The official Mayweather vs. Pacquiao aftermath trash receptacle

i must say, rd 9 was interesting. it look like pacquiao was in control

 

This.

Klompton is a true boxing aficionado and I agree with his assessment.

It was so orchestrated that I was half expecting Vince McMahon to run onto the ring.

 

Why are people still entertaining this bull****? Fights aren't judged in slo mo it's irrelevant to the outcome of this fight.

 

Bs. It uses technology to verify the truth. Boxing is scored real-time by a bunch of often corrupt officials. That doesn't mean that this is the most accurate or true measure of the truth.

Watch Sweet Pea vs JCC. Who won? How many fights are there in the history of boxing like that? How many would be rescored with slo-mo and unbiased judges?

 

I agree, however decades ago, punch stats weren't tracked like they are today, so yeah slo-mo is generally useful to study film and help you decide who wins rounds in classic fights, however my main focus area is using slo-mo to produce more accurate punch-stat numbers of recent fights like Floyd vs Manny, a fight that produced numbers that were prevalently used to infer a lot about the fight. (but never tested)

If you watch old fights, punch stats weren't a part of the telecast, and boxing had a more organic flow. And generally, boxing was presented in scored in a much more accurate way. (there weren't the problems that exist now)

For example,
-you had 15 round title fights (more rounds to seperate boxers)
-you had more judges scoring even rounds
-you didn't have punch stats distracting you during fights
-you had much more unbiased commentators less focused on the scoring (during a fight) and more focused on the ebb and flow

All these factors make the modern presentation of boxing VERY diffierent from the old days.

I think the best way to attack this problem is by using slo-mo to re-track the punch stats. Because obviously deciding who wins a round is subjective, slo-mo or not. Enhancing the accurate of punch stats (compu box) is something we can actually do by re-watching round by round in slo-mo one boxer at a time.

This can allow us to actually have real boxing debates based on what happens in the rounds. As it stands now, it's simply "he said, she said" and a lot of posters here just want to say "move on" "you're fighter lost" "stop crying" etc.

This prevents us from really fixing boxing. I plan on going through every round of Floyd vs Manny and producing accurate punch stats. Is anyone interested in doing this as well, that way we can then see where the differences are. (between ours and the original numbers) Then we can concretely see where the problems are, because unless we test this, it will remain a mystery whether the numbers are accurate.

Once we have more accurate punch stats, then we can see how those accurate #'s jive with the offical cards. It seems like many times, the person with the higher number of official punches landed in a round usually ends up winning the round on the un-official and/or official card(s).

We need to take a round like round 2 in Pac - Mayweather, where the HBO unofficial scorer scored it for Pac and the Showtime unofficial scorer scored it for Mayweather. It would be interesting to re-track those punch stats in a round like that to see who truly threw / landed more punches.

 

If you believe round 2 was a clear Mayweather round, there is obvious bias here. Re-watch round 2 again please. If you tell me you think Mayweather may have edged it out, fine but clear round?

It's really puzzling how Floyd wins some rounds. Is it his movement? his confident demeanor? the way he makes opponents miss? I swear Floyd can make people think he won rounds without landing 1 punch.

 

I rewatched the fight earlier today.

i gave Pacman rounds 4, 6 and 10 (swing round.) he just didn't do enough on a round by round basis to warrant more than 3 rounds. Honestly, anyone giving him 4 rounds is being too generous.

Everytime FLoyd decided to be the aggressor, he clearly won the rounds. It was brilliant to see him adapt to manny by the later rounds and run away with it. I was also surprised with how he clearly won the first 3 rounds. Pacman put himself in a hole from the very beginning of the match.

Pacman missed a lot more than I expected him to, and he also threw a lot less. Didn't see anything wrong with his right shoulder at all, in fact, in the 10th round he nailed Floyd with a good right and almost caught him nicely with a counter right hook that missed FLoyd by millimeters.

Also the clinching is definitely overstated. Floyd was warned by the 5th round for holding too much and he didn't clinch much afterwards. There wasn't much clinching in the last half of their fight. People make the clinching out to be a remake of Wladimir-Povetkin.

 

I don't doubt for a second that Pac may have won based on accurate punch stats, reviewed carefully in slow motion. I said from the beginning, Mayweather got credited for many punches that were 'taps' or misses. Secondly, Pac was the aggressor and it should definitely be the tiebreaker when rounds are close. I totally understand that ineffective aggression shouldn't be rewarded but when you have an equally ineffective defensive fighter, the aggressor should always win the rounds. I would prefer 10-10 but apparently, it's just not an option for judges cause they never score rounds 10-10.

having said this, i leaned towards Floyd and here's why. Pac didn't do enough, iMO. Floyd did little but he's the undefeated champion and as a judge, i would be very hesitant to give Floyd his first loss ( a huge result) unless opponent clearly wins rounds and clearly takes the fight from him. After carefully reviewing fight in slow motion, it could be true that Pac landed more punches that mattered but he simply didn't do enough to take Mayweather's P4P crown and give him his first loss. The burden is on Mayweather's opponent to do more than Mayweather, to win. Trying to knock Mayweather from the top of the mountain by throwing little, outscoring him by little and being tentative, isn't going to do the job.

As a Pac fan, i didn't have a problem with this loss, i had a problem with lopsided scores and some who claimed 'floyd dominated'. Floyd didn't do s h it and Pac clearly kept Floyd at bay BUT Pac was too f cautious, not busy enough and didn't quite give it the effort i was hoping for. I don't think he deserved the win, irrespective of these slow motion 'accurate' revisions. In the end, floyd didn't do sh it but Pac didn't so sh it either!

 

Live I thought Pac-Man just edged it but I'll have to watch it again. This is definetly a round where I think we should all go back and track punch stats. Watch it twice (preferably in slo-mo) counting all punches thrown / punches land.

This will take a lot of the subjectivity out of debating a fight like this. Lets be honest, although very humorous at times, in a rivalry this heated, most of the debates around here is two biased sides trying to make the other side look silly to prove their fighter won.

The only way to truly get to the bottom of this is by counting punch stats. Remember, this is something 100% quantifiable. It doesn't directly determine who wins a round, but with the exercise anyone can participate and share their punch stats, and then we can determine who are the outliers. Anyone is entitled to their opinion on who they think won a round, but too many times people just assume someone won a round without really studying it.

I admit I just watched the fight live and refused to watch it again because I was so disappointed by the fight, but I am interested in going through it again round by round, in slo-mo and tracking the punch stats. Because I suspect many of the punch stats are erroneous and random due to many thing surrounding this fight.

I mean lets be real, this was a HBO - Showtime combined telecast. It was split between HBO people and Showtime people. Well I wonder if that was the same way for the punch stat operators. Maybe one guy was from showtime and one guy was from HBO. Maybe one guy's punches were more easier to see and the other guy's wasn't.

To me this is something we can do as boxing fans so I am very motivated to re-track the punch stats, but I would like to work on it with other un-biased fans. Fans that really want to test those punch stats and don't root hard for Floyd or Manny, just are a neutral boxing fan.

 

There are people who think Floyd won first 3 rounds when he only won Round 1. Round 2 might be called a draw if you favor Floyd but Round 3 without the shadow of a doubt a clear Pac round. Rounds 1-5-8-11; Floyd won these 4 rounds and thats it.

 

@ Typhoon^^There were plenty of rounds where FLoyd was the aggressor. DOn't make this out to be a unilateral aggression solely coming from pacman's end. Because that's delusional talk that can't possibly be entertained as logical thinking.

What happened in the first 3 rounds?? What happened in rounds 11 and 12, you know the championship rounds?? What happened in round 5 after Pacman finally won a round in round 4?

I get it, you're a big fan of his. I'm actually a big fan of his too, but this idea that Pacman won is just ridiculous. It wasn't the most competitive fight, but Pacman was a dangerous opponent and kept FLoyd on his toes for the entire fight. I can't see anyone giving pacman any of the rounds besides 4, 6 and 10., regardless of tape speed or whatever nonsensical excuses people wnat to make.

 

Well about 99% of the boxing community and all 3 judges disagree with you.

Pacman did not win a round in the first 3 rounds. There was no 10-10 round either in those first 3. Floyd was the one who pretty much dictated everything for the first quarter of the fight.

 

first 3 rounds what?
Pac was the CLEAR aggressor in round 2, WITHOUT A DOUBT. He was the aggressor for most of the fight, at least 8/9 out of the 12 rounds.

Again, based on accurate, unbiased revision of the fight, Pac may have indeed landed more punches that mattered. By this i mean, punches that should've been counted.

The key rule is:

Relevant rule:
Punches with no force, or punches to the arms, are not counted at all.
-International Boxing Association Technical & Competition Rules

i question rule many of the punches Mayweather got credited with because they seemed to be many taps or jabs/punches that missed.

but again, as i mentioned in my longer post above.. even as a Pac fan, i thought he lost. I don't feel he deserved to win. For floyd to get his first loss, the opponent will need to do more than what Pac did. As i stated above, Floyd didn't do s h it but Pac didn't do sh it either and so Pac didn't deserve to win.

 

Damage controlling Pac****s.

 

obvious bias. Lederman gave Pac round 2 and re-watching it without this terrible bias of yours, you would question why Floyd won it. Basically, Pac had the burden of always doing more and when both did about the same, Floyd tended to get rounds.