Robberies vs close fights

Except for the really ridiculous scorecards, I sympathize with judges because scoring is both objective and subjective to an extent. Even us boxing fans can't ever agree on what we see. Here's how I saw some controversial fights after rewatching: - Hagler-Leonard: Hagler edged a close fight. - Floyd-Maidana 1: slightly leaned Maidana, but could have been a draw. - Floyd-Pacman: Floyd clearly. - Bradley-Pacman: Pacman (robbery). - Saul-Lara: Saul in a close fight. - GGG-Saul 1: Clear GGG in a competitive fight. - GGG-Saul 2: Leaned Canelo, or draw, could go either way. Taylor-Regis: Close. Draw or either way. - Spence-Porter: Spence in a close fight. - Loma-Teo: Draw or Teo. - Taylor-Catterall: Catterall (robbery). - Teo-Sandor: Sandor in a close fight. - Gervonta-Cruz: Gervonta clearly in a competitive fight. - Loma-Haney: Haney in a competitive fight. - Bertebiev-Bivol 1: Bivol edged it, but quite close, could've been a draw. - Bertebiev-Bivol 2- Clear Bivol win in a competitive fight. - Tank-Roach: Roach clearly in a competitive fight, even without the KD.

A fighter can win a competitive fight clearly. A close fight can go either way, acknowledging swing rounds. I don't call close fights robberies. It's unethical though how the close and competitive fights are scored for the bigger names. Anyway, I'm sure other fans would dispute my scores. Goes to show how different our perspectives are.