Was Holly Holm Really Robbed Against Stephanie Han?

Was Holly Holm Really Robbed Against Stephanie Han?

We live in an age where every close fight is deemed an extreme miscarriage of justice. Fights that have rounds that have an abundance of swing rounds, which can swing the scorecards in many different directions. We saw that again on Saturday night in El Paso, Texas. The robbery cries were loud when Stephanie Han retained her WBA world lightweight title with a repeat victory over Holly Holm. It was viewed as highly controversial. A blatant hometown decision for Han. But was it really the robbery that many perceived it to be?

I was elsewhere in the boxing world, covering the Boxxer show in London. I had seen the result and the online fury. Han getting over the line by the narrowest of margins. One judge couldn’t split them at 95-95, but the remaining two judges saw it to Han by wafer-thin 96-94 scorecards.

I saw the outrage over the result. Unlike the scorecards, that was unanimous. The stats seemed to back up that argument. Holm landed 107 punches in comparison to the 70 punches she took in return. Holm threw more, 437 to the 358 punches that came back at her. It looked like a pretty clear case that Holly Holm had indeed been robbed of a rightful victory.

Later on Sunday night, I finally managed to catch up on the fight. The result and that aforementioned outrage were firmly planted in my mind. I fully expected to see what many others had. But I didn’t.

It very quickly became apparent that it was anything but a blatant robbery. There were more swing rounds than clear rounds, and as I said earlier, that can move the scorecards in any number of ways. Although on this occasion, the scoring officials might have got there in different ways, but all three judges were only one point apart when the scores were added up. Maybe that says everything.

Holm had lost their first meeting in January clearly, despite it ending somewhat prematurely in the 7th round to a clash of heads. The second time around, Holm was most certainly much improved. The game plan was better. And it was working, at least to a point. But despite her obvious improvement, I didn’t see the dominance that I was expecting and many others saw. I personally saw a lot of rounds that could have easily gone either way. Han was a little too conservative at times with her output, and it would have been a fight full of regrets if the fight hadn’t gone her way. But I also think Holm can now think that in defeat. Could she have done a little bit more? Close rounds left room for the officials to put a mark down for Han or Holm. It’s not really a phrase I like, but scoring ‘swing’ rounds becomes somewhat subjective. Rounds where there is an argument for either fighter. I think we had that on Saturday night.

Opinions can also be influenced, swayed, and formed by the commentary on offer. We had to remember that judges just score. They don’t have to relay the action to their audience. They just concentrate on the task at hand. That can make a difference. I am old enough to remember when Harry Carpenter convinced an entire nation that Henry Cooper had been robbed against Joe Bugner in the 70s. He hadn’t, but the words of Carpenter convinced millions that he had been. At the weekend, the ESPN commentary team had Han winning. But did they do round-by-round scoring? In my opinion, it works better when the broadcaster utilises someone who just scores the fight. It leaves a little less margin for error.

Don’t get me wrong, I can definitely see a case for Holm winning, but equally, I can also see a case for Han. It was just that kind of fight. I just think Holm left enough room for doubt in those swing rounds.

I had the 35-year-old edging the fight 6-4 in rounds. But I wouldn’t have argued if Holm had got it by the same score. The draw was also in play. It’s just one of those fights for which a case can be made for either fighter. A close fight isn’t a robbery. This was a close fight. Nothing more.

Photo Credit: Cooper Neill/Most Valuable Promotions