What Really Happened on our Fight of the Century

[gauze]

here you go guys... http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=668284

[Willy Wanker]

I think we need to stop referring to this fight as the fight of the century.

Wasn't even fight of the night.

[baya]

what really happened? the one who likes mango's found out very quickly that he wasn't as good as the one he was fighting. then he started making excuses and subsequently losing fans.

[DeadLikeMe]

This has to be the hardest any fan base has taken a loss. It almost makes me feel bad for them. Almost.

[mezoomozaa]

Manny did good job his age relatively to all the wars he has been through, and after the most devastating loss of his career and few years of trash fight, I think Manny should be praised for the work he put in that fight.

[mezoomozaa]

By the way, it wasn't the fight of the year for me, let alone fight of the century. Even hype-wise, people were more crazy about many fights more than that one.

It was a money fight, like Tyson vs Lewis.

[Combat Talk Radio]

***Okay so do you guys/gals see the flaw in today's scoring system? You're not alone, what is wrong here is that they made the scoring a subjective type instead of an objective one like most other modern sports.

Were it to be scored objectively, Floyd would have dominated even more soundly.

Punches connected - Floyd (and yes, the body shots in the clinch ARE counted. This is what people are missing and why Floyd is brilliant)

Flow of the fight/Control - Floyd. Manny had one F'n job: Press the action, because Floyd wasn't going to and he knew that. Maidana pressed the action in the first fight and arguably did better than Manny.

Defensive - Floyd. No brainer. Manny was getting caught with rights all night long. Floyd got caught maybe twice the whole fight.

Offensive - Floyd. This doesn't mean "throw a lot of punches and hope one hits". Despite what Skip Bayless thinks, wasted aggression isn't the point. Stylistically, Floyd's offense was superior. He was stopping Manny's combos repeatedly, nullifying and countering.

Strategic - Floyd. At first May was taking some chances with lead rights to test Manny's chin and even staggered him a couple of times, but Manny turned up the aggressive, and Floyd switched strategies. Manny never changed. He attempted the same combo over and over only to get countered. His strategy was terrible and Roach had no answer.


The ONLY thing I would objectively give to Manny Pacquiao in that fight was overall speed - and he didn't use it properly.

[RED REP]

It's amazing that through frame by frame replays you could really watch how these two legends at the pinnacle of their skills work. What is really amazing to me is that pacquiao who clearly fought floyd's game whether he planned it or floyd has able to lure him into it was able to neutralize floyd defensively and floyd was missing his punches all over in inches by inches, and although pacquiao was expected to miss a lot due to the defensive prowess of floyd, which he did, pacquiao clearly landed the more meaningful and effective clean punches in the fight and this is undeniable.

Now, we as floyd fans, was hypocritically saying that floyd had clearly schooled or dominated the fight, we want it so badly that we are beginning to believe it ourselves, but it's really not the fact, the actual fight is so VERY VERY VERY close. Do not listen to the jim lampley, roy jones or any of the compubox mumbo jumbo because it's all flawed and subjective, trust your eyes, watch it frame by frame in slow motion because that is the real deal and you will see the truth. And the truth is the fight could go either way because it's that close. The truth is manny pacquiao is the one who landed the more meaningful and clean effective punches, floyd missed a LOT too and I mean a LOT as much as pacquiao did.

Here is the real score and what it's suppose to be, if we are to apply the actual basis on how this game is scored in today's boxing standard:

Clean effective punching: Manny
Effective aggressiveness: Manny
Ring Generalship: Floyd
Defense: Floyd

No way you could argue with that because first of all, clean effective punching belongs clearly to Manny, No way you can fool a frame by frame, slow motion nowadays.

Secondly, effective aggressiveness still belongs to manny because first of all, floyd isn't aggressive at all, why would a judge give this to floyd that's ridiculous, a guy who isn't aggressive at all can't be effective. And although manny's aggressiveness is being tamed by floyd's effective defense, it is Manny Pacquiao who is the more assertive and aggressive between the two so clearly this factor is in Manny Pacquiao's favor.

Thirdly, ring generalship belongs clearly to Floyd, no way it's going to belong to Manny because the flow and pace of the fight was in floyd's favor, Manny fought floyd's pace and style. No way to argue about this.

Fourthly, although both are superb defensively, and if you watch it frame by frame in slow motion, it could go either way,but for me, I'll give it to floyd because clearly he was able to tame Pacquiao's supposedly overwhelming offensive game and usual output.

***Okay so do you guys/gals see the flaw in today's scoring system? You're not alone, what is wrong here is that they made the scoring a subjective type instead of an objective one like most other modern sports. Why would they make such a thing? Why make it harder to score for themselves than it really is specially with today's technology is a great puzzle to us. Maybe they are stuck in the old traditional ways and still afraid of change or maybe they want to purposely control and from time to time encourage controversial decisions themselves so that they can skew/favor the result of the fight to the fighter which will benefit their own business welfare in the long run, we really do not know the real answer. But one thing we know is, clearly, this system does not work anymore because it has resulted in too many controversial decisions, the list of controversial and flawed decisions are already too long to count that you just have to accept it.

Bottom-line: We now have the technology in our hands and this isn't 1800's anymore, change the scoring system and find a way to incorporate replay system with it; --every modern sports now have incorporated replay in their scoring system, why does the most dangerous sport in modern times, where every punch thrown can cause hematoma and death to human being still doesn't have the luxury of a truly accurate objective scoring system? Basketball has one now, Tennis has one now and a countless many other modern sports, and that's ridiculous because that's not so dangerous as boxing. Come on, it's time to change.

In conclusion, there is no heroism nor celebration here for the fans, the fight of century is so awful for the casuals because they cancel out each other, only us, true hardcores of the game can appreciate the skill level involved in that fight. The fact is, both of them are so good at evading each others arsenal and the thinking part of the game that they could go on forever like that and no eventful thing will happen. Pacquiao fought floyd's game whether his team planned it or lured by floyd and whatnot and that's what happened, they cancel out each other, they are so so good defensively that the fight ended that way till the end.

effective aggression: manny

lololololololololol

[SergioMartinez]

What really happened is Manny was misled. He was misled by Delahoya, Arum, Roach.

He believed that Mayweather possessed very little power and once the bell rung, May's punches had a little bit more pop than he expected.

Plus Pac had issues with a long jab, most fighters he had fought had little to no jab.

Basically it was a learning experience all around.

[Shpacman]

This is some truth now. All these guys which tell us about scooling look only to one component of the game - ring generalship. This was the easyest component to judge. Other 3 components are too difficult for judging for an average fan. So these guys listen to kelerman, johnes, compubox, etc. Instead of carefully watching the fight by theirselves.