Wait, where was I? Oh, yeah. Saturday night came and all Hell broke loose with Pacquiao/Bradley, which will likely dominate all combat sports coverage this week.

For those still interested in MMA’s own problems and issues, Mike Chiapetta has that covered over at MMAfighting. Give it a read. Quite a few boxing aficionados and people involved more directly in boxing have made the comment to me that this doesn’t just signal the end of boxing and tip fans towards MMA, it knocks the scale off the fulcrum. But MMA has its own problems, and it’s for the most part these very same judges. More on that later.

But first, more fallout from Saturday.

Bob Arum is doing what he can to make sure he’s not included in any conspiracy theories by demanding an investigation into the judging. It would certainly be apt given the severity of the situation and will likely show up on the docket for Thursday’s meeting of the Nevada State Athletic Commission, barring insurmountable ineptitude. Then again, this is NSAC we’re talking about here. The last time there was judging this bad in boxing the judges were immediately suspended. But that was in New Jersey, which has the historically more competent and reputable Athletic Commission (the same one that also literally wrote the rules for MMA).

Arum also said that the case for Pacquiao is so convincing that there isn’t likely to be a rematch until an investigation is conducted (same article as above). So much for Bradley and his people hyping that November 10th date, which he actually started doing before the fight even started in anticipation of losing a contested decision against a distracted Pacquiao. What’s that they say about best laid plans?

And for those of you who haven’t separated your shoulders from throwing your hands up in the air over the course of the last two days, judge Duane Ford, who gave the fight to Bradley, gave an equally absurd defense of his scoring to Kevin Iole:

“If this were ‘American Idol’, without a doubt, Manny Pacquiao would have won. But it was not. I gave an honest opinion. I had Pacquiao up 4-2, I think, at the end of six rounds.  I thought he hurt Bradley a couple of times early in the fight. But when the bell rang to end that round, it was over and what happens in one round doesn’t carry over to the next round. They’re separate units. In the second half of the fight, Pacquiao picked off a lot of punches to the head, but Bradley landed some hard body shots. That hurt Pacquiao. I don’t mean it hurt him in the sense of it physically hurting him, but in terms of scoring and piling up points. Bradley did an excellent job standing his ground as a boxer. Remember, it’s a boxing match and Bradley demonstrated his ability to box expertly.”

It needs to be pointed out, again, that CompuStrike stats show that Bradley was literally outpunched in all but one round in terms of both volume and power. So what Ford is basically saying is that he isolated some moments Bradley had and chose to ignore everything else, which is certainly possible but also betrays a certain level of ineptness.

Taking this argument further, Bradley was not the more aggressive fighter. Nor was he the better ring general; Pacquiao dictated the course and direction of that entire fight. Nice enough guys have made the argument (which I won’t link to because I don’t want to embarrass them) that Bradley might have won on defense for blocking some of Manny’s shots. Which is to say that he should be given rounds for not getting his ass kicked more than he already was.

Oh, but then there’s this, again, from Ford:

“In pro boxing, you look for damage, and if the punches are equal and the damage is equal, you are looking for effective aggression, and that does not necessarily mean the guy going forward,” Ford said. “Effective aggression can be a guy going back. And then you look at ring generalship, and that’s all about control.”

…wow. Well, there you go.

I’m not trying to be dismissively cynical when I say that it’s bad everywhere you look. I just say that to accentuate the point that this is a problem in all of combat sports.

It’s not just something where we should just shrug and say “well, them’s the breaks,” because there are very specific peoples, places, and organizations one can point to and say that there needs to be reform and education. NSAC and its executive director Keith Kizer, for starters, and also Florida as shown on Friday’s UFC on FX 3 card.

There are also common denominators in both sports, particularly when it comes to judging, which in MMA often employs the same boxing judges who don’t seem to be able to accurately and consistently judge their own sport.

For MMA it might actually be easier, in that some of it could be remedied by tweaking the defined scoring criteria and evaluating the application of the ten-point must system. For example, arguments could be made that going with strict 10-9s may not be the right way to go in a sport with fewer and longer rounds. In boxing, however, it seems to be a more complicated issue of widespread incompetence.

I don’t have any answers, but those in positions to make changes have to start asking questions.

The judges at ringside: dumber than Jim Lampley's Ridiculous Glasses.

Making the performance of Florida officials on Friday night’s UFC on FX 3 card look competent would be a tall order for any Commission, but the Nevada State Athletic Commission was apparently up for the challenge.

In case you don’t know already, last night’s bout between Manny Pacquaio and Tim Bradley ended in a controversial split decision. And by controversial, I mean batshit crazy. After doing everything but taking out a gun and shooting Bradley point blank in the head for twelve rounds, two of the three judges gave it to the fighter that was outstruck in every round in regards to both volume and power.

The tempered reactions I’ve read have almost exclusively come from people who didn’t see that fight. If you didn’t see it, I don’t think you can appreciate exactly how bad this decision was.

The official scorecards (Sports Illustrated)

Let me put this into a personal context: anyone who knows me and is a fan of combat sports knows that I’m not one to launch into hyperbole after a close decision. Quite the opposite, in fact, as I’ve gotten into some disagreements with people who have labeled a decision they did not agree with a robbery.

But in this instance, there’s no question. I have only two of the twelve rounds to Bradley, and I was being generous. The other ten weren’t even close.

I have never, ever, seen a worse decision, and I don’t think I ever will.

After the fight, Bob Arum dumped some dirt onto the fire by speaking out against the decision and announcing that the rematch in November wouldn’t take place in Nevada but would instead occur in a “non-tax” state. Likely Texas, as Kevin Iole speculated.

Iole also states that the controversy will only help, not hurt, boxing. I have to respectfully disagree. Particularly with fighters like Pacquaio and Mayweather who are likely to go the distance in their fights. If fans know they won’t see a finish by KO, they’re less likely to drop sixty dollars on a fight that they know will be better off left to the flip of a coin than in the hands of judges. It particularly hurts other cards, which were already suffering from a dwindling hardcore fanbase.

Between this and the absolutely ludicrous Therapeutic Use Exemptions being granted so fighters like Chael Sonnen can compete while using steroids, it’s been an embarrassing year for the Nevada State Athletic Commission. Their spectacular ineptness and speculated corruption is unprecedented. Something has to give here.

Fight Opinion has a collection of some of the reaction. The outrage here is warranted, folks.

“When talking to him on the phone, his speech was becoming slurred,” said Mike Mobbs, who’s counted Goodridge as his best friend since the two were nine years old, growing up in Barrie, Ontario together. “It got to the point where, when having phone conversations with him, I found myself constantly saying, ‘What did you say? Pardon?’ That, to me, was the tip-off.”

He’d forget appointments, forget whole conversations. He’d call a friend on the phone, talk to them for a while, then hang up and call them back ten minutes later. ‘How’s it going?’ he’d ask. And what were you supposed to say? That it was going exactly the same as it was ten minutes ago? That his brain was broken, and that there was nothing anybody could do about it?

…

“I had no idea about CTE,” Goodridge said. “I didn’t know anything.”

read more: The Fighter Who Stayed Too Long at MMAFighting.com

The story of Goodridge, as conveyed by Fowlkes, is heartbreaking. Particularly what it’s done to his friends and family.

People will write this off because Goodridge is at the extreme end of the spectrum of fighters who hang on too long. Goodridge is first and foremost associated with MMA, but he’s also fought in boxing, he has an even more extensive kickboxing resume. I worry people will see that and write it off as isolated, but it’s a very real problem in all of sports, not just MMA or boxing or combat sports in general. One need look only to what we’re finding out about former NFL players, in particular that their average life expectancy is hitting the low to mid 50s, mostly due to CTE-induced trauma, depression, etcetera. Sports fans are going to have to start asking themselves and their favorite leagues/promoters some very hard questions sooner rather than later.

================================

And from The Boxing Tribune’s Paul Magno: a much younger fighter at the very top of the game, Manny Pacquaio, is essentially broke due to the (potentially illegal) interference in his finances coming from Top Rank promotions and Bob Arum:

Manny Pacquiao’s grasp and control of an empire that has generated well over half a billion dollars is contained within six cardboard boxes filled to the brim with random receipts and hand written notes. Forbes’ 24th Richest Athlete in the World also has no idea where to find basic documents such as fight contracts, bank statements, endorsement contracts, promoter contracts, property ownership records, etc.

…

According to statements made by VisionQwest CEO, Michael Lodge, Pacquiao’s entire operation was in disarray with Manny’s advisor, Michael Koncz, assuming control of all money dealings in the absence of a full-time accountant or trained financial consultant. Little care was paid to accuracy as numbers, supplied by Koncz, were simply “plugged” into generic taxation forms and sent off to the IRS.

But disorder and sloppy record-keeping would be the least troublesome facts uncovered by VisionQwest.

According to the company, they also found out that Pacquiao’s advisor, Koncz, not only worked for Pacquiao, but was also working for Pacquiao’s promoter, Top Rank.

read more: Where in the World is Manny’s Money? at The Boxing Tribune

What more can I say? Boxing’s always been manipulative and haunted by less than reputable characters that have forever tainted and stained its image and integrity, but Bob Arum and company are among the lowest of the low. It’s nigh impossible to even imagine a guy like Pacquaio, who has generated so much money that most of us can’t even comprehend it, being cash poor. Yet here we are.

That said, the sporting of boxing has to change its approach.

MMA as a whole sells entire fight cards and brand names. This is not to downplay the importance of an intriguing name event or star power, as every promotion needs it in order to thrive and succeed. However, a disappointing or less than intriguing main event can still succeed and give fans their money’s worth based on the strength of the card and overall presentation. This is how the UFC not only became successful, but also made its name its biggest asset: the main draws aren’t just their champions, it’s the UFC itself.

Pacquiao's domination of Clottey had fans twiddling their thumbs and analysts grumbling (photo: Chris Cozzone, The Times Online)

Boxing is a completely different animal, and not just for its style and presentation.  Since its inception, the business model for boxing has been to sell fights and/or individual fighters. This is not necessarily a bad thing, obviously, since the sport has survived and thrived for many years using this method. The problem is that it gives the appearance that the promotional system in place for boxing is archaic and out of touch. As cliché as it sounds, we live in a rapidly changing world. Technology, the world economy, business, travel, and communication have evolved, warped, and changed at a nearly incalculable and unprecedented rate. Attitudes and expectations have swung in wildly different directions in some industries. Combat sports, and boxing specifically, may be no different.

Unfortunately, boxing hasn’t changed much in terms of its approach in the last decade. They have stuck to a formula of personalities over principles. Promoters still negotiate the most politically viable fights possible, even and particularly when it comes to championship bouts. For even the most loyal boxing enthusiast, championships and rankings are suspect and questionable in an industry where the two best fighters in the world can’t come together because of political power plays, grudges between a boxer and promoter, and a litany of reasons having nothing to do with actual sport and competition.

Granted, these problems exist in MMA and other sports as well, but the fact that there are really only two major draws left in boxing – Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao – should signal to many that it’s time for a major change. Even moreso that neither of them are anywhere close to heavyweight, which is still the biggest potential money maker in combat sports despite the fact that it doesn’t even exist in the eyes of the mainstream in North America. I’d like to say that mainstream fans have simply come to appreciate the more technically sound and faster-paced lighter weight classes, but the unfortunate truth is that an industry that thrives on marketing personalities cannot sell North American audiences on bouts between Eastern European and Russian boxers.

Then again, maybe they could if boxing changed its approach. Pacquiao and Mayweather are still drawing mainstream attention and money, but perhaps nowhere near what they could bring in. More importantly, it doesn’t seem to help the industry as a whole. It may be time for them to shift to a model where interest is built around an entire evening of bouts with an intriguing main event, rather than a single fight built around a superstar facing a fighter for whom millions of dollars is spent in vain to convince a skeptical audience is a worthy contender.

The pay-per-view will do good numbers based on the presence of Manny Pacquiao and the fact that the fight took place in the spectacle of Cowboys stadium. Unfortunately, you can’t pull the same ballyhoo trick of a stadium locale twice. Fans are going to be more skeptical than ever, particularly after what they saw on Saturday night. The announcers (who themselves may see a need to change to a more big-card rather than big-fight approach) completely buried the undercard throughout the broadcast and openly admitted to the audience that the fights and fighters they were watching belonged nowhere near a card costing in excess of fifty dollars. As for the fight itself, to call it a one-sided affair would be an understatement. Pacquiao threw 1,231 punches over the course of twelve rounds to Clottey’s 399. That’s not a typo.

As far as how to execute a new game plan, I won’t pretend to have all the answers. I concede as well that making these changes is easier said than done. Boxing doesn’t have the benefit of having come up in the last two decades under essentially one banner, and as such you have a lot of powerful and influential promoters and players involved. Beyond the logistics of getting everyone to come together for the benefit of the sport and against their own individual financial interests, it’s tougher to stack a full boxing card as opposed to MMA since boxing fights tend (and are scheduled) to last longer.

All I’m saying is that something has to be done. Despite what some analysts would lead you to believe, boxing and MMA are not engaged in a direct competition. It’s not a zero sum game where people won’t watch boxing because they watch the UFC. I myself am primarily a fan of MMA, but I’ll certainly watch boxing when it’s made available (and intriguing) to me. However, there are two big obstacles to me developing a greater and more consistent appreciation of boxing. One is the cost of pay-per-views, which in addition to all of the MMA shows would break me. The other is lack of interest amongst both personal friends in the area and local establishments that would potentially show these fights.

Different promotional strategies, like the Super Six World Boxing Classic, are key to attracting and maintaining a new audience.

In fairness, there are people in the boxing game that recognize this as a problem and are offering attempts at a solution. Showtime and Sauerland Event promotion organized the “Super Six World Boxing Classic,” a tournament containing six top-ranked Super Middleweights to decide a consensus Unified Super Middleweight Champion (consisting of the WBC and WBA titles).  The tournament started in late 2009 and is ongoing. Though criticized by some, it’s a unique and fascinating approach. It has created interest not only in a whole boxing division that had been ignored, but also makes names out of six fighters who otherwise might be unknown to the layman fight fan.

Hopefully it’s the beginning of a new trend of promoters and promotions trying new techniques beyond throwing someone up against a mega-star and praying that enough people buy him as a viable challenger. Boxing isn’t dead or on life support, but to pretend it hasn’t lost much of its luster stateside is foolish and self-defeating. There is a way to renew interest in the sport and pull in fans such as myself. They just have to concede to change and not write me off as an unreachable audience.