“I Thought It Was a Robbery”: Shakur Stevenson Does Not Hold Back While Talking About Maxi Hughes vs George Kambosos Jr

The boxing world reverberated with controversy following the Saturday night bout between George Kambosos Jr. and Maxi Hughes. But none sounded louder than the words of Shakur Stevenson. The undefeated two-division champion watched from his ringside seat, an eyewitness to a narrative vastly different from the one etched in the judges’ scorecards. Branding the verdict a “robbery”, he challenged the consensus with a conviction as potent as his left hook.

However, the staunch Stevenson critique doesn’t end at the controversial fight verdict. The young dynamo from Newark, New Jersey, known for his formidable jabs in the ring, was equally unflinching outside it. He fired off punches aimed at the judges, the boxing fraternity, and even his potential future opponent. What exactly did Stevenson say that’s sending ripples across the boxing landscape?

In Stevenson’s corner: Candid views and controversial critiques

In a post-fight interview with ESPN’s Bernardo Osuna, Shakur Stevenson was as candid as a punch to the gut. “I thought it was a robbery,” he declared, unafraid to contest the decision that had Australian George Kambosos Jr. triumph over British southpaw Maxi Hughes. “I thought Maxi boxed well, and I thought he was a better fighter.”

The match at the FireLake Arena had Kambosos grappling with Hughes’ nimble movement and straight left hand. Yet, the judges’ scorecards painted a different picture. Two judges, Josef Mason and Gerald Ritter, tipped the scales in favor of Kambosos, while David Sutherland declared it a draw. But for Stevenson, the narrative was starkly different. “Mason somehow scored nine of the 12 rounds for Kambosos,” he reflected, highlighting the stark discrepancy he perceived.

Shakur Stevenson vs Kambosos? Not quite yet

Stevenson didn’t stop at criticizing the fight’s outcome. He took aim at the judges’ ability, suggesting they lacked focus and needed more training. “I think that the judges should be held to a higher criteria,” he insisted. He expressed his concerns about the direction boxing was taking due to such inconsistencies, arguing, “they’re not really paying too much attention to the fights, and I think it’s messing up boxing.”

As the conversation turned towards future opponents, Stevenson remained steadfast in his candid approach. He acknowledged Kambosos’ achievements but remained confident about defeating him if a match were to happen. However, Kambosos was not his first choice. “I wanna fight the best of the best, so as of right now, Kambosos is not on my level,” he stated with conviction. He set his crosshairs on names like Vasiliy Lomachenko, Devin Haney, and Gervonta Davis.

Shakur Stevenson’s hard-hitting critique of the Hughes-Kambosos fight and his ambitious future plans have ignited the boxing fraternity. His candid remarks question not only a singular fight outcome but the very judgment system that governs boxing. As he sets his sights on top-tier opponents like Lomachenko, Haney, and Davis, one can’t help but wonder about the reverberations of his comments.

Also Read: Bob Arum Hints at “Major” Plans in Store For Shakur Stevenson

Will Stevenson’s candor initiate changes in the sport? What will his outspokenness mean for his career trajectory? And most importantly, will we see him face off against the best of the best? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Watch This Story: Everything You Need to Know About Ongoing Devin Haney vs. Shakur Stevenson Negotiations