After the decision over the Pacquiao vs. Bradley fight, people are now starting to wonder – is boxing still a sport? Or has it become a mere business? After hearing the decision, I tried to convince myself that it was a just and fair judgment but to no avail. I cannot remove the shroud of doubt in my mind. What was wrong with those two judges? Are they blind or it was just I am watching the fight on a different angle? I am a Filipino and I know that people would say that this is just another copy of those biased commentaries over the fight. Well, you are entitled to your own opinion. Now, if you think it’s just the entire Filipino population, you are wrong. Most of the boxing analysts are wondering what went wrong and they are trying to grasp the reason why Bradley was held the winner.
A short discussion on how boxing is scored.
Boxing is scored using a Ten Point System. The usual case is that for each round, the boxer who dominates is given ten while the opponent receives nine or less (usually its 9). For each knockdown, a boxer loses one point. If a boxer incurs two knockdowns in a single round, then he will receive 7 points while the winner gets his 10 points which is equivalent to a 3-point advantage.
How does the judge honor a point to a fighter? There are four general criteria. You have clean punching, ring generalship (dominance), effective aggressiveness and strong defense. These four are collectively weighed by a judge to determine the winner for a specific round. If the fight is able to cover the scheduled number of rounds, then these scores are summed up to have the judge’s verdict of the fight.
Generally, clean punching is given greater score by the judges. The remaining three criteria are there to give additional weighing factors for the judge. Since this is based on the perspective of the judge, a boxing match is technically subject to their objectivity, veracity and arguments.
Each bought is overlooked by three ringside judges. Each one of them has an equal say on the result of the fight. If three agreed on the same winner, then it is a unanimous decision. If one judge is favor the first fighter and another one favors the second, then the decision of the third judge will be the basis of the judgment. Two possible outcomes, a score favoring one of the fighters will result to a split decision while if he gives both fighters’ equal scores, then it is a draw. The last possible case is when all three give equal scores to both fighters which will bring another draw decision.
Each bought is overlooked by three ringside judges. Each one of them has an equal say on the result of the fight. If three agreed on the same winner, then it is a unanimous decision. If one judge is favor the first fighter and another one favors the second, then the decision of the third judge will be the basis of the judgment. Two possible outcomes, a score favoring one of the fighters will result to a split decision while if he gives both fighters’ equal scores, then it is a draw. The last possible case is when all three give equal scores to both fighters which will bring another draw decision.
What’s wrong with the Pacquiao vs. Bradley fight decision?
If we are to touch-up a little bit of statistics, we will be able to understand more on why this decision appear to be very much trivial. Lederman, a renowned boxing expert, was touched by one of the media presenter of the fight to give his score and here is the screenshot.
To give you a better idea, here are the fight statistics.
Now, here are the official scorecards as recorded by the Nevada State Athletic Commission.
I don’t want to discuss it further since it will never change the result. I’ll let you arrive with your own conclusion. Is this some form of business strategy knowing that Pacquiao is about to retire? Was it mainly the judges’ personal perspectives or there is something dark behind this? One thing’s sure, it was a misjudged fight!
[Photos on this post are publicly available over the internet.]
[No Copyright Violation is intended.]
0 comments:
Post a Comment