Noise 2
Another nightmare. Here's my knee-jerk response, for what it's worth. Maybe it's worth a shot, can't hurt anything. Makes more sense than just rueing and wringing hands, and the e-mail form is accessible and easy
New Jersey State Athletic Commission:
Director: Aaron M. Davis
e-mail form:
http://www.nj.gov/oag/sacb/feedback.html
Telephone: 609-292-0317
Postal mail:
New Jersey State Athletic Control Board
25 Market Street
1st Floor, West Wing
Trenton, NJ 08625
FanPosts are user-created content written by community members of Bad Left Hook, and are generally not the work of our editors. Please do not source FanPosts as the work of Bad Left Hook.
36 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Email for the NJ Attorney General’s Office, which oversees the Athletic Commission.
http://www.nj.gov/lps/formmail.htm
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
HBO email form
My personal preference is to request of HBO support for, and pressure on NJ for, a reversal of the decision, not a rematch. Shouldn’t have to fight twice, he already won. But whatever is your thought.
http://www.hbo.com/boxing/index.html#/about/contact-us.html
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
Sent to the Jersey Commission July 10, 2011
Re: Paul Williams vs. Erislandy Lara decision, Boardwalk Hall, Atlantic City, July 9, 2011:
Thank you in advance for your attention, and thank you as well for working as you do for the health and safety of boxers, and for the health of the sport of boxing.
Regarding which, the health of boxing was severely compromised on Saturday, July 9, 2011, when the really, really wrong and unjust Win for Paul Williams was read. Williams threw punches, lots of them—he threw far more than Lara. But few landed, just 1 out of 5.* Worse, Williams was clearly a damaged fighter sustaining ever greater damage while losing badly on any realistic scorecard. He was hit with lefts by Lara so many times his face, the landing pad for 2010’s KO of the year, was swollen almost twice its normal size. Lara looked fresh as a daisy at the end of the fight, which is not definitive, but is nonetheless a worthy indicator.
For your review, and realizing that Compubox stats aren’t everything, these are overwhelming. http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/view.php?pg=williams-lara-compubox But please watch the fight, which should erase all doubt, never mind Compubox stats.
The judges were Al Bennett, 114-114, Hilton Whitaker III, 114-115, and Donald Givens 114-115. This was not a close fight. It was almost a shutout among all internet threadsters, press row, and the fight callers. Roy Jones Jr., who knows something about it, was publicly appalled.
This decision is such an injustice that, justly or not and for the first time in years, more than mere home cooking is perceived by many. Regarding perceptions of New Jersey, after last night’s decision, instead of thinking of the great state parks, the Meadowlands and Giants Stadium, the lighthouses and beaches, Frank Sinatra, Dionne Warwick, and Bruce Springsteen, the darkest side of Jersey’s history—Mob/corruption/fixed-fights—seems to leer and lurk again, turning decent boxing fans away from the sport they love, and away from New Jersey. It strikes me that fighters seeing this corruption-riddled-looking mess will go a long way to avoid fighting in, and bringing money into, Atlantic City, enough so that this decision will not only cost Lara, it will consistently and subtly deprive NJ of revenue. For sure I’d personally need the reassurance of a public and strict Commission reassessment to feel comfortable condoning this decision with my dollar by spending it there.
For the sake of the perception of State of New Jersey and the sport of boxing, I hope from the heart that the New Jersey Boxing Commission lives up to its usually good reputation, reviews the fight, and overturns the decision—without putting either fighter through a rematch. If that can’t be done, then an immediate rematch, as is being requested by Lara’s trainer, seems only right.
Thank you for your consideration,
SCG
*Boxing Scene, July 10, 2011
http://www.boxingscene.com/compubox-stats-lara-lands-half-power-on-williams—41350
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
by BoxAnne on Jul 10, 2011 12:13 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Hell, this is poetry, BoxAnne
A great example of what a letter to a commission should look and sound like.
Bad Left Hook
"My God, kids today think that the laces are for tying up the gloves."
-- Fritzie Zivic
rec'd this comment, as well as the post as a whole
Boxing writer: "Iran, what are you going to do when you retire?"
Iran Barkley: "Rob your house"
Not nearly as good as yours and rife with hyperbolic language but I'm still pissed about that decision.
Re: Paul Williams vs. Erislandy Lara decision, Boardwalk Hall, Atlantic City, July 9, 2011
To the New Jersey State Athletic Control Board,
I am writing to you in order to voice my severe shock and disappointment as to the result of the HBO televised Paul Williams vs. Erislandy Lara bout. This bout was an exciting testament to the heart and skill that a boxer must have in order to succeed on the elite level of this most esteemed and historic sport. The decision, as scored by the three judges, is a testament to everything that is horrible and wrong with the sport today.
Judge Al Bennett scored the bout 114-114, a draw, Judge Hilton Whitaker III scored the bout 114-115 in favor of Paul Williams, and Judge Donald Givens scored the bout 114-116 in favor of Paul Williams. It is my personal opinion that this result was a pre-meditated robbery. I cannot speak as to how or why the judges colluded other than to speculate that nefarious characters must have had a hand in this terrible decision. From the SACB home page of the State of New Jersey website, it is the Board’s main purpose “to protect the safety and well being of all participants and promote the public confidence and trust in the regulatory process and conduct of public boxing and other combative sports”. I will state in this email and publicly that the New Jersey State Athletic Control Board has failed in their main stated purpose.
Due to this decision I will no longer spend my hard earned money or attention in support of any athletic events supervised by the New Jersey State Athletic Control Board. There is no way to guarantee the sanctity of sport and all the values and morals learned from watching and participating when atrocities such as this one are allowed to occur. I will also publicly discourage any of my family, friends or associates to attend, view or participate in any sporting events supervised by the New Jersey State Athletic Control Board.
I demand that the New Jersey State Athletic Control Board publicly and with all the honesty that they failed to protect answer for this most extreme and unjust decision.
by glatin1982 on Jul 13, 2011 11:55 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Tha’t a great letter.
The results of the effort by outraged boxers, media, and fans seems actually to have had an effect, altho not a reversal of the outcome (which I never personally expected) that we all wish it were. Maybe more noise more often would help more often. It’s never going to be a perfectly judged sport 100% of the time, and this won’t be the last battle, but scaring people regarding the money they make judging is a start. And overall you can hope that it encourages/empowers fans to raise more hell the next time, because at least once they’ve seen it have an effect.
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
For more stats as ammunition
http://www.boxingscene.com/team-lara-hbo-tell-williams-rematch-retire—41358
lots of good detail. I may bombard them, simply copying and pasting these Boxing Scene figures with an appropriate intro sentence.
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
It may be a coincidence but arguably the worse decision boxing history also took place in AC (I was there). It involved James Toney vs. Dave Tiberi.
"Luck is when preparation meets opportunity." - Mike Quarry
I've only heard of that one
Two of the judges weren’t even licensed in the state of NJ, and Tiberi was so disgusted that he turned down high six figures for a rematch and just retired.
by Verklemptomaniac on Jul 10, 2011 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Related Stuff from Other BLH Threads
Mike Dallas jr. vs. Mauricio Herrera:
Zac Young 95-95; Fritz Werner 92-98; Alejandro Rochin Mapule 94-96
Zab Judah vs Lucas Mattysse:
Joseph Pasquale 13-114; Hilton Whitaker III 113-114; Weleska Roldon 114-113
Devon Alexander vs. Lucas Matthysse
Carlos Colon 93-96; Denny Nelson 94-95; Brett Miller 96-93
Paul Williams vs Erislandy Lara:
Al Bennett 114-114; Hilton Whitaker III 114-115; Donald Givens 114-116
Devon Alexander vs Andriy Kotelnik:
Jerry Roth 116-112; Ohren Shellenberger 116-112; Denny Nelson 116-112
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
Was Denny Nelson Licensed to Judge the Kotlenik Fight
http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=490233
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
ALL THREE Lara vs Williams JUDGES SUSPENDED BY NJ COMMISSION
also reported by Rafael about 45 minutes ago.
http://www.boxingscene.com/paul-williams-vs-erislandy-lara-judges-suspended—41496
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
With any luck
Denny Nelson runs for cover, gets another job.
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
Not enough in my opinion.
Such unqualified individuals should have never been in a position to judge such a high-profile fight in the first place. It’s great that Davis wants to declare that they need additional training, but a cursory glance of their resumes before that fight should have made that completely obvious to anyone. He says that the commission “did not provide our best officiating on July 9.” My question is why was this case, and are any consquences actually going to be felt by the person(s) responsible for this. Merely declaring the judges incompetent is not an adequate response to this kind of decision, and I would hate to see this story die with what amounts to little more than an after-the-fact PR move
It seems like as strong a statement
as they can make, and more than a lot of us expected. Three men are suspended, which means they’re loss of income, and have been publicly reprimanded, and will likely never really judge anything much again. It’s very rare for action that strong to be taken. As to why did it happen? I’d like to know too, but NJ’s commission is generally pretty good, so it’s always possible it was just a perfect-storm kind of mess-up—not enough attention paid, but no worse.
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
My comment admittedly came off as a little angry. I however feel like the suspensions would be a lot more meaningful if these were people who clearly make their living from judging. Whitaker is the only one who appears to do so with any regularity, and questions could have easily been raised about his competence well before this fight.
I also think the strongest statement that could be made would be to declare the bout a no contest; it seems like the commission is trying to have its cake and eat it too by publicly reprimanding the judges but upholding the decision. One can certainly raise questions about whether that’s the most advisable course of action in this situation (slippery slope, etc.), but publicly throwing the judges under the bus while still standing behind their actual judgments doesn’t look particularly good IMO.
I don’t think they can change it at all according to their own rules, unless they find evidence of corruption, which they didnt’ find—doesn’t mean it wasnt’ there, nor does it mean they didn’t look—would take a lot of investigation to prove corruption, levels of police power and staffing they probably just arent’ equipped for.
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
Progress Is Progress--It's Always a Win, Even If It's Not a Shutout.
The voices ot the well known, especially boxers and trainers, speaking out seemed to help a lot. The huge media scorching (especially Ring, that mag has a lot of cachet) really helped. I hope they all do it more often. I think they don’t try for the same reasons we don’t more often, the sense that nothing said or done will help. So just in terms of encouraging greater response the next time—and there will always be a next time, it’s a subjective sport more vulnerable than most to hanky-panky—it’s progress, if not a perfect solution. And progress is a big bunch better that nothing.
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
Sent July 14, 2011
Aaron Davis
New Jersey State Athletic Commission
Thank you for your immediate and courageous response to the Lara vs. Williams judging controversy. It’s a highly unusual and historic move, one which will be remembered and reflects well on the State of New Jersey. It’s a relief to know that something significant was done, and that the undereducated were in this case removed from the arena.
With this suspension, the New Jersey Commission has raised the bar for commissions worldwide. I can’t document this, but I’m pretty sure my name is legion in hoping that this brave and commendable step sets a new standard for commission behavior generally, throughout the boxing world. I think most fans hope that at least, in future, bad boxing decisions where corruption has been ruled out will live up to your example in publicly calling in for the review and reeducation of lackluster, inattentive, and therefore damaging judges—that this will become more the norm.
Thank you again for taking a lot of the edge off the injustice to Lara, and to boxing, and thank you as well for starting to lead the way to more frequent, attentive reaction to, and actions regarding, obvious and sometimes repeated bad judging. It’s too important to the fighters to be allowed to lapse, never mind the public and the press. Congratulations to you on this bold and heartening step.
Suzanne Gagne
Holyoke, Mass.
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
One thing everyone fails to note is that PW threw over 1,000 punches and I believe landed more than Lara. Thus, an argument could be made (however weak and remote) that the judges did have at least a perspective. Just saying.
Too many of the boxing writers out there are running wild with this when they forget the Toney-Tiberi affair—or Casamayor-Santa Cruz. Let’s have some historical perspective is all I am saying. I am not questioning the crticism of these 3 judges . I just have a hard time with sanctamonious rage when it is too myopic or too targeted. Everyone is piling on here but where were they on some others? Not BLH posters—but boxing writers. Peace.
"Luck is when preparation meets opportunity." - Mike Quarry
Everyone is piling on here but where were they on some others?
Historical perspective is always where I try to start. But this was a right-now situation, not a study on bad decisions overall (there’ve been far too many); it was a response to a situation as powerful as it was single-minded, which is what was called for here and now—and unlike before, something was actually done.
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
The argument t for Williams re punch volume is pretty remote, unless you’re used to judging amateurs,seems to me.
I agree that this is neither the first nor the worst of robberies; in particular, this past 12 months, there have been at least 4 controversial-at-best decisions and imo that they created a “cumulative blows” effect on the psyches of those watching and caring about the sport, which fueled this firestorm. It did have an effect, essentially for the first time ever that a Commission has taken such a step. So that’s a good thing, and here’s to its continuing effect. More noise, more light.
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939
Again, This is not about you; it's about Boxing writers who are piling on with no perspective.
Cut me some slack here. Gee. Not fair.
"Luck is when preparation meets opportunity." - Mike Quarry
“Piling on” is better late that never, and in this situation historical perspective isn’t the point. Media, writers, fighters, fight callers and threadsters spoke as one, got it right this time, and made it count—such that a state commmision (in a state that is known for presenting a lot of boxing) set a significant precedent. If the media got it right this time, why not cut them some slack? Why not commend them, even? Nothing can be done about bad decisions of the past—this is about now and, hopefully, the future.
When it comes to historical perspective what I think is odd is that few seem willing to have any such perception regarding the history-making nature of the really unheard of and welcome action of that commission. A triple suspension is huge. And it’s a first. And suspensions are as far as the commission can go within its charter, and more than any other previous commission has ever done, at least in the US. Unless maybe you know of another professional-level instance where 3 judges (or even 1) were suspended at all, let alone within 4 days of the fight. I googled for days and couldn’t find another instance, google may have failed me, it sometimes does. So I guess the lack of historical perspective seems more stark to me in relation to the general response or lack thereof to NJ’s precedent-setting action.
There is no safety in numbers, or in anything else--James Thurber, 1939


















