November 14, 2010

Pacquiao Beats Margarito, Wins WBC Title: Boxer Manny Pacquiao dismantled the larger, taller Antonio Margarito on Saturday night at Cowboys Stadium to claim the vacant WBC super welterweight title. In the final rounds, Pacquiao (52-3-2) clearly took pity on Margarito (38-7-0-1), doing just enough to win the rounds as his opponent's eyes were swollen shut.

posted by rcade to boxing at 01:18 PM - 9 comments

In Round 11 you could see Pacquiao would land a couple of shots, then look over to the ref as if to say "now?" Then land a couple more... back to the ref, "what about now?"

There was one body punch in the earlier rounds that really took the starch out of Margarito and one flurry around the 9th where I felt that if the round had another 30 seconds Margarito would have gone, but outside of that it looked like Pac could have hit the guy for 30 rounds with stopping.

Maybe the ref was waiting for a clear indication that Margarito was toppling but really, when a boxer can take his gumshield out through his cheek and is being out-landed four or five to one round after round it's probably time to stop it.

posted by Mr Bismarck at 02:01 PM on November 14, 2010

Maybe the ref has a relative with Parkinson's.

posted by yerfatma at 02:14 PM on November 14, 2010

Margarito suffered a fractured orbital bone in the fight. That must have been some weird vibe with the mauling played out on the giant screens of Telemanjaro.

posted by rcade at 02:28 PM on November 14, 2010

Disclaimer: I don't want to sound like a Metafilter hockey fan, but I don't know much about boxing or boxing scoring, nor did I see this fight.

However, given how lopsided the bout sounded, why were the final scores so close? Those numbers reflect total hits witnessed/noted by the judges, right? If Pacquiao was outhitting Margarito 4 or 5 to 1, so much that he was easing up in the later rounds to not seriously maim the apparently barely-there Margarito... shouldn't those scores have been hugely disparate?

posted by hincandenza at 05:52 PM on November 14, 2010

Those numbers reflect total hits witnessed/noted by the judges, right?

No, they reflect the 10-point must system that boxing and some other combat sports use. I personally have never liked the system, but the basic gist of it is that even a dominant round in terms of punches landed is often scored 10-9 for the better fighter.

posted by googly at 07:26 PM on November 14, 2010

That's the fault of the "Ten Point Must" system. Even if someone heavily outpunches the other fighter for a whole round, if there isn't a knockdown or clear evidence of a fighter being staggered then the round usually ends up being scored 10-9.

A knockdown round is usually scored 10-8.

As a result, even if Pacquiao is given every round, (and I felt he won them all), the score ends up as 120-108, (10-9 for twelve rounds).

Technically, a fighter can land 100 punches and win a round 10-9, then in the next round his opponent lands one, (gets a knockdown), and wins that round 10-8.

posted by Mr Bismarck at 07:26 PM on November 14, 2010

The ref should have stopped this in round 9 or 10 if that long. Now we just need to wait and see if the Mayweather fight ever happens. That could be one of the best fights of all time.(or they would both dance for 12 rounds scared to make a mistake)

posted by Debo270 at 09:23 AM on November 15, 2010

It was like watching Drederick Tatum pound on Homer Simpson.

posted by grum@work at 01:26 PM on November 15, 2010

That's the fault of the "Ten Point Must" system.

The "Ten-Point-Must" system was supposed to be an improvement upon the old system of scoring by rounds won, lost, or drawn. Under that system, one fighter could absolutely dominate his opponent in one round, yet lose the fight because his opponent was slightly better than he in 2 rounds, and the rest were considered to be even. There is no easy and fair way to judge boxing. Even the system employed in amateur boxing of counting blows landed is not very good. One fighter might land a lot of "love tap" jabs, while the other lands a few solid blows. The winner might be just barely standing, while the loser would likely have scored a knockout had the fight gone one more round. Developing a fool-proof system for scoring a boxing match is nearly impossible. Do it like they did in the old days, keep going until one boxer quits or can no longer stand up.

posted by Howard_T at 04:39 PM on November 15, 2010

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.