n the heart of the madness that is Las Vegas on fight weekend, Ace Freeman breaks down the aftermath in the wake of Manny Pacquiao?s controversial split decision loss to Timothy Bradley last night as seen live on HBO PPV.
I was standing in the sportsbook at the edge of the MGM Grand casino when the guilt started to take hold. I was just about to cash my winning proposition ticket that I?d placed on long odds for Tim Bradley to win a decision over boxing?s pound-for-pound king Manny Pacquiao. Not because I thought he?d actually win. Far from it? but in recent years I?ve placed a bet on the heavy underdog in every one of Manny?s fights. The reason for this is two-fold. First as a huge fan of his I?d always imagined being extremely disappointed should he finally meet with defeat after a historic unbeaten run and the payoff would be some solace. Second is that it?s become a good luck charm for me to bet on his opponent.
However luck was nowhere to be found last night in Las Vegas. Not for Manny Pacquiao. An overwhelming majority of fans and pundits on hand at the MGM Grand Garden arena thought he had thoroughly beaten Tim Bradley with relative ease when the final bell sounded to end their fight.
HBO?s broadcast team had the fight a one sided wipeout and most members of the media present were discussing whether they?d given Bradley one, two or three rounds as a stretch.
Then? disbelief. As renowned announcer Michael Buffer announced the first score of 115-113 for Pacquiao shock set in. How could that be possible? One judge had Pacquiao ahead by only one round? Unfathomable.
But there was more.
A second judge had Bradley ahead 115-113.
At this point it was immediately apparent something was afoul.
The third and final score of 115-113 for Bradley (tipping the fight in his favour via split decision) was almost expected at that point following the utter absurdity of the first two scores.
Shock and awe swept through the media room like a tidal wave? and then oddly, there was laughter.
?Well, that?s boxing for you.?
It was a sentiment many reverted to very quickly after the disbelief faded.
What a sad commentary for our beloved sport of boxing.
I can?t say I didn?t have the same feeling rush over me at that moment.
Manny Pacquiao dominated that fight.
Tim Bradley, an inside fighter by style, was completely unable to fight Pacquiao on the inside. He tried early and was sent reeling and got hurt every time he tried.
He was also ineffective from distance and any time he wasn?t trying (and failing) to advance to Pacquiao he was raked with Manny?s straight left hand every time it was thrown.
In the fourth Bradley was briefly separated from his senses by a Pacquiao barrage and stumbled awkwardly as he was sent reeling. It looked as though he injured his foot at the time and he was asked by his corner if he wished to continue as he sat bewildered between rounds.
While the American challenger showed resolve to push on, he was unable to mount any kind of effective offense in the fight and continued to be punished anytime he attempted to fight at close range.
Late in the bout everyone on hand was using terms like ?shutout?, ?wipe-out? and ?mismatch?. HBO called it another brilliant performance by Pacquaio as he continued to pile up every round on their card late into the fight.
While Bradley may have won one or two rounds late as Pacquiao began to coast, the decision never looked to be remotely in doubt.
In the moments after the mind boggling decision was announced I thought back to the NBA semi final game that ended in a comfortable victory for the Miami Heat over the Boston Celtics.
If, after the final buzzer that saw Miami ahead by a score of 101-88, it was announced that the game had inexplicably been given to Boston despite what the entire world had just witnessed to the contrary? would it simply be chalked up to ?well that?s basketball for you??
How absurd does that sound? Some sobering context.
It?s a sad state of affairs when outrage has become so commonplace in boxing that it?s biggest proponents are no longer the least bit surprised when the egregiously unexpected occurs.
I stood up in the media centre in the aftermath and tried to find one single person who?d scored the fight for Bradley and there wasn?t one on hand. Not one.
I had the fight scored ten rounds to two for Pacquiao. That, and nine rounds to three were the most popular verdicts in the press room. Followed by a few shutout scores for Pacquiao. Anyone with four rounds for Bradley was in a tiny minority.
My friend and colleague Ryan Maqui?ana of Comcast SportsNet compiled an excellent poll of some of the more respected members of the media and it came in as a landslide in favour of Pacquiao.
Boxing is indeed a subjective sport with the way it?s rounds are open to interpretation while being scored. It often leaves the fans and media wildly split in a fight that features many close and competitive rounds.
We need look no further than Pacquiao?s last fight with his long time nemesis Juan Manuel Marquez for an example of such a split in popular opinion. Many feel Marquez won their November 2011 rubber match that was awarded to Pacquiao by narrow scores? many of them claiming robbery.
Robbery is a hot button word in the boxing community. Personally, I detest to use that term as the majority of fights we watch can often be swayed in either fighters?s direction by a couple of close ?swing rounds?.
Pacquiao-Marquez III was a perfect example of this. I had Manny winning that fight by one round, but a difference of two rounds (and there were many that were too close to call in that bout) and the bout swings in Marquez?s favour. This comes with the territory in boxing. But a robbery it was not.
Or if it was a robbery, you need to come up with a new term for what we witnessed last night? because the two fights were not in the same ball park, league, or universe.
If you thought the third closely contested fight between Pacquiao and Marquez was a robbery? Pacquiao-Bradley was grand larceny.
When we look back at boxing?s controversial past, there aren?t nearly as many *blatant* robberies to point to. This is all the more reason to reserve the use of that term for such occasions as to not cheapen the word.
Last night, the shoe fit. As we waited for the fighters to arrive at the post fight press conference I stopped two Las Vegas policemen and said I?d like to report a robbery. They laughed and said there wasn?t much they or anyone else could do.
There never is.
I can?t recall a worse decision in a marquee title fight in recent years. Certainly there are a few that compare, but on the biggest stage this one sticks out like a sore thumb.
Tim Bradley arrived at the conference looking like a beaten man. He was in a wheelchair due to his ankle but the visual seemed fitting. He did not have the smile and aura of a man who had just achieved his life long dream.
?I heard the boo?s out there at the end of the fight,? Tim said. ?There were three judges out there and that?s the way they judged it.. two of them felt I won the fight. What do you want me to do? I definitely want to do it again.?
Pacquiao arrived with a smile and was as humble as ever.
?That?s why we love this sport of boxing,? he said with a shrug and laugh as he took the podium.
?We have to respect the decision, but 100 per cent I feel I won the fight. To the fans, in your heart you know who won the fight. It?s okay. This is part of the game and we have to accept that. That?s the best attitude to have and you must show respect.?
His words were graceful and elegant and it was abundantly clear this was the politician Manny Pacquiao we were hearing.
?I give him credit for maybe two or three rounds but that?s it,? he concluded. ?I know I won the fight.?
Pacquiao?s recent re-commitment to his faith seemed to have him in a good place despite what had just been taken from him. He was humble, gracious and grateful to be there despite the circumstances.
As he continued answering questions that had obvious answers I couldn?t help but feel sorry for him.
As a man who?s given so much to boxing through his blood, sweat and tears in the last few years this is how the sport rewards him?
?What can I say?? asked Pacquiao?s renowned trainer Freddie Roach. ?I thought we won just about every round. I had it ten to two and am very proud of Manny. I thought he fought a great fight and that it was his best performance since the Cotto fight.?
?It?s a travesty and it?s unfathomable,? Top Rank Promoter Bob Arum hissed. ?Lets call this what it is. We all saw what happened out there. This was not a close fight. I?ve seen questionable and home town decisions in my day but this was just a case of judges not knowing how to score a fight. Unfathomable.?
And as quickly as the conference started it was over.
My fellow members of the media had, for the most part, already begun to shrug it off.
?It?s a real shame,? one of them said to me. ?In a week no one will be talking about it anymore. These kind of farcical decisions have become that commonplace.?
I looked in my wallet and saw my aforementioned winning ticket and debated throwing it out or burning it. In a perfect world that gesture would have been righteous but like everyone else in this economy, I could use the extra funds.
As I sat there staring at the hundreds of dollars I?d just won on boxing?s most recent farce the loathing started to set in. I thought of all the people I know who would ask me for an explanation. I thought of all the sports pages across the country who would go on to write about just another embarrassment and black eye for boxing.
The sport I love so dearly has become a whipping boy within mainstream sports.
To give you some contrast as to how bad a decision this was, on my way out of the media centre I ran in to Floyd Mayweather Sr. The veteran coach and boxing personality is as big a detractor of Manny Pacquiao as you will ever find.
?Big Floyd, who won that fight?? I said.
His furrowed brow twitched as he sighed and begrudgingly said ?Pacquiao?.
?Was it possible that Bradley won seven rounds in that fight??
After another pregnant pause he simply said ?No.?
As I continued my way out of the arena I was lucky enough to see one of my colleagues in the media stop Keith Kizer (Nevada State Athletic Commission executive director) on his way out of the arena.
?I had Pacquiao way ahead but Bradley came on late and made it close,? he said.
When asked if there would be any room for a protest he continued: ?Absolutely not. If there was an investigation any time there was a split decision we?d be investigating every fight.?
And with that he gave us the slip.
Kizer is a gentleman and his answers were carefully thought out. He has an agenda he is obligated to stick to due to the politics involved in the situation, but for once it would be nice to see someone stand up and acknowledge these instances of negligence that are killing the sport we all love.
Chalking it up to ?that?s boxing for you? is starting to become tiresome.
After finally making my way through the clustered crowd, still rife with disbelief, I arrived at the sportsbook.
While the cashier counted out my hundred dollar bills I struggled to find my sought after solace.
?I know you probably don?t care but I feel compelled to let you know I don?t feel good about this,? I said.
?I heard it was a robbery.?
?That?s an understatement. Are you getting a lot of Bradley tickets coming in??
?Oh yes, tons. A lot of people made a lot of money tonight.?
That?s boxing for you.
