BoxRec

asdfjkl wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:

Grant wrote: Oh dear if only you had have watched. Mosley lost pretty convincingly i thought. They will have to make up a title for him to win i fear. By the way love seeing fighters with attitude celebrating before a decision only to lose it. As for the main event, it depended on who you gave the close rounds to IMO. I thought the tenth could have gone 10 - 8 also but either way it was close. The first score was ridiculous but the decision was a fair one otherwise. In my Opinion. Also i thought Mannys legs were gone after the tenth he looked spent in his corner at the break. Decision aside a great fight

Touissaint beat Mosley close but clear. Nothing wrong with that decision. I had it 77-75 for Touissaint.

And what about Umar Salamov and Damien Hooper? The rank 16 in his division vs the rank 75 in that same division from Australia?
I fully admit that I haven't seen anything, but I was surprised about the result, note that the rank 75 guy lost on KO against a 3 win 1 lose guy who currently has 6 wins 3 loses. An upset could always happen, but all 4 decision upsets in one event? That's rare at least.

I didn't see that fight. Can't comment on it.

ESPN Poll

Question: Did you agree with the judges?

33%Yes
67%No

20,389 votes

gilgamesh wrote:116-112 Pacquiao was my score

I agree

Apparently bob Sheridan scored it for horn to. I get the feeling most people voting on those poles either got terribly swayed by atlas or are Philippino

thunderfromdownunder wrote:Apparently bob Sheridan scored it for horn to. I get the feeling most people voting on those poles either got terribly swayed by atlas or are Philippino

Which commentary did you watch the fight with?

crusader wrote:

thunderfromdownunder wrote:Apparently bob Sheridan scored it for horn to. I get the feeling most people voting on those poles either got terribly swayed by atlas or are Philippino

Which commentary did you watch the fight with?

It was British, they scored it for horn. I just spoke to my brother and he said the same with Sheridan (who does most Australian broadcasts)

thunderfromdownunder wrote:Apparently bob Sheridan scored it for horn to. I get the feeling most people voting on those poles either got terribly swayed by atlas or are Philippino

I get the feeling that 60% of the 33% that had it for Horn hail from Australia.

gilgamesh wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:
Touissaint beat Mosley close but clear. Nothing wrong with that decision. I had it 77-75 for Touissaint.

And what about Umar Salamov and Damien Hooper? The rank 16 in his division vs the rank 75 in that same division from Australia?
I fully admit that I haven't seen anything, but I was surprised about the result, note that the rank 75 guy lost on KO against a 3 win 1 lose guy who currently has 6 wins 3 loses. An upset could always happen, but all 4 decision upsets in one event? That's rare at least.

I didn't see that fight. Can't comment on it.

neither did he, come on gil, comment on something you know nothing about. Manny clearly won this fight, as clearly as marquez won their third fight. Boo hoo

I gave it 115-114 to Pacquiao but I wouldn't call it a robbery.

I gave rounds 7 & 12 to Pacquiao and 10 to Horn, all of which were close and could have gone either way. The other rounds which Horn won, he won convincingly, so there's a case for both sides.

I'd have to watch it again another time, perhaps with alternative commentary or none at all. It's clear to see that Pacquiao is finished, he's speed, timing and distance have definitely slipped and he only looked more comfortable in the second half of the fight once Horn begun to tire.

thunderfromdownunder wrote:

crusader wrote:

thunderfromdownunder wrote:Apparently bob Sheridan scored it for horn to. I get the feeling most people voting on those poles either got terribly swayed by atlas or are Philippino

Which commentary did you watch the fight with?

It was British, they scored it for horn. I just spoke to my brother and he said the same with Sheridan (who does most Australian broadcasts)

I wonder if we'd see a strong correlation btwn people which broadcast people watched and who they scored for.

I watched an ESPN stream and was chatting on another forum with about 20 people who were watching the same stream. Most people acknowledged that Atlas's commentary was crap and blatantly pro-Pac, but the consensus was still that he'd done enough to edge it.

Does anyone have a complete breakdown of their score? I had it 95-94 Pac going into the last two, but my attention drifted a bit and wasn't able to concentrate on the 11th and 12th. I gave Pac 2,3, 4,8,and 9 (10-8) and Horn 1,5,7,10.

I muted it because I couldn't deal with Atlas. Manny clearly won.

I can guarantee Saad wouldn't have been led by Teddy Atlas' commentary. He hates Teddy with a passion.

I've never been led by any commentary. I have my own eyes and I know the sport as well as anybody. I don't need anybody explaining to me what's going on I can see it and understand it better than the commentators in most cases and usually call sh*t or notice important details before they do.

Some people might be easily led, but I promise you I'm not one of them. This applies to everything not just boxing commentary.

The judges were not from Australia, but they could still be biased or just influenced by the spectators who support Horn. The sanctioning bodies like to have a presence throughout the world, especially in places where thousands of fans will buy tickets. The WBO has Joseph Parker in New Zealand and now they have Horn in Australia. Atlas is sometimes very biased in his commentary. I used to like him as a commentator, but he has changed for the worse compared to 10 years ago. People were criticizing Pacquiao for choosing Horn as an opponent, but he went to his opponent's home country and Horn was a legitimate contender. I expected some bias from the judges.

lazboy wrote:Atlas did not even acknowledge one Horn punch let alone a round. You all have been bewitched by his eye/mouth twitch. If you rewatch the fight without Atlas coloured glasses maybe you will see what the judges saw. Horn teeing off on a lifeless Manny.

Unless a lot of people are listening to fights on radio broadcasts, I don't see where commentator bias has the great hypnotic sway some people want to give it.

squiggy wrote:Unless a lot of people are listening to fights on radio broadcasts, I don't see where commentator bias has the great hypnotic sway some people want to give it.

Just a lame ass excuse for people who want everyone to see it the way they wish it went.

so does anyone think this has anything to do with getting Terrence Crawford into a position to get that WBO strap from Horn?Assuming he comes through Indongo then moves up?Is this the plan from Arum all along?

squiggy wrote:Unless a lot of people are listening to fights on radio broadcasts, I don't see where commentator bias has the great hypnotic sway some people want to give it.

It does though. It can even affect judges. I was at the IBF Convention and a few professional judges were swayed by Atlas' commentary while watching a fight from about a year ago. They had to score the fight each round as a test to see if they would be influenced by his commentary. Atlas was in favor of the boxer who was doing worse and knocked down, but yet won a split decision. Perhaps one or two judges at that fight heard Atlas at ringside.

LancashireLoyal wrote:so does anyone think this has anything to do with getting Terrence Crawford into a position to get that WBO strap from Horn?Assuming he comes through Indongo then moves up?Is this the plan from Arum all along?

Why would that be a plan? Crawford certainly would take the belt from many easily. If you want to go the conspiracy route, this would be more about having another good money fight for many so he doesn't have to get his ass kicked by Crawford.

RScarf1 wrote:

squiggy wrote:Unless a lot of people are listening to fights on radio broadcasts, I don't see where commentator bias has the great hypnotic sway some people want to give it.

It does though. It can even affect judges. I was at the IBF Convention and a few professional judges were swayed by Atlas' commentary while watching a fight from about a year ago. They had to score the fight each round as a test to see if they would be influenced by his commentary. Atlas was in favor of the boxer who was doing worse and knocked down, but yet won a split decision. Perhaps one or two judges at that fight heard Atlas at ringside.

If you're sitting ringside watching the damn fight and you're swayed by commentary you shouldn't be a judge. If I was a commissioner and a judge came to me saying "Oh my score was bad because I was listening to Teddy" he'd be out of a job.

I've only just now gotten to watch the fight (Atlas commentary, just because that's what I found), and sadly (as a Pac fan), it wasn't a robbery. I scored it even. That 117-111 guy is some kind of semi-functional idiot or something, but those two 115-113s are totally in the realm of possibility, giving close rounds to Horn.

gilgamesh wrote:

RScarf1 wrote:

squiggy wrote:Unless a lot of people are listening to fights on radio broadcasts, I don't see where commentator bias has the great hypnotic sway some people want to give it.

It does though. It can even affect judges. I was at the IBF Convention and a few professional judges were swayed by Atlas' commentary while watching a fight from about a year ago. They had to score the fight each round as a test to see if they would be influenced by his commentary. Atlas was in favor of the boxer who was doing worse and knocked down, but yet won a split decision. Perhaps one or two judges at that fight heard Atlas at ringside.

If you're sitting ringside watching the damn fight and you're swayed by commentary you shouldn't be a judge. If I was a commissioner and a judge came to me saying "Oh my score was bad because I was listening to Teddy" he'd be out of a job.

No shit, the view ringside is shitty enough as it is.

gilgamesh wrote:

Tanzio wrote:This was no robbery. Neither was the Easter W.

I didn't think the Easter win was a robbery. I thought he won. Pacquiao won tonight.

Well I thought Easter won but those 120-108 cards were absolutely disgusting.

I had pac just winning but he was dreadful. He is a shot fighter now. Him from three years ago would have smashed Horn to bits.

Horn still deserves credit but it looks like he won't get it.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

LancashireLoyal wrote:so does anyone think this has anything to do with getting Terrence Crawford into a position to get that WBO strap from Horn?Assuming he comes through Indongo then moves up?Is this the plan from Arum all along?

Why would that be a plan? Crawford certainly would take the belt from many easily. If you want to go the conspiracy route, this would be more about having another good money fight for many so he doesn't have to get his ass kicked by Crawford.

was Jeff Horn not mandatory though? i dont see how they will even get a rematch straight away

Naandrew wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:

Tanzio wrote:This was no robbery. Neither was the Easter W.

I didn't think the Easter win was a robbery. I thought he won. Pacquiao won tonight.

Well I thought Easter won but those 120-108 cards were absolutely disgusting.

I had pac just winning but he was dreadful. He is a shot fighter now. Him from three years ago would have smashed Horn to bits.

Horn still deserves credit but it looks like he won't get it.

He's not shot. He's still a very good fighter. He's just not what he used to be. If he was shot he'd have been stopped by Horn or lost decisively not been screwed over by judges.