How many fights do you have to watch in slow motion to see who won?

None

 

Pretty pointless, judges don't judge in slowmotion so why try correcting their score in a way they don't see the fight

 

The Manny Pacquiao 3rd fight.

Anything else, Nope..

Only PAC is the special one that needs special tools to show he won...

 

Fights that were super close according to the general consensus.

Mayweather-Castillo

All 3 Pac-JMM fights

Barrera-Morales 1 & 2


Other sports utilze slow motion to correct mistakes. TV sports broadcasts use it to see better what the human eye missed.

Is there a reason to not wanting to watch slow motion?

Yes. Not wanting to see the truth.

:deal

 

Only ******s need slow motion to score boxing matches.

 

The *******s need slow motion because apparently they aren't quick enough in real time to judge fights.

Also they need Pac to have the correct gloves and trunks and plyometric training in order to judge the fight honestly

 

none. u just rewatch it and if u cant figure it out watch it again

 

helenius-chisora

if you watch in super slow, 10x replay, you can just about make out the right hand that grazes chisora's head in the 11th which probably was the deciding factor in swinging the fight to helenius

people who say chisora was robbed just can't see helenius' punches in real time

 

:huh is this guy serious?

 

If you think those fights were close YDKSAB. Competitive, not close. Maybe Morales/MAB 2. The rest, no.

 

None. It is unnecessary to me because judges don't have the option of slow motion.

 

Well here's a serious question for all of you.

Aside from 1 hour and 15 minutes of your time, what do you stand to lose by watching a fight in slow motion?

Perhaps, the threat of your original beliefs challenged?

:think

 

:rofl:rofl

 

I just don't need to watch a fight in slow motion to score rounds. I've watched long enough.