Page 1 of 2
Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 12:42
by Ruthless-RKO
Bob Arum said,
"It was a close fight. I thought Manny won.”
“There’s an argument for the fight being 7-5 Manny — 11th round was sort of close. I thought Manny gave away early rounds.”
“Could it have been 7-5 for Manny? Yeah. But you can’t argue with the result.”
“I think you cannot spend so much time as a senator and expect to be a world-class fighter,”
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 12:44
by gilgamesh
Arum used this as an opportunity to get into the Australian Boxing market. He now has a piece of Jeff Horn and Joseph Parker going forward. He arranged this fight, and probably arranged the scorecards for this very reason.
Plus the lucrative rematch between Horn and Manny...of course Arum is happy, it just means more dollars for him. He's laughing all the way to the bank.
"The world knows it's a robbery, but the Aussies don't"
He's saying to himself as he counts his money.
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 12:45
by SaadOffTheDeck
He's had a piece of Parker since the Ruiz fight.
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 12:47
by gilgamesh
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:He's had a piece of Parker since the Ruiz fight.
Using the old "Rob him in the first fight to get a trilogy" out of it bit the way he did with Tim Bradley then probably.
Don't know if they'll do the trilogy or not, but this gives Manny one more big money fight before being used as a stepping stone for somebody else at Top Rank...unless he just calls it a career.
This all worked out for Arum though.
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 12:49
by SaadOffTheDeck
Sure, it almost always does when you have two guys fighting each other. this doesn't strike me as corrupt. But I'm more in the incompetent corner than the conspiracy most of the time.
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 12:51
by gilgamesh
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Sure, it almost always does when you have two guys fighting each other. this doesn't strike me as corrupt. But I'm more in the incompetent corner than the conspiracy most of the time.
I would be here as well if not for the fact that the bell rang early 3 times last night too, favoring the Australian fighter who needed to be knocked out to lose twice.
F*ckery across the board.
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 12:55
by SaadOffTheDeck
gilgamesh wrote:SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Sure, it almost always does when you have two guys fighting each other. this doesn't strike me as corrupt. But I'm more in the incompetent corner than the conspiracy most of the time.
I would be here as well if not for the fact that the bell rang early 3 times last night too, favoring the Australian fighter who needed to be knocked out to lose twice.
F*ckery across the board.
That's highly incompetent.
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 18:31
by caldo2025
Ruthless-RKO wrote:Bob Arum said,
"It was a close fight. I thought Manny won.”
“There’s an argument for the fight being 7-5 Manny — 11th round was sort of close. I thought Manny gave away early rounds.”
“Could it have been 7-5 for Manny? Yeah. But you can’t argue with the result.”
“I think you cannot spend so much time as a senator and expect to be a world-class fighter,”
I've been calling this for years...Arum is going to exploit Manny until he extracts the last penny from the boxer that built Top Rank himself. That's who Bob Arum is. He's probably ecstatic about the results last night. Now he's got a good looking, WHITE, champion to market now instead of an old "senator". Arum comes from the racist years of the great white hope BS...he knows finding a great white boxer is like seeing bigfoot. It's rare. There's no way he just stumbled onto this one....this was premeditated and I think he saw someone that could beat Manny. I'm sure he played it up to Manny like it was a definite KO. Can't stand this guy.
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 18:33
by SaadOffTheDeck
Manny built top rank? Lmao, where do you come up with this shit?
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 18:37
by gilgamesh
Top Rank, Inc. is a boxing promotion company founded by Jabir Herbert Muhammad and Bob Arum. It was incorporated forty-four years ago in 1973 and is based in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Founded: 1973
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 18:39
by SaadOffTheDeck
I think that Muhammad Ali fella was a nice get.
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 18:41
by gilgamesh
SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I think that Muhammad Ali fella was a nice get.
He only contributed partially to their success. They needed that Filipino market to really put it over the top
![[icon_e_biggrin.gif] :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 19:19
by Nightmare Roy
Ruthless-RKO wrote:Bob Arum said,
“I think you cannot spend so much time as a senator and expect to be a world-class fighter,”
Oooosh! Rib shot!
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.s s
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 20:51
by Ruthless-RKO
gilgamesh wrote:Arum used this as an opportunity to get into the Australian Boxing market. He now has a piece of Jeff Horn and Joseph Parker going forward. He arranged this fight, and probably arranged the scorecards for this very reason.
Plus the lucrative rematch between Horn and Manny...of course Arum is happy, it just means more dollars for him. He's laughing all the way to the bank.
"The world knows it's a robbery, but the Aussies don't"
He's saying to himself as he counts his money.
He wanted this fight more than anyone.. kept hyping up Horn. He was so against Pacman vs. Khan.. he was going to make sure he fought Horn next..
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 20:55
by Grant
gilgamesh wrote:Arum used this as an opportunity to get into the Australian Boxing market. He now has a piece of Jeff Horn and Joseph Parker going forward. He arranged this fight, and probably arranged the scorecards for this very reason.
Plus the lucrative rematch between Horn and Manny...of course Arum is happy, it just means more dollars for him. He's laughing all the way to the bank.
"The world knows it's a robbery, but the Aussies don't"
He's saying to himself as he counts his money.
By 'aussies' you mean the rest of the world except for the states of course
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 21:00
by Best Coast
Grant wrote:gilgamesh wrote:Arum used this as an opportunity to get into the Australian Boxing market. He now has a piece of Jeff Horn and Joseph Parker going forward. He arranged this fight, and probably arranged the scorecards for this very reason.
Plus the lucrative rematch between Horn and Manny...of course Arum is happy, it just means more dollars for him. He's laughing all the way to the bank.
"The world knows it's a robbery, but the Aussies don't"
He's saying to himself as he counts his money.
By 'aussies' you mean the rest of the world except for the states of course
To think that only Americans thought Pac got ripped off is ridiculous. Are you by any chance an Aussie Horn fan?
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 21:05
by Best Coast
gilgamesh wrote:SaadOffTheDeck wrote:He's had a piece of Parker since the Ruiz fight.
Using the old "Rob him in the first fight to get a trilogy" out of it bit the way he did with Tim Bradley then probably.
Don't know if they'll do the trilogy or not, but this gives Manny one more big money fight before being used as a stepping stone for somebody else at Top Rank...unless he just calls it a career.
This all worked out for Arum though.
I'm not a conspiracy guy but I cant help but smell Arum crookery behind this bogus decision...much like the Bradley travesty.
Horn is a crude brawler and I hope he can muster the stones to face one of the top welters in their prime: Spence, Thurman, even Crawford in his WW debut would expose him as the hype job he truly is.

Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 21:30
by Tinnie
So let me get this right... Arum sets up a fight for Pac in Australia, against a relatively unknown but ranked contender. Who pre-fight, the general concensus seemed to believe wouldnt last the distance with Pac, even claimed by some to be a mismatch. But Arum riggs the cards, sacrificing his most high profile fighter, all in a master stroke of criminal genius to possibly eek out a trilogy and secure the untapped cash cow markets of Australia and NZ?...
Where is damn Mulder when you need him!?!
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 21:32
by Tinnie
double
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 02 Jul 2017, 21:53
by RScarf1
There's not going to be a trilogy. They (the powers that be) do not want Horn losing. They want him to be undefeated and another win over Pacquiao will increase his status and they can make more money. Pacquiao is going to be the sacrificial lamb so that Horn can move on to more lucrative fights.
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 03 Jul 2017, 00:19
by Kalan
[quote="caldo2025"] Now he's got a good looking, WHITE, champion to market now instead of an old "senator". Arum comes from the racist years of the great white hope BS...he knows finding a great white boxer is like seeing bigfoot. It's rare. There's no way he just stumbled onto this one[/url]
Horn great???? ... On any scale of white fighters, Horn is nowhere near Lomachenko, Golovkin, Usyk, the K Bros, Beterbiev, or even Joe Smith, Frampton, or Bivol... Horn is freakin' nowhere.. I guess he could beat Chris Algieri.. He can't box and he's not an outstanding puncher.. Horn is dead meat when he fights the top Welterweights.. Of course Khan, Bradley, Pacquiao, Vargas, etc. never fought any of the top Welterweights either -- so maybe he can have an Amir Khan like career and fight select pushovers forever and ever.
I think that is what will happen actually... Spence, Thurman, Brook, Crawford, or Porter are most likely never going to get a chance to KO Horn.
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 03 Jul 2017, 00:30
by Kalan
Tinnie wrote:
So let me get this right... Arum sets up a fight for Pac in Australia, against a relatively unknown but ranked contender. Who pre-fight, the general concensus seemed to believe wouldnt last the distance with Pac, even claimed by some to be a mismatch. But Arum riggs the cards, sacrificing his most high profile fighter, all in a master stroke of criminal genius to possibly eek out a trilogy and secure the untapped cash cow markets of Australia and NZ?...
Where is damn Mulder when you need him!?!
That's what I was thinking... I think the playing field was tilted to Horn's advantage -- but by Aussie interests, not Arum's.
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 03 Jul 2017, 05:50
by caldo2025
Kalan wrote:caldo2025 wrote: Now he's got a good looking, WHITE, champion to market now instead of an old "senator". Arum comes from the racist years of the great white hope BS...he knows finding a great white boxer is like seeing bigfoot. It's rare. There's no way he just stumbled onto this one[/url]
Horn great???? ... On any scale of white fighters, Horn is nowhere near Lomachenko, Golovkin, Usyk, the K Bros, Beterbiev, or even Joe Smith, Frampton, or Bivol... Horn is freakin' nowhere.. I guess he could beat Chris Algieri.. He can't box and he's not an outstanding puncher.. Horn is dead meat when he fights the top Welterweights.. Of course Khan, Bradley, Pacquiao, Vargas, etc. never fought any of the top Welterweights either -- so maybe he can have an Amir Khan like career and fight select pushovers forever and ever.
I think that is what will happen actually... Spence, Thurman, Brook, Crawford, or Porter are most likely never going to get a chance to KO Horn.
Noo...I didn't mean it to sound like I was naming Horn great in any way. Just saying that Bob Arum has been looking for THAT great while boxer since coming into this business. Plus all of the names that you mention are not even close to as white as Horn is. Yes, he's Australian but he speaks perfect English and the lady's would love him. All the guys you name are cold war Ivan Drago-ish types that don't sell well...white? yes. Tough to sell to 14 year old girls? absolutely. Frampton is the closest on your list but he's a midget on cereal boxes so he doesn't count.
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 03 Jul 2017, 08:00
by Lackeos
Some people speculating about what the motivation would be if the judges had a motive for handing-in a corrupt verdict. I think one possibility could be that Arum wanted Horn to rob Pacquiao and then for Crawford to beat Horn. To have Crawford rob Pacquiao directly would generate a lot of hate towards Crawford the way that it did when Bradley robbed Pacquiao. But if Crawford beats the guy who robbed Pacquiao, then Crawford is the good guy. Plus, if Crawford fights Pacquiao directly, there is a risk of Crawford losing. If you throw countless proxy opponents at Pacquiao until one of them can beat / rob Pacquiao, then you can match that proxy opponent with Crawford, and there's not a lot of chance of Crawford losing to Horn once you have corrupt judges working against Horn.
Re: Bob Arum: Fight was no Robbery! I had Pacman winning.
Posted: 03 Jul 2017, 09:48
by Ricky_
Incompetent judging at best. Anyone giving Horn 7 rounds in that fight doesn't know what wtf they are watching. Here was my card/comments;
R1 - Horn is awkward, clearly much bigger than Pacquiao, typical first round. Horn kept Pacquiao guessing and imposed himself well in the first round. 10-9 Horn.
R2 - Pac finds his range, clearly outboxed Horn in round 2. 19-19 even.
R3 - Horn is gamely, but Pacquiao is simply too accurate for Horn, Horn is landing little despite showing good heart. 29-28 Pac.
R4 - Close round. Horn kicked/tripped Pacquiao in this round, pretty blantant but the ref didn't even warn him. If that had been Hopkins and not Pacquaio he would have dislocated a few limbs. Close round, will give it to Horn. 38-38 even
R5 - Best shot of the round to Pacquiao but he didn't do enough, looking old. 48-47 Horn.
R6 - Even worse round for Pacquiao, looks a shot fighter, not landing anything. Horn gets the round for his pressure. 58-56 Horn.
R7 - Close round, Pacquiao is being made to fight Horn's fight, dragged into a bit of a war he didn't want to be in. Far superior counter-puncher though, cleaner punches for Pacquiao in a busier round. 67-66 Horn.
R8 - Crap round, Horn gassing a little, puting a lot into this fight. Pac round, all square - 76-76 even.
R9 - Woeful from Pacquiao, Horn was a sitting duck, i think it's a combination of age and fighting bigger men, Pacquiao had Horn hurt as bad as he had Algieri hurt, and he could finish neither. Not seeing a 10-8 here though, Horn bravely kept jabbing even when he was on the run, 10-9 for me. 86-85 Pac.
R10 - Great heart from Horn to comeback in this round, I think Pacquiao was punched out a bit too - still a clear Pacquaio round despite Horn's bravery, Horn hit air for 3 minutes there. 96-94 Pac.
R11 - Another poor round, Horn chasing, very gamely fighter with a size advantage and has taken Pacs bets shots. Simply too inaccurate though and getting picked off every now and then by a fighter levels above. 106-103 Pac.
R12 - Close round, Horn is landing little, probably pressed the action enough here though to compensation for such poor punch accuracy, i'll give him this one. 115-113, Pacquiao.
---
Overall opinion is Pacquiao is old, he isn't hungry anymore and had no interest in fighting Jeff Horn in the first place. Even in the media duties he sat on his phone entire conference - he treated the event with contempt and should just retire and enjoy his riches now. That been said, he was robbed in this fight, that decision was a damn joke, to find 7 round for Horn you would have to award him rounds were he hit nothing and was picked off - i;d be interested to hear what 7 rounds anyone could find for Horn. He was a gamely competitor and a bigger man, that roughed up Pacquiao on the ropes in spots, which i liked, but he's not an elite fighter, as his punch accuracy showed.