Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site pucc-i Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!CS-Mordred!Pucc-H:Pucc-I:ags From: ags@pucc-i (Seaman) Newsgroups: net.rec Subject: Hollyfield Disqualification Message-ID: <397@pucc-i> Date: Wed, 15-Aug-84 14:03:37 EDT Article-I.D.: pucc-i.397 Posted: Wed Aug 15 14:03:37 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 17-Aug-84 00:17:30 EDT References: <455@houca.UUCP> Organization: Purdue University Computing Center Lines: 31 > The US boxer > did not lose the bout on points, but rather on a disqualification for > continuing to fight after the referee twice said "Stop". The "decision" > being (probably unjustifiably) questioned by Jim McKay was the upholding > of the disqualification by the protest arbitration committee. I didn't follow the boxing competition, but I did run across the controversy over the Hollyfield fight on tape, which I played back about two dozen times until I was satisfied that I understood the sequence of events. Here is what I saw: 1. When the referee said "Stop" for the first time, Hollyfield's opponent had his arm around Hollyfield's headgear and over his ears. 2. The referee was standing behind Hollyfield at the time. 3. After the first "stop," but before the second, Hollyfield landed not one but TWO additional blows. 4. The second "stop" came quite clearly AFTER the second blow. Hollyfield then stopped immediately. 5. The referee was Yugoslavian, as was the fighter who won the gold medal by default after Hollyfield's disqualification. You may draw your own conclusions. I really don't care. -- [This is my bugkiller line. It may appear to be misplaced, but it works.] Dave Seaman My hovercraft is no longer full of ..!pur-ee!pucc-i:ags eels (thanks to my confused cat).