Хөнгөн жингийн WBC-ийн сул бүсний төлөөх тулаанд Ламонт Роач Зепедад илт давуугаар ялагдаж, аваргын бүс хүртэх боломжоо дахин алдлаа.
Наймдугаар сарын 1-нд болсон тулаанд Ламонт Роач сүүлийн үеийн үзүүлэлтээрээ аваргын бүсний төлөө тулалдах эрхгүй байсан ч түүнд боломж олгосон юм. Гэвч 12 раундын турш Зепедагийн дарамтад байсан Роач 118–110, 117–111, 117–111 гэсэн оноогоор шүүгчдийн санал нэгтэйгээр ялагдал хүлээв. Энэ нь түүний хувьд аваргын бүсний төлөөх гурав дахь дараалсан ялалтгүй тулаан боллоо.
Роачийн үнэлэмж нь 2025 оны гуравдугаар сард Дэвистэй хийсэн тэнцээний дараа өссөн билээ. Тухайн үед олон хүн түүнийг ялах хангалттай үзүүлэлт үзүүлсэн гэж үзэж байсан ч Крус болон Зепедатай хийсэн сүүлийн тулаанууд түүнийг шилдэг өрсөлдөгч гэх байр суурийг ганхууллаа.
Өдгөө 31 настай боксчин өмнөх тулаануудынхаа хөлсөөр карьераа үргэлжлүүлж байгаа ч ийм төрлийн хүндхэн ялагдал нь түүний ирээдүйн цалин болон өрсөлдөгчийн чанарт сөргөөр нөлөөлөх эрсдэлтэй байна. Аваргын бүсгүйгээр үргэлжлүүлэн тулалдах нь түүний хувьд өндөр орлоготой тулаануудаа алдах шалтгаан болж болзошгүй юм.
Дэлгэрэнгүй эх сурвалжийг харах
Эх сурвалжийг нээх ↓
Instead of being sent back through the contender ranks, Roach was handed a third consecutive championship opportunity against Zepeda for the vacant WBC lightweight title on August 1. He did not deserve that chance based on his recent results, and he wasted the gift.
His disputed draw with Davis in March 2025 created Roach’s value. Many viewers believed Davis’ voluntary knee should have been counted as a knockdown, which would have given Roach the decision.
That performance turned Roach into a sympathetic figure. He looked like the skilled underdog who had done enough to defeat one of boxing’s biggest attractions and was denied his moment.
A second draw against Cruz weakened that story without destroying it. Zepeda tore it apart.
Zepeda did not leave Roach any room for excuses. The scores were 118–110 and 117–111 twice after 12 rounds of sustained pressure. Roach was not robbed, unlucky, or rescued from victory by controversial judging. He was comprehensively beaten.
A fighter can earn good money while his position in the sport deteriorates. Roach’s social media response treats past purses as proof that nothing has changed, but his next offer will provide the real answer.
Promoters could sell the Davis controversy before the Zepeda match. They could present Roach as a dangerous contender who belonged with the best at lightweight. That sales pitch becomes much harder after such a one-sided defeat.
Three consecutive championship bouts across two divisions have now passed without Roach recording a victory. Those were chances many contenders spend years trying to earn.
At 31, he may still collect respectable money against the correct opponent. What he cannot assume is that another champion or major name will volunteer to provide it.
Losing to Zepeda in that fashion could take a large bite out of Roach’s next purse and the quality of opponent attached to it. The payments may continue, but the expensive ones can disappear quickly when a fighter keeps receiving title shots without winning them.
