Yes neither of those were very close. I thought Quartey/Forrest was a bit commentary inspired also, I didn't think it was the absolute tragedy of justice most people thought it was.
I just can't grasp why so many would be so outraged about a guy not getting a decision when he just didn't even land many clean punches, forget effective since Paulie just can't punch, I'm just talking clean ones. So that's why I tend to think all the outrage was a bit commentary inspired.
Take Cotto/Clottey for example. I originally scored it for Cotto but changed it to Clottey after watching it again. Still it was close enough and a Cotto win is OK IMO. But Clottey beat Cotto's ass at times, didn't just use good ring generalship, beat him up, and rounds that were given to Cotto, outside of what the 6th where he wailed on him and the first where he dropped him, were given mainly cause Clottey did less than normal, or less than we thought he should, although even there you can make a good case he was still doing more than Cotto. Yet there there's really not much controversy. Why?
Assuming Lampley was rooting for Clottey, not Cotto like he was, wouldn't it be fair to assume that there would be a bit more controversy? Maybe not, I don't know. It may have influenced me, since I scored it for Cotto originally. Granted my abhorrence of Clottey and his complete lack of ambition may have skewed me too. I still think he could have easily won that fight.
Bookmarks