted Klitschko to beat Fury purely because I like to see people shut up when they've been abusive, but Fury clearly won that fight and fair play. Similarly, I can't stand Pacquiao but wouldn't dream of claiming he lost to Bradley.

 

As to nationality, I couldn't care less where a fighter's from, only that he or she is fun to watch: "WOOOO, that person happened to be born within 300 miles of where I was born! I'm definitely on their side!" Supporting someone because of an accident of birth is bizarre to me.

Edited by gavpowell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: How biased are you when it comes to supporting a fighter?

 

I'm hugely biased...though I tend to REALLY criticise a guy I support if I feel he under performs. Tanaka got it from both barrels for fighting like an idiot vs Saludar for example.

lol i just watched that fight. He would drop his left and Saludar kept tagging him with a straight right over and over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...