Floyd Mayweather called her scoring ?a joke.? But unlike most jokes, no one is laughing, at least not in public. Even Keith Kizer, the well-known kibitzer who heads the Nevada State Athletic Commission, isn?t laughing, perhaps because he?s busy defending the questionable judging of boxing?s questionable boxing judge du jour, Cynthia J. ?CJ? Ross.
As the world knows, C.J. Ross, having the privilege of sitting ringside, determined that Saturday?s romp between Floyd Mayweather and Canelo Alvarez was a draw. She?s entitled to her opinion, as are we all, even when it runs counter to common sense and the shifting sands beneath our feet.
Calls for her license to be revoked, pleas that an investigation be launched, demands that she be flogged in front of Caesars Palace, have largely gone ignored. Instead, Keith Kizer, in whose jurisdiction the fight occurred, has leaped to Ross? defense.
?Just because a judge?s scorecard ends up even, doesn?t mean the judge necessarily thought the fight as a whole was even,? Kizer told USA Today. Sounding like both a Zen master and the Nutty Professor, he explained, ?It could be that a judge has six rounds for each fighter, but the six rounds she gave fighter A, she gave them to him easily and the six rounds she gave fighter B, they were really close rounds. That?s pretty much how it was last night.?
As explanations go, that?s a good one. Few, however, are likely to be appeased.
?Good judges, they don?t keep track of their scores,? he continued, suggesting that bad judges do keep track of their scores. ?It?s a round-by-round scoring system. All three judges thought Mayweather was the better fighter, that he won that fight as a whole. Because one judge had it even on the scorecard doesn?t mean that judge thought both fighters did equally well.?
There?s curious kind of logic to Kizer?s remarks, but they won?t pass the foolproof scratch-and-sniff test.
?Let?s say you don?t agree with her on the eighth round. One round out of 24 you disagree with her and you think she should never judge again??
If you ask the guy on the street, or anyone without a vested interest in the fight?s outcome, the answer to Kizer?s question is yes, to which he naturally has a reply: ?The answer is the scoring system. Discipline does not make sense here.?
The scoring of C.J. Ross aside, part of the ire is related to the fact that The One, hyped to the high heavens as Mayweather?s most competitive fight in years, didn?t live up to expectations. It?s not Mayweather?s excellence that?s in doubt. It?s the sincerity of those who foisted this upon an eternally trusting public.
Golden Boy CEO Richard Schaefer, in full Elmer Gantry mode, said, ?The whole world was watching. That scorecard was a disgrace. How that judge could be appointed after the decision of Bradley and Pacquiao is not a question I can answer. How can that happen? Is it going to happen again??
But Team Mayweather is foregoing chest-thumping in lieu of reconciliation.
Leonard Ellerbe, Mayweather Promotions CEO, having revised his initial critical outburst, now says, ?I thought the scoring was a little off, but it just makes you that much more motivated.? He added, acknowledging of the side on which his bread is buttered, ?The commission is the best in the business, but sometimes people have off-nights, just like everybody else. But they did a wonderful job of appointing officials and we don?t have nothing to say.?
If he says it was a ?wonderful job,? it must have been a wonderful job.
Who are we to say otherwise?
