BadLeftHook, who are normally pretty good with their scorecards, gave the fight 115-113 to Pacquiao. Personally I had the contest as a close Mayweather decision - I gave Manny the 4th, 6th and 12th with a couple of even rounds. But it's interesting to see just how wide spread the variance is with the scoring of these cards. And yes, I know only the 3 blokes at ringsides' actually count.
I guess the difference lies in how you score close rounds. Let's be honest, in that fight there were very few decisive rounds - in fact, the 2 clearest rounds were 4 and 6 and were both in Manny's favour.
A lot of the other rounds were Floyd stepping away from engagement before firing out some decent counters while Manny worked for pressure and tried to launch an offence. Or nothing happening whatsoever for 2 minutes. Subjectively, the majority of rounds were far from conclusive, even in typical Floyd fashion, and while most of us gave Floyd's technical ability the nod, if you watch the fight back it's actually increasingly easier to call them even or in some cases understand how Pacquiao's aggression to try and force a fight could be favoured.
Simply put, the punches Floyd landed in the close rounds, were they enough to actually win a round where little happened because of the negative steps taken by FM? If fighter A is being so reluctant to engage, is that credit to him or a mark against fighter B for being unable to force the action continuously? Do you call that a positive for Floyd imposing a negative gameplan on the opponent or should the man trying to fight be rewarded for pushing the pace?
When you look at it like that it's a grey area for sure. Truth be told, the fight was a bit of a stinker and Mayweather was largely responsible for that - Many of us saw that coming. It certainly wasn't the technical masterclass that is being lauded today. Floyd got hit and hurt and forced to cover up on far too many occssions for it to be remotely a masterclass, even by his standards. I can't recall a single moment that would feature on an extended highlight reel of his. Instead, the contest was an uber skilled defensive fighter negating an off-colour pressure fighter to just about an acceptable level to work a tight decision in my eyes.
I'm fully aware that the art of boxing is to hit and not be hit, ie fencing without swords. Please keep in mind that I'm not contesting the decision, I'm just trying to understand how some outlets are giving the nod to Pacquiao without clear bias in his favour and open hatred of Mayweather.
then he goes on record to say he's injured. Take it on the chin they were shocking on the night, I can't believe after all these years and an extensive training camp he put on that performance he looked clueless at times.