In the often-contentious world of combat sports, few things spark more debate than a judge`s scorecard. The term “robbery” is frequently brandished, sometimes justifiably, often not. As Katie Taylor and Amanda Serrano prepare for their highly anticipated third meeting, it`s an opportune moment to look back at their first two legendary clashes and dissect the scorecards that fueled so much discussion.
These aren`t just fights; they are chapters in a rivalry for the ages. The first encounter in 2022 and the rematch in 2024 delivered action worthy of their billing, yet both left a lingering question: did Amanda Serrano truly get a fair shake from the judges? Let`s put on our analytical hats and revisit the action and the scoring.
Fight 1: The Madison Square Garden Classic (April 2022)
The initial battle was a strategic chess match that exploded into a war. Taylor, the undisputed champion, circled and countered, utilizing her footwork and sharp straight punches. Serrano, the aggressive challenger, marched forward, seeking to impose her strength and volume. For the early rounds, Taylor seemed to build a lead, but Serrano found her rhythm in the middle chapters, particularly a dominant fifth round that saw Taylor visibly hurt and forced into survival mode. It was a spectacular display of resilience from Taylor.
What followed were rounds of near-constant, frenetic exchanges. Both fighters landed significant shots; Taylor`s clean counters against Serrano`s relentless body-head combinations. Scoring these rounds live was, frankly, a nightmare. Every sequence offered a potential argument for either fighter. When the final bell sounded, the outcome felt genuinely uncertain.
The official scores reflected this uncertainty: 96-94 for Serrano, and 97-93 and 96-93 for Taylor, resulting in a split decision victory for Katie Taylor. CompuBox statistics showed Serrano landing more total punches (173 to 147) and power punches (171 to 146). However, statistics tell only part of the story in boxing; effective aggression and clean punching are what judges are *supposed* to prioritize round-by-round.
Looking back, the consensus among many ringside observers and media scores leaned towards Taylor, or perhaps a draw. While intensely close, it`s hard to label the first fight`s decision a clear “robbery” given the back-and-forth nature and Taylor`s effectiveness in crucial moments, even if out-landed in volume. A dissenting judge isn`t proof of malice, merely a differing perspective on a chaotic 30 minutes.
Fight 2: The Unanimous, Yet Debated, Decision (November 2024)
The rematch picked up right where the first left off, immediately escalating the drama. Serrano landed a significant shot at the end of Round 1 that clearly bothered Taylor. The pattern of Taylor`s movement meeting Serrano`s pressure continued, but this time, Taylor`s counters felt particularly sharp and well-timed. She effectively broke Serrano`s rhythm with combinations.
However, this fight also saw multiple head clashes, one of which opened a nasty cut over Serrano`s eye. This became a factor, as Taylor, perhaps intentionally or not, targeted the wound. A point was even deducted from Taylor later in the fight for leading with her head, a decision that felt slightly out of sync with the action it punctuated, yet understandable given the impact the head clashes had on Serrano.
Like the first fight, the later rounds dissolved into gritty, phone-booth brawling. Both fighters showed incredible guts, trading heavy shots until the very end. When the cards were read, all three judges scored it identically: 95-94 for Katie Taylor. A unanimous decision, but with the narrowest possible margin.
CompuBox data from the rematch is stark: Serrano landed significantly more punches (324 to 217 total, 278 to 208 power). She won eight rounds on power punches landed compared to Taylor`s two. While volume isn`t everything, such a significant disparity, coupled with Serrano seemingly landing the harder, more impactful shots for stretches, raises eyebrows.
Media and fan reactions this time were more divided. While some agreed with Taylor, a notable portion felt Serrano had done enough, pointing to the punch stats and perceived effectiveness. This is where the “robbery” narrative gained considerable steam.
The Verdict: Was Serrano Robbed?
Analyzing both fights without the live adrenaline rush confirms their status as classics. They were fiercely contested, technically intriguing, and brutally entertaining. Scoring them round-by-round remains a challenge, with many rounds being toss-ups.
However, based on the re-evaluation of the action and particularly the compelling statistics from the second fight, the argument that Amanda Serrano was unfairly denied victory in the rematch is strong. While the first fight could reasonably be scored for Taylor or a draw depending on how one values effective aggression versus clean countering in those close rounds, the volume and power differential in the second fight, combined with Serrano`s early success and resilience through the cut, suggest she had a clearer claim to victory.
A score of 2-0 in favor of Taylor, while official, doesn`t quite capture the razor-thin margins and debatable rounds of this rivalry. At minimum, Serrano likely deserved a draw in one fight, or perhaps a win in the second. The narrative of a potential “robbery” holds more water when applied specifically to the second encounter.
Ultimately, the judges rendered their decisions, and Taylor`s name is in the record books for both wins. But as they step into the ring for a third time, the contentious scorecards of the past hang heavy in the air, giving this trilogy bout not just sporting significance, but the potential for a definitive resolution to a judging saga.
