11/21/24
June 09, 2012
SportsFilter: The Saturday Huddle:
A place to discuss the sports stories that aren't making news, share links that aren't quite front-page material, and diagram plays on your hand. Remember to count to five Mississippi before commenting in anger.
Two judges had Pacquiao losing seven rounds. I... what?
If all three had come in 115-113 in favour of Pacquiao I still would have been confused about what the judges were watching.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 01:35 AM on June 10, 2012
WTF just happened? Fucking outrageous.
posted by Optamystic at 03:14 AM on June 10, 2012
Yeah I live in Hawaii and don't follow boxing but my Facebook wall lit up tonight after that decision. Is there really any possible reason beyond either incompetence or corruption that would explain the two judges decision?
posted by Joey Michaels at 06:01 AM on June 10, 2012
" Is there really any possible reason beyond either incompetence or corruption that would explain the two judges decision?"
Not that I can think of.
I thought Pacquiao lost his last fight, to Marquez, but that was at least a decision that could be explained either way. This may be the most obviously dodgy decision I've since since Lewis-Holyfield I.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 07:50 AM on June 10, 2012
This is what happens when there is no national or international governing body for the sport of boxing. There are no standards. It's a joke.
posted by insomnyuk at 09:40 AM on June 10, 2012
At the end of that aforementioned fight I had the score at either 10-2 or 10-1-1 in favour of Pacquiao. Pacquiao landed somewhere around 100 punches more than Bradley with an accuracy advantage of 34% to 19%.
So of course Bradley won a split decision.
That may just about do it for boxing for me.