WBO Issues Official Response to Pacquiao/Horn Outcome

[Strategic1]

With the dynamics in boxing I would not hold up the action waiting for a ruling, I would have a judge watching a monitor of the fight that can do an instant over rule like in Tennis, Ref calls KD judges over rules and calls slip.

If its a bit more complicate they call the ruling at the end of the round or end of next round.

Yes, that makes sense. You are right. And with the use of monitors, they'd get the call right even in between rounds.

The ref can then order the judges to make the adjustment to their cards.

NBA, MLB, nhl, NFL ...all have some kind of video review. It's time to change.

[Strategic1]

So basically you're saying Skip Bayless is correct that Manny lost.

No not Bayless... reputable guys but keep a performance record on how they do.. if they are bad at scoring and go against the proper decision often, take them off.

[NC Uppercut]

We just need to have cats fight & send the video off to judges to watch at their leisure & get back to us in a couple weeks & tell us who won fights lol. Since everyone loves the suspense of a decision so much imagine how suspenseful that will be to wait 10-14 days for a decision.

Panda we won't hear crap else, for an extended period of time! Lmao

[Damn Wicked]

Bad idea. Guys like Keith Thurman would not be undefeated, the process would grind to a halt because every decision would be contested, even lopsided ones.

I'm fine with saying we do this for split or majority decisions. Not unanimous ones.

Tell me, who do you think beat Thurman?

[champion4ever]

That letter was irrelevant. All the WBO can do is order a rematch; Something that Manny is already planning to do from the rematch clause within the original contract.

It's up to the Australian World governing body to overturn that verdict; Which is something they will never consider doing. They can rule it a no contest, no decision, a draw or even a disqualification if they want to.

However, unfortunately for Manny Pacquiao, the final verdict stands as we all know it.

[Combat Talk Radio]

Tell me, who do you think beat Thurman?

By NSB logic, and assuming this "Waaahh I won I want a judge panel review!!!" proposal...

Both Porter and Garcia would have their fights reviewed, and especially in the case of Garcia, it would be overturned and Garcia declared the winner.

Why Garcia?

People say Jeff Horn lost based on CompuBox having Manny landing more punches.

CompuBox had Garcia up on punches landed against Thurman.

So by this logic, Garcia should have beaten Thurman - and that's what these people screaming for a panel are effectively saying.

In the Porter fight Porter was CLEARLY the aggressor and bullied Thurman the same way Horn bullied Manny. Assuming at least 3 judges score aggression whether it's effective or not, they would call Porter the winner.

That's why I don't agree with a panel that can override decisions. Fine for just saying as a matter of course "we THINK the other guy won", not fine if you're going to overturn the decision, because they'll get it wrong based on subjective factors.

[Combat Talk Radio]

No not Bayless... reputable guys but keep a performance record on how they do.. if they are bad at scoring and go against the proper decision often, take them off.

But that's just it. There's nobody that is consistently bad. Even CJ Ross. Remember Mares/Agbeko? Mares throwing more low blows than Andrew Golota, meanwhile two of the judges seemed perfectly content to score Mares dominating the fight while Ross was basically treating unpunished low blows as points off and ended up with a draw to at least stop a unanimous robbery.


Now, in MayGregor, there will be eyes on it seriously, because there'd obviously be incentive to make Conor win just for the bookie side. High risk of corruption there, which is one reason I miss open scoring. Blatant accountability and the chance to yank the judge and replace them before they have a chance to screw a fighter over.