Whenever talking about a controversial decision, past or present, this nugget of shit always gets brought up in some form or another.

"You need to REALLY beat a champion to win his belt".

Says who? Show me in the boxing rulebook where it says "The Champion/Popular fighter Shall Inherit All Ye Close Rounds".

It's REDICULOUS. Boxing is very cut and dry: you win a bout by knocking your opponent out or winning more rounds than him.

Judges are responsible for interpreting who won a round, and that's it. If they are doing anything else, like taking into account a championship/popularity/money/market value/ect, then by it's very definition, THEY ARE CORRUPT.

We all agree that corruption in boxing is a huge, undesirable problem. But when you use this rediculous old cliche to justify a robbery, you are doing nothing but helping to perpetuate the bullshit that has all but destroying boxing over the years.

Cut it out. The guy who fought better deserves the win.

JMM > Pacquaio