Middleweight beltholder Peter Quillin could soon defend his WBO title against promotional stablemate Danny Jacobs.
Boxing community reacts to Hopkins-Dawson being ruled a no-decision - Next
Page 3 of 3
"I agree with the no-contest. I think that they're doing the right thing, because I don't think that you should be knocked out by anything other than a punch or any other move other than a punch.
"If the fight is not stopped for anything other than a punch, then I think that it's wrong. So I think that this fight should be a no-contest," Lamont Peterson, RING No. 2-rated junior welerweight and IBF/WBA beltholder.
"Listen, I was at the fight in Los Angeles, and on the night of the fight, as soon as it happened, I thought, 'wow, this is definitely going to be a no-contest or a no-decision'.
"When they were making the ruling, as I'm sitting there and watching the replays on the big screens in the arena, when they said that it was a knockout, I was very surprised. I figured that 'no question, they're going to appeal this,' and I figured, 'this is a slam-dunk.'
"And as I was watching the replays on the night of the fight as well as a bunch of times when I came home on the DVR, I was convinced from the moment that it happened as I was watching it happen that this was a cut and dried no-decision or no-contest because of the fact that it was 100 percent a foul.
"Whether you believe that it was a purposeful foul, or you think that Bernard Hopkins was fouling him by leaning on his back, or that Dawson fouled him by throwing him down.
"Either way, there was a foul committed, accidental or not, and the fight needed to be stopped. To me, it was blatantly a no-contest. It took a couple of months to have the hearing, but it was the right decision," Dan Rafael, ESPN.com
"Actually, I could see it coming. What were they, in the second round? Whether it was incidental or accidental, the referee rendered a decision. What did they originally call it? A TKO?
"Well, if they're going by the letter of the rules, if it was just an accident or done on purpose, I think that it could have been a disqualification.
But you could kind of see that unless it had gone four rounds, you really can't say who was giong to win the fight. I had picked Dawson, but there was really no way to tell who was going to win the fight.
"So I think that they did the right thing, to be honest. I think that they should have a rematch, and it would be bad to put it back in California.
"You have two guys who are from East Coast, and that fight would probably do better in Atlantic City or Connecticut. It probably wouldn't do well in California and it didn't do that well the first time," Henry Ramirez, trainer of heavyweight contender Chris Arreola.
Photos by Tom Hogan, Hogan Photos, Golden Boy Promotions
Lem Satterfield can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org