Pacquiao robbed?

stupid

 

The Subjectivity of Scoring A Fight Can Amaze Even Experienced Participants

When I watched Pacquiao - Bradley live, I was comfortable that Pac had won 9 out of 12 rounds. The decision seemed to be a mere formality. There was no doubt whatsoever. So I was shocked and upset when I heard two of three judges give Bradley 7 of the 12 rounds. The internet was abuzz with sheer anger and frustration. People were saying either the judges were incompetent or the fight was fixed. I scratched my head and wondered how it had happened. But it struck me that Max Kellerman said he heard from several respected boxing writers on press row that they scored it for Bradley. Hmm.

This morning my wife Emily and I decided to watch the fight on mute, without any of the Pac bandwagon commentary that is inevitable from HBO, and without any of the very pro Pac crowd cheering at anything he did. Emily had nearly 100 bouts as a fighter, including amateur boxing, MMA, and pro boxing. I have been involved in boxing in several capacities since I was a teenager. So I felt the two of us could give an unbiased view.

It is absolutely amazing to me how much closer a fight appears without sound. I surprised myself at how much closer the fight seemed upon a second viewing while on mute. I invite anyone to try it. There were a lot of close rounds in that fight, much closer than I had thought previously.

1 - Em and I both thought Bradley won the round.
2 - I scored it even. Em thought Pac or even.
3 - I scored this even. Em thought Pacquiao or even.
4 - I scored this for Pac. However, initially Em thought Bradley won the round. Upon a second viewing of the round, Em changed her mind and made it even.
5 - We both agreed Pac won.
6 - Again we agreed Pac won.
7 - I scored it Pac or even. Em scored it for Pac.
8 - I scored it even or Pac. Em scored it even.
9 - I said Pac or even, but Em scored it for Bradley.
10 - We both agreed Bradley won.
11 - I said Bradley or even. Em scored it for Bradley.
12 - I had it Bradley or even. Em had it even or Bradley.

So, a much closer fight than I originally thought. We scored it 5-4-3 for Pacquiao. Em originally had it 5-5-2 until re-watching a few rounds. Ultimately, we still thought Pac edged it. Neither one of us thought Bradley won. At worst it should have been a draw. The only way you give this fight to Bradley is if you gave him most all of the closer rounds. But I'll be honest that I was amazed at what a closer fight I saw upon the second viewing, with the sound on mute.

 

http://fightnews.com/Boxing/bradley-..._analysis1.gif

What most struck me about the official judge's scorecards was that two of three judges gave the 5th and 7th rounds to Bradley, but my wife and I, even upon reviewing it with no sound, still had the 5th and 7th for Pac. Same with the 8th. We thought the round was no worse than even, or slight advantage to Pac if we had to choose. But two of three called it for Bradley.

We had seen the 1st round for Bradley but 2 of 3 gave it to Pac. They made up for that by giving Bradley the 2nd, even though we thought the 2nd was even or slightly for Pac.

 

Just recalled that Duane Ford had Marquez behind against Juan Diaz before Marquez KO'd Diaz. That fight was similar in that Marquez landed the cleanest, hardest, most effective blows, yet Ford gave the edge to Diaz in the rounds scoring. That's certainly not how I saw that fight. I thought Marquez was winning handily, though it was a competitive bout. Just another tip-off that Ford might score this bout the way he did.

 

Thank you, good sir. My sentiments captured have been captured in your post.

 

Speaking of which, how does one become a judge in Nevada? Who is this C.J. Ross? How many amateur bouts did she have to judge before becoming a pro judge? How did she get assigned to the biggest fight around when she has a sketchy judging record? Therein might lie some answers. Ross appears to be someone who bends over backwards to give losers some rounds. Do that often enough and pretty soon you have a loser winning the fight. But that's who they picked and who was accepted.

Personally, I would not accept any judge who had Foreman down only one point going into the 10th round against Moorer. Is there anyone out there who honestly thinks Moorer didn't win every round up to that point? Well, the fact that Duane Ford had it razor close tells you all you need to know about his ability to score a fight.

Fighters need to do more investigating of judges before accepting them, and lodge objections and refuse to fight if wackadoos are appointed.

 

The point is that Ross did nothing to fairly justify her appointment to a high profile bout like that. So the real questions should be pointed to the commission or the WBO, and ask them how in the hell it was determined that Ross would be judging that bout. Even BEFORE the fight, Lederman was questioning how the heck Ross got that bout when her history was mediocre at best. Therein lies the real answer about boxing. It isn't about putting in the best, most competent, and honest judges and referees. Not at all. Just ask how you get to be a judge or referee in Nevada, or California, or Texas, for that matter, where you see "officials" who have never even worked an amateur bout before. But they know someone or are someone's son or daughter.


Barry Tompkins, Showtime: 119-110 Pacquiao
Harold Lederman, HBO: 119-109 Pacquiao
Ray Markarian, The Sweet Science: 119-109 Pacquiao
Michael Marley, Examiner: 119-109 Pacquiao
Dan Rafael, ESPN: 119-109 Pacquiao
Vittorio Tafur, San Francisco Chronicle: 119-109 Pacquiao
Michael Woods, The Sweet Science: 119-109 Pacquiao
Ramon Aranda, 3 More Rounds: 118-110 Pacquiao
Mario Cabrera, Boxing Republic: 118-110 Pacquiao
Nigel Collins, ESPN: 118-110 Pacquiao
Mike Coppinger, Ring Magazine: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ace Freeman, Fight Fan: 118-110 Pacquiao
Rich Marotta, KFI Los Angeles: 118-110 Pacquiao
Kelsey McCarson, The Sweet Science: 118-110 Pacquiao
Gabriel Montoya, MaxBoxing: 118-110 Pacquiao
Pete O’Brien, USA Today: 118-110 Pacquiao
Eric Raskin, Grantland: 118-110 Pacquiao
Michael Rosenthal, Ring Magazine: 118-110 Pacquiao
Colin Seymour, Examiner: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ryan Songalia, Ring Magazine: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ryan Burton, Boxing Scene: 117-112 Pacquiao
Scott Christ, Bad Left Hook: 117-111 Pacquiao
Tim Dahlberg, Associated Press: 117-111 Pacquiao
Gareth Davies, London Daily Telegraph: 117-111 Pacquiao
Doug Fischer, Ring Magazine: 117-111 Pacquiao
David Greisman, Boxing Scene: 117-111 Pacquiao
Jorge Hernandez, The Low Blow: 117-111 Pacquiao
Kevin Iole, Yahoo! Sports: 117-111 Pacquiao
Robert Littal, Black Sports Online: 117-111 Pacquiao
Steve Kim, Max Boxing: 117-111 Pacquiao
Ryan Maquiñana, Comcast SportsNet Bay Area: 117-111 Pacquiao
David Mayo, MLive: 117-111 Pacquiao
Kieran Mulvaney, HBO: 117-111 Pacquiao
Lance Pugmire, Los Angeles Times: 117-111 Pacquiao
Chris Robinson, Boxing Scene: 117-111 Pacquiao
Cliff Rold, Boxing Scene: 117-111 Pacquiao
Champ Ross, Da Truth Boxing: 117-111 Pacquiao
Luis Sandoval, Boxing Scene: 117-111 Pacquiao
Jonathan Sakti, Comcast SportsNet Bay Area: 117-111 Pacquiao
Tim Starks, Queensberry Rules: 117-111 Pacquiao
Richie Tomassini, Comcast SportsNet Bay Area: 117-111 Pacquiao
Darren Velasco, 8 Count News: 117-111 Pacquiao
Rick Reeno, Boxing Scene: 116-112 Pacquiao
George Willis, New York Post: 116-112 Pacquiao
Steve Zemach, Queensberry Rules: 116-112 Pacquiao
Armando Alvarez, Telemundo: 115-113 Pacquiao
Jake Donovan, Boxing Scene: 115-113 Pacquiao
Lem Satterfield, Ring Magazine: 115-113 Pacquiao
Thomas Hauser, HBO: 115-114 Bradley
Bart Barry, 15 Rounds: 116-115 Bradley
Brian Kenny, Top Rank: 116-112 Bradley

TOTAL: Pacquiao 48, Bradley 3.

 

Fight was much much closer than a robbery. Live, I scored 116-112 Pacquiao and when I watched it again last night (sound off) I scored 115-113 Bradley. My scorecard looking back was exactly the same, rounds 1-9 and the only deviation I ended up having from my original was rounds 9, 11 and 12. It was Pac's inactivity until about 1:20 left (sometimes later) that caused the sway. If you land cleaner punches that's one thing... but it doesn't always negate the work done by the opponent either. Bradley was shooting the jab very well those later rounds in particular and as a result he was controlling even while backing up. The jab disrupted Mannys rhythm. If we start scoring fights mainly based on harder punches, then what are boxers without glaring power to do? If they cannot hurt an opponent, instead they win rounds off activity and control. That's where Bradley got his rounds. There is NO way you can score a fight completely or mainly based on harder punches unless they are frequent enough to change the complexion of the round overall. To do so would be biased towards fighters with power, over ones without. The very reason for scorecards is to determine who boxed better, who won since there was no knockout. At some point, Pacquiao needed to respond to Bradley's quick starts to rounds (scoring all the way) and score himself. He didn't, instead waited (or was controlled for the beginning of those rounds)at and he lost because of it.