This post was post fight: The thing I dislike most about this fight is how as time passes, people act like Pac completely dominated him. The fight was extremely close.
Thurman won ONLY if one wanted to give him every benefit of the doubt on close rounds. Otherwise was a clear Pac win
Pac dominated Thurman for the first 5-6 rounds. Thurman made it competitive the rest of the way. Thurman took a savage beating (we've never seen Thurman lumped up, bruised, and bleeding like that) and was badly hurt by the body shot. Pac took some brutal shots from Thurman, but wasn't beaten down during any stretch or looked like he was on his way out.
Pacman didnt dominate the whole fight, but the KD makes a big difference. The fight was close but clear, very clear. No way it is possible to defend that thurman won, in any case biased people should defend that he got a draw, which is next to impossible because of this KD, that's why this KD is important, it removes the possiblity of defending a draw for thurman and, as I said, 100% sure he didnt win. So... Very clear in my opinion, close too. One thing does not negate the other.
It was a close fight which shows how Good Thurman was back then.. Today, I don’t think he’s as motivated.
I actually tuned into the fight late myself and watched from round 5 onwards and I'm pretty sure I had Truman winning basically every round.
It was a fight of two halves, Pacquiao clearly getting the better of it the first half while Thurman got acclamated to Pacquiao's rhythm and unusual herky jerk style and got the better of most of the rounds in the second half. From what I remember, at least on my card, the fight rested in the last round and if memory serves me Pacquiao left enough in the tank to take the round from Thurman rather emphatically. Pacquiao deserved the win on my card, but yeah most people I know recall the fight as if Pacquiao dominated and Thurman did'nt put up much of a fight.
