Unless you’re a devoted fan of Adam Carolla, you probably didn’t know that the famed TV/radio personality and podcaster got his start in the entertainment business after being hired as a boxing coach for Jimmy Kimmel back in 1994. Seriously. Before Loveline, The Man Show, The Celebrity Apprentice, and all the rest, Carolla was just a smart-assed carpenter who knew how to throw hands.
Urijah Faber was the guest for today’s installment of The Adam Carolla Show, which gave the two a chance to get in a focus-mitt session — with Carolla offering the California Kid some advice on his punching technique — ending in some mildly awkward shadow-boxing. With Faber’s UFC 149 headlining bout against Renan “The Streak” Barao scheduled for July 21st in Calgary, every advantage counts, right?
Unless you’re a devoted fan of Adam Carolla, you probably didn’t know that the famed TV/radio personality and podcaster got his start in the entertainment business after being hired as a boxing coach for Jimmy Kimmel back in 1994. Seriously. Before Loveline, The Man Show, The Celebrity Apprentice, and all the rest, Carolla was just a smart-assed carpenter who knew how to throw hands.
Urijah Faber was the guest for today’s installment of The Adam Carolla Show, which gave the two a chance to get in a focus-mitt session — with Carolla offering the California Kid some advice on his punching technique — ending in some mildly awkward shadow-boxing. With Faber’s UFC 149 headlining bout against Renan “The Streak” Barao scheduled for July 21st in Calgary, every advantage counts, right?
(“I feel bad for the fighters and the judges for being a part of perceived controversy, and I feel bad for Arum being falsely accused…but I’m glad there are passionate fans out there.”)
The June 9th boxing title fight in Las Vegas between Manny Pacquiao and Tim Bradley ended in controversy after Bradley was awarded a split decision despite being routed in nearly every round. Last Saturday many more fans got to see the fight when it was replayed for free on HBO. The sanctioning body for the match’s title belt, the WBO, has announced that they are reviewing the fight, and promoter Bob Arumcalled for the Nevada State Athletic Commission (NSAC) to be investigated after he himself was accused of somehow being involved in corrupting the judges decision.
Basically, it’s another mess for boxing and its beleaguered fans to sort through. We thought it would be a good time to check in with the Executive Director of the NSAC, Keith Kizer, to discuss judging in boxing, the controversial decision itself, how he saw the fight and what, if anything, the state commission is doing to review the fight.
– Elias Cepeda
CagePotato: Thanks for taking time to discuss judging in the Manny Pacquiao vs. Tim Bradley bout. Before we get into that fight specifically, let’s set up some general context. Can you describe how judges are selected in Nevada? Not for specific assignments but overall. How does someone become a judge in Nevada?
Keith Kizer: There are three different ways, basically. Sometimes we bring in outside judges for events. For example, on that very card we had several judges from California. What happens in those instances is I’ll call [California State Athletic Commission Head] George Dodd and ask him to give me a couple names of great judges. He is really good about doing that for us. So what happens after that is I have those judges included on the list that I give to the sanctioning bodies and fighter camps, as I did with this event.
But we also have a regular roster of judges. Another way that people can become Nevada judges is when there might be somebody who is a world class judge but lived elsewhere and moved to Nevada. That doesn’t guarantee that they would be added to our roster, but when there is an opening sometimes they are chosen.
(“I feel bad for the fighters and the judges for being a part of perceived controversy, and I feel bad for Arum being falsely accused…but I’m glad there are passionate fans out there.”)
The June 9th boxing title fight in Las Vegas between Manny Pacquiao and Tim Bradley ended in controversy after Bradley was awarded a split decision despite being routed in nearly every round. Last Saturday many more fans got to see the fight when it was replayed for free on HBO. The sanctioning body for the match’s title belt, the WBO, has announced that they are reviewing the fight, and promoter Bob Arumcalled for the Nevada State Athletic Commission (NSAC) to be investigated after he himself was accused of somehow being involved in corrupting the judges decision.
Basically, it’s another mess for boxing and its beleaguered fans to sort through. We thought it would be a good time to check in with the Executive Director of the NSAC, Keith Kizer, to discuss judging in boxing, the controversial decision itself, how he saw the fight and what, if anything, the state commission is doing to review the fight.
– Elias Cepeda
CagePotato: Thanks for taking time to discuss judging in the Manny Pacquiao vs. Tim Bradley bout. Before we get into that fight specifically, let’s set up some general context. Can you describe how judges are selected in Nevada? Not for specific assignments but overall. How does someone become a judge in Nevada?
Keith Kizer: There are three different ways, basically. Sometimes we bring in outside judges for events. For example, on that very card we had several judges from California. What happens in those instances is I’ll call [California State Athletic Commission Head] George Dodd and ask him to give me a couple names of great judges. He is really good about doing that for us. So what happens after that is I have those judges included on the list that I give to the sanctioning bodies and fighter camps, as I did with this event.
But we also have a regular roster of judges. Another way that people can become Nevada judges is when there might be somebody who is a world class judge but lived elsewhere and moved to Nevada. That doesn’t guarantee that they would be added to our roster, but when there is an opening sometimes they are chosen.
This happens with refs as well. This is what happened with Joe Cortez and Tony Weeks. But what usually happens is that people work the amateur ranks as judges here, similar to how people work the minor leagues before moving on to Major League Baseball. They can work the amateurs for years and when it gets to the point where we need to expand the pool, someone is shown the door, someone dies, or we are just getting more fights than there have been, I ask Don Barry, who is the head of amateurs here, to give me the names of his top three judges, in terms of skill and professionalism, and I meet with them, look at their resumes and might have them shadow for several fights.
I’ll have them score the fights they watch while shadowing and give me their scorecards at the end of the night, compare with the official scorecards see if there is anything they messed up. At that time, let’s say someone has proven themselves and it is time to expand, I’ll get with a chairman, have a chairman probably interview that person as well and then put them on the agenda of a meeting like we do with fighters. There, they discuss what they’ve done, question them and have the commission decide whether or not to license them.
CP: You mentioned “skill and professionalism,” as necessary characteristics for judges. We’ll get into skill a bit later, but I want to talk about the professionalism piece. One of your judges who scored the fight for Bradley, Judge Ford, said in an interview that Bradley gave Pacquiao a “boxing lesson.” It is one thing to explain your reasoning for judging the fight a certain way, but that read a bit excessive. Was that an professional thing for him to say?
Kizer: If you read the full quote, Judge Ford was saying that in the rounds he gave to Bradley, Bradley out-boxed Pacquiao, not that Pacquiao was dominated. And he felt that Bradley won more of those rounds than Pacquiao won. In Duane’s opinion Bradley out-boxed Pacquiao. That was probably a loaded term he used but if you look at the full context, it makes sense, if that’s what he saw.
CP: So you don’t think that he was being unprofessional in saying that Bradley gave Pacquiao a “boxing lesson?”
Kizer: I think it’s a loaded term that he shouldn’t have used, but with the whole context of what he says it makes sense. If that is what he saw, then it makes sense. And a lot of other people saw it that way, too. Thomas Hauser, Brian Kenny, Jake Donavan and others all scored it for Bradley as well. This is a situation, I believe, where if Harold Lederman hadn’t scored it so wide then there wouldn’t be as much outrage as there is.
CP: The WBO announced that they are reviewing the fight. What can and what is the Nevada State Athletic Commission doing in regards to reviewing the fight?
Kizer: As you know, there’s no ability to overturn a fight. The judges’ decision is final. So there is no formal review process. That being said, the officials themselves [the judges] review it, especially when there’s a controversial split decision. They review the film and see why they disagree with their colleagues and they plan to do that. I kind of jumped on the train and told them that I want to be a part of that when they review it as well.
CP: So it won’t be a review with any potential teeth to overturn or anything like that, it is more of professional development?
Kizer: Yeah.
CP: Can judges be penalized or fired or anything like that for doing a poor job?
Kizer: Oh sure. They are licensed like anyone else so those licenses can be taken away. Judges could all be subject to suspension. You might have seen some of them judging here in Nevada years ago and now you don’t see them anymore. Sometimes they see the writing on the wall or I show them the writing on the wall and they move on. With referees, they sometimes see the writing pretty well but for some reason judges sometimes need a push out the door and I’ve had to do that about a dozen times in the six years I’ve been the director.
Judges are not evaluated by any single fight. Let’s say there’s a big fight and a judge doesn’t do that well, maybe we move them to the undercard because they need time to hopefully bounce back and they are not going to do that with some big-time fight. In those cases, I’ll watch them very closely. If it is still the case, that’s it. That process, from start to finish could be months or it could be weeks.
CP: It doesn’t sound like any of the judges who scored the fight for Bradley will be punished, though. It doesn’t sound like you have an issue with their scores, is that correct?
Kizer: With these judges, it is not just about one fight. When the camps and promoter heard they would be the judges, they were all very happy with the referee and the three judges. They have all had stellar careers. We look at this as a whole. These are great judges. That’s why [Top Rank] promoter Bob Arum initially said he was shocked by the decision. Whether or not I scored the fights the same as the judges, that is not the important question to me. I have no issues with the judges. The important question to me is, ‘are they still very good judges?’ To determine that I look at the last year or two overall, for them, not just that individual fight itself. That isn’t to downplay the importance of any one fight, because they are all important. But when we are talking about someone’s professionalism and competence, we need to look at their performance comprehensively.
CP: That seems fair, in terms of evaluating competence and skill but what of the specter of corruption? What would you have to see from a judge in a fight to arose suspicion that there is something more sinister than differences of opinion or competence issues at play?
Kizer: Oh, I don’t know. I have never seen it so I don’t know how to answer that. If you’re asking me what would it take to freak me out, I’ve never freaked out before in this job so I don’t know. But I’ll tell you what, a decision where guys like Thomas Hauser, Jake Donanvan and others had it pretty much dead even is not a fight that would concern me. Those are all well-versed guys.
After the fight Bob Arum was complaining about the decision but was still saying that these are good judges and that he was just really shocked at the decision. He scored it for Pacquiao but said that the judges just had an off-night and that there was nothing untoward going on. Then Teddy Atlas went on to say all this stuff that ended up not being the case, about Pacquiao being near the end of his contract with Arum and insinuating that Arum had something to do with the decision to pressure Pacquiao to stay with him. It was only after that that Bob Arum started saying that the commission needed to be investigated and all that. Teddy libeled Bob and his answer was just to libel some other people (laughs). That’s never the answer.
I had the fight scored 7-5 for Pacquiao. I had it 7-2 for Pacquiao after nine and then I thought Bradley won the 10th and 12th and eeked out the 11th. With close fights that I scored differently I’ll often call judges to the side and say, ‘explain to me the way you got that.’ I did it with the Nam Pham vs. Leonard Garcia fight. I had it 3-0 the other way as the result. It wasn’t until later when I started getting letters from knowledgeable writers and observers saying that they had it 2-1 and that it was a lot closer than I had said and thought.
Fights are scored round by round and sometimes a guy can win the rounds he wins by a wide margin but the other guy barely eeks out more total rounds and wins the fight. I think the last time we had this much outcry was with the second Shane Mosley vs. Oscar De La Hoya fight. At the time Arum was calling for the FBI to investigate. But after all these years, no one really talks about that one much and I think you’d be hard pressed to find someone who will say that it wasn’t a close fight. De La Hoya clearly won the first part of the fight but Shane rallied and De La Hoya sort of took his foot off the gas.
I really think that if Arum himself hadn’t been accused very poorly by Atlas and then reacted defensively by accusing us, this fight wouldn’t be as much of a controversy as it is.
CP: So is it fair to say, then, that you are not really concerned with the image of the Nevada State Athletic Commission after the judging controversy in the Pacquiao/Bradley fight?
Kizer: I’m always concerned about the image and I feel bad for the fighters and the judges for being a part of perceived controversy, and I feel bad for Arum being falsely accused but I don’t feel bad about people being able to express their passion and yelling ‘robbery.’ I’ve gotten emails from people telling me that they had it even and can’t believe people are doing this, but I’m glad there are passionate fans out there. Sometimes they are rabid and crazy and it’s called slander (laughs), but I’m glad they are passionate. I just think there are a lot of people jumping on in a bandwagon effect.
(“See, when boxers get knocked out, their eyes *close*. I rest my case.”)
By George Shunick
If you’re anything like me, chances are you’ve claimed that MMA is safer than boxing whenever some know-it-all claims that MMA is too dangerous to be legalized. (Well, I live in New York, so maybe I get into this argument more than most people.) But the case seems fairly logical; unlike boxers, a significant part of MMA training does not involve striking. Moreover, the type of striking found in MMA targets the full body of the opponent. Boxing only allows punches above the waist and takes place at a closer range, invariably guaranteeing more blows to the head. So it follows that since boxers are struck more in the head throughout months of training and in their fights than MMA fighters are, MMA is a safer sport for the brains of athletes.
Well, common sense and logic help a lot, but ultimately aren’t quite as authoritative as those pesky things called facts. Recently, Sherdog.com conducted an interview with Dr. Charles Bernick, who is in charge of a study of the brain health of professional fighters titled the “Professional Fighters Brain Health Study.” (Creative, isn’t it?) The study is conducted by the Lou Ruvo Center for Brain Health in Las Vegas and is designed to last for four years. Its purpose is “to detect subtle changes in brain health that correlate with impaired thinking and functioning. If changes can be detected and interpreted early, there may be a way to reverse or soften trauma-induced brain diseases, like Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy. The study could also point regulators to specific markers in fighters’ brain scans that indicate a problem.”
When pressed if there is a discernible difference between the brain health of boxers and MMA fighters, Dr. Bernick responds:
(“See, when boxers get knocked out, their eyes *close*. I rest my case.”)
By George Shunick
If you’re anything like me, chances are you’ve claimed that MMA is safer than boxing whenever some know-it-all claims that MMA is too dangerous to be legalized. (Well, I live in New York, so maybe I get into this argument more than most people.) But the case seems fairly logical; unlike boxers, a significant part of MMA training does not involve striking. Moreover, the type of striking found in MMA targets the full body of the opponent. Boxing only allows punches above the waist and takes place at a closer range, invariably guaranteeing more blows to the head. So it follows that since boxers are struck more in the head throughout months of training and in their fights than MMA fighters are, MMA is a safer sport for the brains of athletes.
Well, common sense and logic help a lot, but ultimately aren’t quite as authoritative as those pesky things called facts. Recently, Sherdog.com conducted an interview with Dr. Charles Bernick, who is in charge of a study of the brain health of professional fighters titled the “Professional Fighters Brain Health Study.” (Creative, isn’t it?) The study is conducted by the Lou Ruvo Center for Brain Health in Las Vegas and is designed to last for four years. Its purpose is “to detect subtle changes in brain health that correlate with impaired thinking and functioning. If changes can be detected and interpreted early, there may be a way to reverse or soften trauma-induced brain diseases, like Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy. The study could also point regulators to specific markers in fighters’ brain scans that indicate a problem.”
When pressed if there is a discernible difference between the brain health of boxers and MMA fighters, Dr. Bernick responds:
“We did look at this, because obviously it’s a common question. And so far — and you have to take our results as somewhat preliminary, probably now we have the full data on maybe 150 fighters — there isn’t a huge difference between boxers and MMA guys. If you kind of match them for the number of fights they’ve had, their age, education and number of fights, there’s not a huge difference. There are some minor differences between the two in certain things, but all in all there’s not a huge difference. And it may be the fact that the fight might not be the important part. It actually might be the training… You know, as we’ve talked to fighters, a lot of them say, well, when you train, we may hold back a little, but sometimes, on the other hand, it depends who you train with. You know, you may be going all-out.”
Well, that’s not encouraging. Maybe there is an issue with hard sparring. Then again, maybe there isn’t. Although Dr. Bernick is clear that “there’s no evidence [MMA is] safer,” he’s also clear that “we don’t have any evidence one way or another, to be honest with you.” This is because the four year study is only in its first year, and there is still the majority of the evidence that remains to be collected and analyzed in the coming years which could easily reverse the study’s findings thus far.
Even if the study’s preliminary observations stand, this doesn’t suddenly devalue the argument for legalization. Last time I checked, sports like boxing and football — which are, if not more dangerous, at least as dangerous — are still legal across the country. The most important consequence of this study will hopefully be a better understanding of the exact relationship between cranial impacts and neurological deterioration. Are brains damaged significantly after only a few hard hits? Are numerous sub-concussive blows more damaging than knockouts? Is there demonstrable evidence that practicing MMA leads to brain trauma, as it does in boxing? In answering these questions, this study might compromise a convenient talking point for the MMA community, but it will provide information that could make the sport safer and prevent more fighters from suffering life-altering brain damage.
Saying that the justice system of America is broken is like saying that a train with square wheels does not make for a great Christmas toy. If you need a few examples of how corrupted it has become, look no further than Hollywood. Robert Blake was able to get away with murdering his wife using the old “I was going to kill her, but someone did it first!” defense. Matthew Broderick killed two people in a car accident and was forced to fork over less money than most of us spend on gasoline in a month in return. And don’t even get us started on how Lindsey Lohan is still allowed to remain a part of normal, civilized society with the rest of us.
Saying that the justice system of America is broken is like saying that a train with square wheels does not make for a great Christmas toy. If you need a few examples of how corrupted it has become, look no further than Hollywood. Robert Blake was able to get away with murdering his wife using the old “I was going to kill her, but someone did it first!” defense. Matthew Broderick killed two people in a car accident and was forced to fork over less money than most of us spend on gasoline in a month in return. And don’t even get us started on how Lindsey Lohan is still allowed to remain a part of normal, civilized society with the rest of us.
According to court docs obtained by TMZ, the judge called B.S. on Mayweather’s claim that he’s dehydrated behind bars — saying the boxer’s condition is “self-induced as water is made available to [Floyd] twenty-four hours a day.”
As for Floyd’s gripe that he’s only consuming a fraction of the calories he needs — the judge says it’s because “[Floyd] chooses not to eat the food provided.”
The judge also balked at Floyd’s complaint that he can’t train at a world class level while serving his time — saying, “While the training areas and times provided to Floyd may not be consistent with his prior regimen, he is indeed provided sufficient space and time for physical activity if he so chooses.”
Though later stricken from the record, we’ve heard that the judge concluded with some harsh words for Mayweather, stating:
You will do the hardest time there is. No more protection from the guards. I’ll pull you out of that one-bunk Hilton and cast you down with the Sodomites. You’ll think you’ve been fucked by a train! And the training facility? Gone… sealed off, brick-by-brick. We’ll have us a little heavy bag barbecue in the yard. They’ll see the flames for miles. We’ll dance around it like wild Injuns! You understand me? Catching my drift?… Or am I being obtuse?
Although we’d ask the judge to refrain from referring to Native Americans as “wild Injuns” if he wants to be taken seriously (besides the fact that it is sooooo 1948), we applaud his tenacity when dealing with these pampered celebs who think they are above the law. Especially when the celebrity is a professional boxer who beat a woman in front of his own children. Considering his long list of priors, Mayweather should be thanking his lucky stars (and his legal team) that he isn’t behind bars for longer than the three month cake walk he received, but far be it from us to tell a racist wife beater how to live his life. Clearly it’s working out pretty well for him.
Now, let’s get to speculating: How long will it be before Floyd and War Machine inevitably become prison pen pals?
An emergency motion obtained by the Las Vegas Review-Journal shows Mayweather’s lawyers will ask Las Vegas Justice of the Peace Melissa Saragosa as early as today that the former Olympic bronze medal winner be allowed to serve the remainder of his sentence on house arrest.
The 35-year-old’s physical conditioning is deteriorating under the stress of being jailed at the Clark County Detention Center, and he is being held in “inhumane conditions,” lawyer Richard Wright said in the motion filed Monday.
The boxer is being segregated from the general population and confined to his cell 23 hours a day in a locked-down section populated by felony defendants, Wright said. And in the hour each day Mayweather is allowed in a recreation area, he is alone and unable to use training facilities.
(Solitary confinement: Still not as bad as salad-tossing.)
An emergency motion obtained by the Las Vegas Review-Journal shows Mayweather’s lawyers will ask Las Vegas Justice of the Peace Melissa Saragosa as early as today that the former Olympic bronze medal winner be allowed to serve the remainder of his sentence on house arrest.
The 35-year-old’s physical conditioning is deteriorating under the stress of being jailed at the Clark County Detention Center, and he is being held in “inhumane conditions,” lawyer Richard Wright said in the motion filed Monday.
The boxer is being segregated from the general population and confined to his cell 23 hours a day in a locked-down section populated by felony defendants, Wright said. And in the hour each day Mayweather is allowed in a recreation area, he is alone and unable to use training facilities.
Wright stated that others who have committed similar misdemeanor offenses are treated differently and Mayweather’s celebrity status “cannot be accommodated at the CCDC.” [Ed. note: “similar misdemeanor offenses”? Floyd got busted for beating up his ex-girlfriend in front of their kids, not jaywalking, right?]
Prosecutors are expected to oppose the motion…
The 35-page motion, which included affidavits from Mayweather’s co-manager, Leonard Ellerbe, and personal physician Dr. Robert Voy, stated that if Mayweather remained in jail, it would threaten his career. He had planned on fighting for at least two more years, according to the motion.
Voy, through a court order, examined the boxer for 90 minutes on Friday, while jail medical staff observed.
“Medical opinion shows that CCDC administrative segregation threatens to end or shorten Mr. Mayweather’s boxing career,” the motion said.
Voy determined Mayweather is consuming less than 800 calories a day. He is eating fruit, bread and energy bars bought at the commissary. Under his normal daily training routine the boxer consumes between 3,000 and 4,000 calories.
Voy also investigated Mayweather’s ability to exercise. He found Mayweather has no room to exercise in jail, and he is not allowed to use the training areas because he is in isolation.
“After examining Mr. Mayweather, Dr. Voy was concerned with Mr. Mayweather’s dehydrated appearance, his lack of muscle tone and his dry mucus membranes,” the motion said.
Voy also “expressed deep concern for Mr. Mayweather’s health and explained that any lengthy period of time with an inappropriate diet, coupled with lack of regular exercise, will most likely lead to irreversible damage to Mr. Mayweather’s physique,” the motion said.
“Such damage could and, most likely, would lead to Mr. Mayweather being unable to continue his boxing career,” the motion said.
Voy was concerned that Mayweather was withdrawing into depression and developing anger issues that he normally can “dissipate” through his exercise routine…
Wright identified several differences between the way Mayweather is treated versus those in general population.
Mayweather is allowed access to shower, watch TV, use hot water to prepare food, use phones and exercise for an hour a day. Other inmates have access to phones and TV, can play games with other inmates and are out of their cells “for most of the day.”
Inside his cell, Mayweather doesn’t have access to hot water to prepare food for himself or clean himself, and he was recently told he cannot receive bottled water because he is in isolation.
According to the motion, Mayweather has not been a problem inmate and has treated jail staff with respect. Still, “he (Mayweather) believes he is treated in a very unfair and inhumane way,” Voy said in the motion…
Wright added in the motion, “To lose his physique and ability to box because of being placed in administrative segregation is a blow he should not have to take.”
That Mayweather is being held in isolation and not able to maintain his training regime “may cause, not just huge financial harm to Mayweather, but also huge emotional harm if he is no longer able to pursue his boxing career because of the de-conditioning he has suffered.”
Wright said that Mayweather believed he was only going to be in isolation for a week before being moved to another area of the downtown jail. Wright said jail officials have indicated he will remain in isolation. His scheduled release date is Aug. 3, according to jail records.
Wright said in the motion that Mayweather would be willing to work with jail officials to find “an appropriate location” to serve house arrest if the judge agreed. It’s unclear whether the appropriate location would be Mayweather’s 12,000-square-foot mansion in the ritzy Southern Highlands development. The mansion sports a walk-in closet bigger than his jail cell.
Mayweather has asked to be put in the general population, according to the motion, but jailers have declined to do so because of his celebrity status.
This is the way boxing ends — with Pacquiao getting robbed, and Mayweather’s body disintegrating in solitary confinement. Screw “celebrity status.” If Floyd wants to live among the commoners in general population, he should be granted that right. And if something nasty should befall him, well…jail’s not supposed to fun, is it?
“I want to investigate whether there was any undue influence, whether the [Nevada Athletic Commission] gave any particular instruction and how they came to this conclusion…the whole sport is in an uproar. People are going crazy. If this was a subjective view that each of [the judges] honestly held, OK. I would still disagree, but then we’re off the hook in terms of there being no conspiracy. But there needs to be an independent investigation because it strains credulity that an event everybody saw as so one-sided one way all three judges saw it as close. It strains credulity.”
If I was Manny Pacquiao, I’d have no problem refusing the rematch in the first place. He beat Bradley, everybody saw him beat Bradley, and he gains nothing from pursuing a rematch outside of fulfilling a “revenge” storyline made possible by [ALLEGEDLY] corrupt judges. And speaking of [ALLEGEDLY] corrupt judges, here’s judge Duane Ford trying to justify his 115-113 tally of the fight in the challenger’s favor:
(Timothy Bradley answers questions from his wheelchair victory chariot after “defeating” Manny Pacquiao by split-decision.)
“I want to investigate whether there was any undue influence, whether the [Nevada Athletic Commission] gave any particular instruction and how they came to this conclusion…the whole sport is in an uproar. People are going crazy. If this was a subjective view that each of [the judges] honestly held, OK. I would still disagree, but then we’re off the hook in terms of there being no conspiracy. But there needs to be an independent investigation because it strains credulity that an event everybody saw as so one-sided one way all three judges saw it as close. It strains credulity.”
If I was Manny Pacquiao, I’d have no problem refusing the rematch in the first place. He beat Bradley, everybody saw him beat Bradley, and he gains nothing from pursuing a rematch outside of fulfilling a “revenge” storyline made possible by [ALLEGEDLY] corrupt judges. And speaking of [ALLEGEDLY] corrupt judges, here’s judge Duane Ford trying to justify his 115-113 tally of the fight in the challenger’s favor:
“If this were ‘American Idol’, without a doubt, Manny Pacquiao would have won. But it was not. I gave an honest opinion. I had Pacquiao up 4-2, I think, at the end of six rounds. I thought he hurt Bradley a couple of times early in the fight. But when the bell rang to end that round, it was over and what happens in one round doesn’t carry over to the next round. They’re separate units.
“In the second half of the fight, Pacquiao picked off a lot of punches to the head, but Bradley landed some hard body shots. That hurt Pacquiao. I don’t mean it hurt him in the sense of it physically hurting him, but in terms of scoring and piling up points. Bradley did an excellent job standing his ground as a boxer. Remember, it’s a boxing match and Bradley demonstrated his ability to box expertly…
“In pro boxing, you look for damage, and if the punches are equal and the damage is equal, you are looking for effective aggression, and that does not necessarily mean the guy going forward. Effective aggression can be a guy going back. And then you look at ring generalship, and that’s all about control.”
Effective aggression can be a guy going back? Ladies and gentlemen, the Cecil Peoples of boxing.
I won the fight, without a doubt. You could say I won the first round, give or take the second. Lost the third, lost the fourth, lost the fifth, maybe even lost the sixth, you know, give or take. But from seven, eight, nine, 10, 11 and 12, I clearly dominated those rounds, man. I dominated those rounds. I know that I won those rounds.
I mean, this guy was supposed to stop me. He was supposed to knock me out. But I took his best punches, and I fought back hard. You know what I mean?
My corner and I honestly feel that I won the fight. Fair and square. It was not controversial decision or nothing like that. It is what it is, man. The judges got it right, that’s what I feel. There were some close rounds in there that they probably gave to me, because, like I said, I fought every minute of every damn round.
They were probably like, “this dude is only fighting in the first half of the round or the last 30 seconds of a rounds.” They probably caught on to that.
Garbage-ass decision aside, did any of you gain respect for Bradley for at least hanging in with Pac-Man for 12 rounds?
