Pacquiao vs. Bradley: Nevada Commission Plans to Review Controversial Decision
The Nevada State Athletic Commission is interested in getting an explanation for the outcome of Saturday’s scandalous fight.
He explained his reasoning:
We're going to review the tape of the bout because there was so much controversy, and because there was so much disagreement with the decision. Even with bouts with less controversy, judges like to review the tape anyway.
So what exactly does a review mean?
Kizer says he’ll be going through a round-by-round breakdown with all three judges. Each one of them had a 115-113 score, with CJ Ross and Duane Ford siding with Bradley and Jerry Roth in favor Pacquiao. They will be breaking it down to the point where Kizer understands the decision-making in why they scored a round a certain way:
They [judges] see the bout from different angles and have to subjectively decide how hard a punch was, and relate it to the other punches landed in that same round. You do your round by round scoring and there are often a lot of close rounds.
The results aren’t going to change, but if Kizer is not satisfied with the reasoning of Ross and Ford, they could be barred from judging another major event.
Considering Pacquiao landed more punches in 10 of the 12 rounds and out-punched Bradley 253 to 159, the thought process of the two who were in favor of Bradley is certainly in high demand. The decision has created an outrage in the sport and Top Rank promoter Bob Arum has demanded a review of the judges.
Boxing is a very subjective sport and Kizer wants to understand how the fight was judged from the source.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?