As someone whos critical of pac upon initial viewing i had pac winning. He was not busier then horn but was landing better shots. Horn waa aggressive and roughing up pac but alot of it was not scoring shots. R9 was not 10-8.
Having heard all of the uproar I was expecting the robbery of the century, Chavez vs. Whitaker and Lewis vs. Holyfield were going to get blown out of the water by this travesty then I watched the fight and scored Horn a narrow one point winner. Those punch statistics are complete utter bullsh*t, trust your eyes not how many times some twit presses a button. I suspect American fight fans have been swayed by the very persuasive Teddy Atlas, the problem with Atlas is that A) he’s obviously not all there & B) the guy has tunnel vision hence the reason he repeats himself over and over again, I’ve seen him commentate for years and the he misses **** loads while still harping on and on about the same thing, I remember on one undercard fight Teddy was saying how one guy was completely in control when the guy in question was taking bombs, when the guy eventually got knocked down it came completely out of the blue for Atlas.
I don't really see HOW people think horn won. I'm halfway through rewatching the fight. more closely. Actually now have pac outlanding horn in round 1. could be case for a draw if horn wasn't fouling so much.. pushing pac down then punching him before pac recovers ugh. round 2 - 5 are all pac rounds... i admit horn is aggressive but he is being aggressive in wrong (fouling kind of) way. and you can't be the effective aggressor if you aren't landing as much. sorry. this is still what it is.. robbery.