Pacquiao-Bradley Results & Discussion - June-9-2012

[apollack]

Thinking about it this morning as I woke up, 115-113 is 7 to 5 for Bradley, and I honestly just do not see how a judge could have given Bradley 7 rounds, even giving him the benefit of the doubt. You would have to be bending over backwards trying your absolute hardest to give him any round that Pac didn't utterly dominate. You know the saying about who would you rather be, I'd have rather been Pac in nearly every round of that fight.

I basically agree with you diggity.

PD, there is a huge difference between issues. One is whether a man has the right to determine whether or not he boxes. It is about self determination. The other issue is about judging competence, integrity, and fairness. Two different issues. If a guy wins a fight, he deserves to win a fight. You need regulation to make sure you have judges who know what they are doing and aren't affected by outside influence. But sorry if I went off a little in my post.

[mrbig1]

This has got Bob Arum written all over it. Thank god I didn't buy this fight. People should boycott the rematch.

[don1234]

An appalling decision - a view shared by a number of professional judges who were either at the viewing I attended or phoned in following the 'decision'.

That aside, what do people think of Pacquiao performance compared to his prime of the Margarito/Cotto fights?

I would say about 85%. He still could be a swirling dervish, befuddling Bradley who simply didn't know where Pacquiao was at times, but the feet overall were a step behind his prime.

[mrbig1]

Does anybody find it odd that a rematch date is already set?

[Dan1213]

Even if boxing returned to the "no decision" era it couldn't be saved. Most of the young people I talk to are now into MMA. That saddens me! But, after last night I can see why!

[Dan1213]

Post Fight Quotes:

Manny Pacquiao: I respect the decision, but 100% I believe that I won the fight…the fans in their heart know who won the fight…he hit me with a couple of jabs, but I don’t even remember him hitting me a solid punch in my face and — amazing what the result is.

Timothy Bradley: There’s three judges out there and that’s the way they judged it, so I mean, what do you want me to do? You know what I mean? That’s the way they judged it. My corner felt we were winning the fight. I was controlling the action. But like I said, there was three judges out there. Two of them felt I won the fight and that’s all I can say on that.

Promoter Bob Arum: The decision was a ridiculous decision. You guys all know who won this fight. So let’s be honest about the situation. Hopefully we’ll revisit it in November….I hope boxing recovers, because this isn’t arguing about a close decision. This is is something that’s an absurdity, that’s ridiculous, and everybody that’s involved in boxing should feel ashamed. YEAH RIGHT !!!!! I will not pay a plugged nickle to watch a boxing PPV again!

[HandToMouth]

The result: The Pac gravy train rolls on a little longer.

The crap thing is Arum's short-sightedness just dug boxing's grave a little deeper.

mark this moment in the sport when the stake finally reached the softy tissue & drove right thru the heart.

things like this dont happen in a vacum, nor w/o a history.

folks, simply said, this sport could not afford such buffonary at such a vulnerable time.

the grim reaper first starting looking thru his tool box in the late '90's as the cult of tyson exhausted the sport from morbid curiosity into post traumatic catatonia.

since then its been a free fall varying from horrible management of the sport, lack of any compelling competition in the heavies, olympic irrelevance, paper champions in lighter weights, puffed up hanger ons, inability to get the last 2 stars in the ring & the ever louder drum beat of the ADD driven, profit maximizing, mma model quickly flooding the ship into submersion.

& here we stood last night pre fight, the sport w/ its one shining star to circle the wagon around & keep the grim One away for at least another season...

& what does upstairs do? ... utterly salt the earth w/ last nights outright highway robbery debacle, an event keep in mind wh/ many an honest fan shelled out their own 50 silver shillings in a numbing near depression economy.

You can only bleed the Body for so long until rigor mortis finally sets in. This sport, friends, is in REAL, no joke trouble & i'll be surprised if this wont be looked back as the final death knell.

Time to get out the whiskey, pull out the doors 1st album, turn to track 11 & hit up the youtube archives. This indeed feels like the end of everything that stands w/ the sport. Beautiful science, this is the end.

[darkknight718]

I'll have to watch the fight again. There were a bunch of rounds where not much happened, but Bradley was the one pressing the action and throwing more, even if his ten punches weren't as damaging or effective as Pac's one or two. I was surprised at the closeness when the first card was read, and wasn't sure I heard it right when the third one was read. I think the HBO crew was fairly biased towards Pac, giving him the benefit of the doubt on every close round and assuming that Lederman's card reflected reality, which it usually does, but not invariably. This puts another nail in the coffin of Mayweather-Pac, I guess, but that's fine with me.

[hagler04]

I'll have to watch the fight again. There were a bunch of rounds where not much happened, but Bradley was the one pressing the action and throwing more, even if his ten punches weren't as damaging or effective as Pac's one or two. I was surprised at the closeness when the first card was read, and wasn't sure I heard it right when the third one was read. I think the HBO crew was fairly biased towards Pac, giving him the benefit of the doubt on every close round and assuming that Lederman's card reflected reality, which it usually does, but not invariably. This puts another nail in the coffin of Mayweather-Pac, I guess, but that's fine with me.

Lederman is often Pac-biased (his JMM 3 card stunk to high heaven) but trust me .. . as someone who was so pissed at Pac for delaying the fight with his "I'll watch the game and then do stretches" BS and really rooting for Bradley and LOOKING for reasons to give him rounds, I could only give him 3 rounds with possibly 1 other round which could've gone either way. AT best for Bradley, giving him all of the rounds that could concievably go to Tim, it's a Pac 7-5 win. No way did Bradley win 7 rounds of that fight.

Also Bradley really stopped pressing the fight by the 4th . . he tasted enough of Pac's power and then stopped coming forward and throwing punches b/c he didn't want to get knocked out. In the last 4 rounds he started boxing smarter amidst Pac not doing much at all and I think picked up several rounds there, but the rest of the fight was him eating some big shots, losing practically all of the exchanges, and getting outworked and outlanded.

If I know one thing though, the fight may have turned a few casual boxing fans off (there aren't many of them left), but the rematch will make big money. Time heals all wounds and by the time November comes around they'll milk the controversey in a way which will get enough people buying tickets and PPVs. I remember tons of people saying they would boycott boxing forever after Lewis-Holyfield I, and very few kept their promise.

[Overhand_Right]

This stinks. Smells too much like 'lets make a ton of money in a relatively easy rematch'. The contempt the powers-that-be have for the remaining boxing fans is sickening. This is such a degrading episode, a rare moment when big time boxing enters into the public consciousness and it's another familiar tale of barefaced corruption.

The sport has been made to look as pathetic and crooked as it is nowadays. A few interesting fighters left, and the biggest star of them all gets screwed like this to make an 80 year old rich man even richer, once again, at the expense of the game. Fuck boxing, I don't care anymore. Won't get a single penny out of me.

[HandToMouth]

If I know one thing though, the fight may have turned a few casual boxing fans off (there aren't many of them left), but the rematch will make big money. Time heals all wounds and by the time November comes around they'll milk the controversey in a way which will get enough people buying tickets and PPVs. I remember tons of people saying they would boycott boxing forever after Lewis-Holyfield I, and very few kept their promise.

hags... if the sport had other pots on the burner & MMA didnt exist, then i'd agree w/ you. But friend, we cant say that.

If anything boxing can claim vs MMA is there is a long history of excellency in performance and tradition to go along w/ all its black eyes. credibility is VERY important right now, to draw the casual fan or even fight fan (b/c if your under 30 that equates to MMA) over.

last night reeked of bush league & this sport has no capital left to burn. Mainstream fans and networks are laughing at the naked manipulation of this. They can hype this pig as much as they want, but cross over fans arent coming back to this unless bradley's name is mayweather.

and if that happens, it had better be a hagler hearns war, or the vine will die in the dirt.

I repeat, the patient is on life support & dr K is walkin down the hall. The blue bus is calling .

[apollack]

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 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.

[HandToMouth]

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.

wh/ is why this reeks of naked manipulation from the old fatty w/ the cigar. Cardinal rule, the old guard always knew (including past old fatties w/ cigars, ie rickard to king if you buy into strings being pulled), to take out a great champ, you must put him out or beat his head convincely like a drum.

wh/ is just another sign of the coming apocolypse of this sport...

salt the earth of its old tradition and reap the consequences. we may have just lost the map back home.

[prototypeofamodernmadman]

C'mon guys, let's not get carried away, you're all reminding me of the doomers on financial forums who claim that "The grand global depression is upon us" whenever the DOW dips a couple of hundred points,

boxing is a dirty sport that is constantly spewing out stinky decisions, always has and probably always will, the STAR of the sport shouldn't be any more exempt from a bad decision as the club fighter, the ESPN2 fighter or the HBO or Showtime fighter, the outrage meter should be just as high across the board for any fighter getting screwed,

[hagler04]

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 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.

The problem with scoring a fight with the sound off is you can't hear the sound/impact of the punches landed. Bradley landed some feather-duster arm punches which wouldn't hurt a fly . . .I'll take 2 hard Pac shots over 3 Tim arm-punches. But without sound it's harder to discern.

[diggity]

The problem with scoring a fight with the sound off is you can't hear the sound/impact of the punches landed. Bradley landed some feather-duster arm punches which wouldn't hurt a fly . . .I'll take 2 hard Pac shots over 3 Tim arm-punches. But without sound it's harder to discern.

This is exactly why I wasn't fooled into scoring for Bradley.
This isn't amateur boxing or fencing, it's pro boxing and it's about hurt.
If TB at least had a hard, consistent jab in Pac's face all night long and busted him up a little, then maybe you can make the case that volume may overcome power ala the people who thought DLH beat Mosely in the rematch.
Not only did TB lack a consistent weapon throughout the night, much of his best stuff was blocked or missed.
Other than biting his own tongue, for someone who shows abuse pretty easily from fights, Pac looked like got back from a long run at the end of the night.
Bradley appeared beaten and dejected - and to me, that's all you need to know.
Bradley damn well knows he lost that fight.

[jim glen]

" This isn't amateur boxing or fencing, it's pro boxing and it's about hurt. "

Dig, I was going to post earlier after watching the fight this morning,- the only way Badley gets a win, is if your scoring every _ucken punch like it was a pointing up, and not at all, threatning, effective or even truly landing for that matter. So yes you MIGHT account for an Amateur Scoring victory... MIGHT.

but I thought whats the point, (NO Punch intended ), I'm glad you mentioned that, because outside of that possible scoring mindset - ROBBERY!

[HE Grant]

I just watched the fight without sound and to me it was a ho - hum fight ... yes Paq should have gotten the decision but I have seen worse robberies ... I feel the under pinning of the real outrage is that following his performance against Marquez and now this o.k. but nothing great workman like exhibit over a gutsy but average Bradley there is a realization that the prime Paq of Hatton and Cotto is history ... he is getting older and those who hoped that he would be the guy to shut Floyd up and turned the other cheek and justified his refusal to take the full blood testing were just blasted with another sobering disappointment regarding their hero ... here's my prediction ... they will fight again in November and it will be the exact same fight but closer and Paq could very well lose the decision again ... he is getting older, his punch output is down, his stamina down , he is not a huge puncher at 147 and Bradley is younger , hungrier and a conditioning freak ... in addition, in my eyes Manny is losing his marbles ... I could not even make it through the 24/7's and for the first time found myself not really liking Manny with his need to have his ass be kissed all day long by a hundred hired hands and an entourage for everything from prayer sessions to taking a shit ( did not notice if he used Manny Paq toilet paper ) ... tons of excuses out there for everything ... The reality is that his best days are behind him .... the ultimate shame is that Manny and Floyd did not do this three years ago ... the fight game was robbed of a super fight in a time when it is truly needed .. if Paq fights Bradley again and wins a decision and then fights Floyd I still see Floyd, the smarter, hungrier, more focused and better conditioned boxer, winning a pretty clean decision

[apollack]

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.

[JaKob]

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.

i watched it without sound again and this time in high definition.

I still can't score the rounds many did for Bradley. Clean effective punching is the name of the game. Volume can offset this but the volume wasn't there for Bradley. That's volume LANDED.

First round MAYBE. Then again the ONLY definitive shots were landed by Manny at the end of the round. I definitely give the second round to Pacquaio because again the only displays of clean effective punching belong to him.

This isn't the amateurs. Even then Bradley wasn't landing clean. What so many are failing to discern is how little BRADLEY is landing clean. His jabs almost always caught on the gloves. His combinations almost always atleast partially blocked with the gloves. When something did land clean and this happened far less often then Bradleys 'busy' appearance might have some believe... it was a clubbing blow. Manny did not look him oldself in this fight but his defense was solid and he took most of these shots on the gloves. Ultimately Bradley was ineffective. All the 'ring control' and being 'busier' means nothing when you aren't landing clean and being effective. Pacquaio could tak 2 minutes off every round, Bradley would throw some pitter patter shit that would sometime produce a few glancing blows, and then Pacquaio would turn it on and land the only definitive blows of the round. Bradley was busier throughout the round but i simply couldn't give it to him because Pacquaio's window of being absolutely effective and landing hard shots offset Bradley's deceptive workrate which resulted in very little.

[apollack]

Well, JaKob, that's certainly how I saw the fight live when watching the first time, so I can't disagree. In the final analysis, I think that is why so many folks are salty and upset, because Pac was the one dictating and landing the cleanest, hardest blows. At the end of the day, he deserved the win, and when it came to close rounds, if you had to pick a winner of those rounds, Pac's cleaner, more effective, harder blows should have edged it for him, not Bradley, given that it is a pro bout, not amateur.

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.

[kikibalt]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/boxing...,5421219.story

[Kid Dynamite]

Didnt see the fight as I didnt care to pay 70 bucks to watch Pacman beat up Bradley. I had no idea what anyone sees in Bradly. He is an arm puncher who clubs and loops punches.

Seems like every post on just about any boxing forum is giving Bradley 3 rounds. What a disgrace. Boxing survived bad decisions in the past but the sport is party where it is now because of those past bad decisions. Boxing has only two stars: Mayweather and Pacman. One is in jail for beating up the mother of his kids and fan favorite Pacman was just robbed of his title to a virtual unknown to casual boxing fans.

I didn't see the fight but was wondering how Pacman looked last night. I have read from some that this was his best performance since the Cotto fight and others are saying that he is cleary on the downside.

[walshb]

Horrible having to listen to that foul mouthed Diaz in the corner. Disgusting tongue on him.

[walshb]

I scored it by 8-4 to Pacman. No way Bradley took the belt there. Several rds were close and could have went either way or even. But, overall, Manny won the fight even saying that some rds were close.

Must say Bradley came across very well in post fight interview. Not gloating, not disrespectful, and seeing it fairly.

[JaKob]

Horrible having to listen to that foul mouthed Diaz in the corner. Disgusting tongue on him.

Yeah his talking aint... pretty but that's boxing. It's a combat sport and it attracts hard and rough people. I've heard little ol Manny steward refer to someone as a 'motherfucker' in the corner lol.

[walshb]

Yeah his talking aint... pretty but that's boxing. It's a combat sport and it attracts hard and rough people. I've heard little ol Manny steward refer to someone as a 'motherfucker' in the corner lol.

The odd swear word here and there out of frustration/passion I can tolerate, but that guy is just foul for the sake of being foul.

[walshb]

I thought Manny looked quicker and faster with hands and feet than in his last two bouts.

[apollack]

Agree Walsh. I thought Manny looked pretty darn sharp, powerful, fast, and frisky. More aggressive and active than he was against Marquez. Even his D was pretty solid. Can't recall a time when I saw his head snap from a punch. BUT, I do think he coasted a bit too much, particularly late, and loaded up a tad too much, which could have caused some fatigue. Pac probably could have been a touch busier and taken off some power to have a little more consistency of volume. If they do a rematch, he should work on those items. But really, it wasn't a bad fight at all. Competitive and entertaining, but Pac still did what he needed to do to win. Judges blew it, AGAIN.

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.

[Michael Frank]

Friends, sports is entertainment-- not anything more. Pure and simple. Why do you think ESPN has its name, The Entertainment and Sports Network? The only "entertainment" there IS sports. Except we usually believe that sports results are not pre-ordained like TV shows and movies, thus are not fixed. Hence we believe the champions in each sport are generally the "best" at what they do-- because they've earned it through hard training and demonstrated skill & heart, and it's not been orchestrated or manipulated by outside forces.

However, it IS possible for EVERYONE involved in this fiasco of last night to have been in on a fix-- not that it would have required "everyone" at all for it to happen. Just two judges and say, the promoter (Arum) or say some big gambler who bet on Bradley. You don't even need the referee in on it, and in such a close matchup, not even the fighters, though actually THEY would be more likely participants, because their cooperation MIGHT be required. You might even ask yourself, would the great Pac be upset at being screwed out of a decision IF he knew in advance that he'd make another $20 million or whatever in a guaranteed rematch for taking said screwing. Do you think athletes are so prideful that they'd never want the loss on their records? Maybe not, not for $10-$20 million.

WHO benefits from this? I.e., who benefits from the guaranteed rematch, which would never exist as a possibility unless there was a close decision or a huge screw job? Just follow the money. Arum certainly benefits. Those who bet on Bradley at long odds certainly do. The betting parlors certainly do, getting their cut on this fight AND NOW on the rematch, no matter who wins. Bradley certainly does. Actually, Pac does, apart from a blemish on his record that no one will ever regard as a blemish. HBO certainly does. Your cable TV provider certainly does. The Vegas commission certainly does. The hotel/arena certainly does. The WBO certainly does. A rematch means more money to ALL of these people-- all of whom control a lot of money, unlike you and me.

And who loses? The fans. "Big deal," think the insiders, they'll pay up forever, with a few dropouts from future PPVs like some guys here. Pac? Not really (see above). There are few losers here at all apart from the fans. Fans who somehow believe that sports, rife with steroids these days, college grade scandals, and whatever else, aren't as corrupt as their politicians.

When you're a kid, you might fantasize about becoming the greatest athlete in some sport, #1. When you're an adult athlete with a family, and no career expectation after the present one, money may well mean more to you. Sad, but true. Hopefully this doesn't describe Pac, but who knows?

Would an Arum or a King pull such crap? Of course. Would mobster/fight manipulator Frankie Carbo, to whom Ron alluded? Of course. Would Jake LaMotta? Of course. I think Sonny Liston would, too. How about those fight judges (from various nations) in South Korea at the 1988 Summer Olympics, who took money from South Koreans to fix fights?

This is what boxing has been doing to us fans for a century: just making a farce out of "judging." And of course there will be millions of people who continue to support this shit, so it goes on.

I am NO conspiracy theorist; but viewing this fight, there is NO way I can think that it wasn't fixed by at least a handful of people.

Basically, virtually EVERYONE involved in this fight will make a ton of money in a rematch-- an event that, hitherto, had little likelihood of ever even coming into existence.

Boxing feeds off of such crap and grows bigger from it, it always has. Someone should make up a list of all the rematches that came into being out of controversial endings to previous bouts, there are many. In just my lifetime, a few that come to mind:

Ali-Liston II
Dokes-Weaver II
Leonard-Duran III
Pryor-Arguello II (mostly due to the greatness of the first fight, but there WAS that Panama-Lewis-mixed water bottle)
Chavez-Taylor II
Chavez-Randall II & III
T. Norris-Santana II & III
Lewis-Holyfield II
now Pacquio-Bradley II (???)

and many more . . .

It would be nice if some commission or other authority could overrule the judges when there are such huge disparities-- just reverse the decision, give it to Pac, and everyone move on. WITHOUT rewarding this crap with a rematch and acting as if the fans want to see a rematch, rather than a Pac fight with loudmouth Mayweather. Ban the judges involved in such escapades for a lifetime, hence they'll have little incentive to rig bouts. But, as Sugar Ray Leonard once said, "It'll never happen."

Separately, why does the title of this thread show "July 9" instead of June 9???