Pac vs Horn..do we care?

**Spicoli** · 07-05-2017 11:16 AM

Originally Posted by Ron Swanson

Originally Posted by Spicoli

Originally Posted by Ron Swanson

Originally Posted by powerpuncher

Here's the thing. I have read multiple people having Horn winning. I've seen multiple draws too. There are definitely more who have Pac winning, but that's why this isn't a robbery. There are obviously tons of boxing fans who have scored many fights and saw Horn do well.

Most of the people who have Pac winning were celebrities who rarely watch boxing. I had not problem with the decision and I wouldn't have minded if Pac won. Close fight either way. The thing that is bad for boxing wasn't the decision but that too many boxing personalities (Atlas and fat dan in particular) are making such a big deal about it. They should have been level headed and said it was a fine decision even though they disagreed.

Agreed. There is a cancer in the sport where there are so many awful reactions. Like Screamin A Smith, this would never happen in the UFC. Not true at all. Bad decisions happen in sports with judging. The difference is in the UFC Dana White bitches about the decision and says there will be an immediate rematch. Problem solved. Here there is a rematch clause. If Pac wants it he can get his revenge. Nothing to be in an uproar about. But boxing fans don't seem to know any other way to be anymore.

You can see it so clearly in the whole Floyd/Conor bank job. UFC fans are excited. Boxing fans are furious.

Boycott this, boycott that. Perhaps just have an honest dialogue rather than getting so worked up. Call a bank job a bank job. Call a wrong decision a wrong decision. No need for the drama of calling a disputable decision a robbery. That only lessens the value when real robberies happen "yeah, that's boxing, always robberies". It's just not true. And in this case it's not true. I had Pac winning and I would be hard pressed to find 7 rounds I could give to Horn. But that doesn't mean there aren't 7 that could be.

We just got a much better fight than 9 out of 10 of us expected. And on basically free tv. Enjoy it.

I think the biggest mistake was having Stephen A there as a town crier in the first place. They didn't put him there for his boxing knowledge and experience, which isn't the case in Teddy or Fat Dan, but for his cross over network face and ability to frankly talk the loudest shat. Really nothing more. Teddy has always called what he perceives terrible decisions on live tv right up to the point of confronting State commissioners and airing out the errors of appointed judges and blown calls etc. and he's done it both pro and con involving the very same fighters. Now the term 'robbery' is thrown around far too often just as 'great' is but what we need fewer of are network lapdogs who try to walk a balance beam of 'well I dunno, it could have gone either way I guess so yeh' instead of taking definitive stands to what they watched and experienced live. There are robberies that occur and there are fights that hinge on 1 point either way but personally I cannot see either case here but I saw a terrible decision. Atlas doesn't give two shats how many retweets or 'likes' he gets.

Atlas set a stage for outrage. Giving Pac 5 of the first 6 is every bit as bad as giving Horn the decision. His card was actually why I said before the cards came out "this could go either way" it wasn't that I thought Horn won. I had Pac. It was that it was a fight where you could see how the judges could think Horn won.

I don't believe Atlas says anything he doesn't believe which I appreciate about him. But he builds a narrative and convinces himself of it. You can see that when he says a fighter should do....when it doesn't work he doesn't acknowledge it. When it does work, see, like I said, bang. The way the guy thinks he gave Pac 5 of the first 6 so Pac won 5 of the first 6. If his first half of his card was better he wouldn't have needed his later outrage.

When I score a fight I put the score and by any close rounds I put SR for swing round. In this fight I had 4. Usually it is one or 2. So I knew how I had it and the possible score. Anything outside that is BS. Like the 117 score, BS. But, 115-113 fell right on the edge if every swing round went to Horn it was possible. Doesn't make it right. But it isn't outright corruption.

I don't think he set a stage really. He actually gave 1st to Horn and was agreeing with Bradley about him setting pace but needing to maintain. He just scored it the way he saw it and credited the short sharp counters by Manny as Horn became more frontal. Hell he even called Manny out on feeling concern and the one calling the Doctor over with a bowed head for cut. I've never bought that judges are sitting there looking over the shoulders of announcers for pointers. I actually had it 4-2 Manny after 6. Good to keep track of close rounds but ultimately if a round is really that close when scoring it to give it an asterisk, wouldn't it make more sense and more accurate to score it even? I loth even rounds but that's just me, just think there is some distinction between two boxers the majority of the time but of course we also see rounds that are just dead air and little action. I really do get the feeling Arum cashed Manny out as he losses nothing with Manny losing to a very beatable new trinket holder and a Manny who doesn't look to have options but to stick with shady ol Bob. Not saying there was some grand conspiracy council for this specific fight but there are calculations every money hungry promoter makes and Atlas in bigger picture calling boxing corrupt is just saying what each and every one of us has felt or witnessed at some point.