boxing

Mayweather beats Pacquiao by decision

16 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2015 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

16 Comments
Login to comment

I kinda figured Mayweather would win, but it was a lackluster fight just the same. It was almost as if they had a little talk before the fight..."Hey Pacman, I'll fight you and both of us will get zillions, so let's agree not to hurt each other"..."Sounds like a plan Floyd."

2 ( +6 / -4 )

As expected, Mayweather danced around for 12 rounds and won. He landed more punches sure but most of them were defense punches. Manny attacked more when Floyd was against the ropes but he quickly bounced off and danced away. I bet Floyd will take on a nobody in September and be out.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

He'll win that 49th fight too, to tie Marciano's record, but I bet his arrogance makes him shoot for 50.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Love him or hate him, Mayweather knows how to win. He fought a smart fight. Pacquiao was simply not good enough to beat him.

It was a decisive win. No need for a rematch.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Time surely have changed. Boxing used to be called a savage fight, now many so-called boxing fans call's it a well thought out chess match.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Mayweather is the Chelsea of boxing. People who are complaining about the fight should have known what to expect when they bought the ticket.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The fight seemed a lot closer than that. In fact, after hearing the judges scores, most of thought that Pacquiao had got the win. The judge who scored it 118-110 must have seen a different fight than we did!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Mayweather displayed the ugly side of the art of boxing - lots of hugging and running away instead of engaging.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

People expect blood and get disappointed when they don't get it. Many still think boxing is what it was in 1920s.

Mayweather is the best at what he does.People may not like his boxing style. They may find him boring. But it gets him wins and that is what it counts at the end of the day. He won this fight fair and square.

Pacquiao knew what kind of boxer he was facing. He should have prepared accordingly. If you cannot beat your opponent's play style and outwit him in the ring, then you have no right to win the fight. Winning is about forcing your style of fighting on your opponent and dominating him, not expecting your opponent to fight the way that will best suit your style.

Pacquiao should just retire. He had a brilliant career but it is very clear that his best years are behind him. He was simply outclasses in this fight.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

" In fact, after hearing the judges scores, most of thought that Pacquiao had got the win. "

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mayweather received scores of 116-112 from two judges, even before the 3rd one voted; meaning Pacquiao was already losing by 8 points.

And "most thought Pacquiao had got the win"????!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Pacquiao should just retire. He had a brilliant career but it is very clear that his best years are behind him. He was simply outclasses in this fight.

Mayweather is going to retire after his last fight on September. Pacquiao is 2 years younger than Mayweather. After Mayweather retires, who's going to stop Pacquiao?

Mayweather received scores of 116-112 from two judges, even before the 3rd one voted; meaning Pacquiao was already losing by 8 points.

In pro boxing, points don't aggregate. If two judges give a boxer 115-113 wins but a third judge gives him/her a 108-120 loss, then guess what, the boxer still wins the match with a 2-to-1 majority decision.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I have problems with the Judges they are very much Floyd’s Judges. Jose Luis Costello was beaten Floyd Mayweather Jr in their first fight but Judges given Floyd win. Most of American Judges are bias and they will give American boxers win unless you knock out American boxer. This fight was closed fight regardless of boring because Floyd running corner to corner, pushing Manny away and Hugging to Manny. I think the result will be fair if the fight was declared as draw. I believe the fight was draw.

The score 118-110 was ridiculous and you can see how American judge was unfair and ethically corrupted. Floyd’s zero lost record was worthless. If Floyd style running corner to corner was becoming American boxers’ favorite defensive boxing technique and then the boxing will be dying out soon in Las Vegas.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

"In pro boxing, points don't aggregate"

I never said they did; only said he was losing by 8 meaning that no matter what score the 3rd judge gave he had already lost.

If two judges give a boxer 115-113 wins but a third judge gives him/her a 108-120 loss, then guess what, the boxer still wins the match with a 2-to-1 majority decision."

Wrong! And did you not say scores do not aggregate????

And even if it aggregated how did you get to the conclusion that the simple fact one scored 108-120 would translate into a 2-1 majority decision??? This after 2 judges already scored in favour of Mayweather.

What sort of maths is that?

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/How_to_Score_a_Fight

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

If two judges give a boxer 115-113 wins but a third judge gives him/her a 108-120 loss, then guess what, the boxer still wins the match with a 2-to-1 majority decision."

Wrong! And did you not say scores do not aggregate????

And even if it aggregated how did you get to the conclusion that the simple fact one scored 108-120 would translate into a 2-1 majority decision???

Re-read what I wrote again for better reading comprehension.

Here's a simpler line-by-line card for you.

Judge 1 gives Boxer A 115-113 win.

Judge 2 also gives Boxer A 115-113 win.

Judge 3 gives Boxer A 108-120 loss.

Boxer A still wins because 2 judges give him wins, while only 1 judge gives him loss. That's called a 2-to-1 majority decision.

Despite the fact that if you add up all the points, it would be 115+115+108=338 for Boxer A, while 113+113+120=346 for Boxer B.

It doesn't matter how much total points Boxer A lost by - it only matters that he won with more judges. The # of points he lost by is immaterial - it's not even worth adding together, like you did.

There, understandable?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Re-read what I wrote again for better reading comprehension."

I'm afraid yer the one who needs to read again for better comprehension; unless yer arguing for argument's sake!

1) I NEVER said scores compute; you thought I did!!!

2) You're basically saying the same thing I had already said: 2 Judges scored for Mayweather therefore he would win at least by a 2:1 decision. I said that, read again for better comprehension.

"Boxer A still wins because 2 judges give him wins, while only 1 judge gives him loss. That's called a 2-to-1 majority decision."

That's your words; read my original post and see the same had already been said.

When I referred to the 8 point gap was not to mean computation; was re-stating the fact that 2 judges had already decided in Mayweather's favour.

I must confess that was in a hurry and did not read your reply properly; thus I thought you were trying to say that if a boxer gets a decision from 2 judges and the third judge scores big for the other boxer then this other boxer would still win by a 2:1. That was my bad.

Again, re-read my post s for better comprehension; failing that read the link on boxing scoring I posted and you conveniently ignored, pretending not to have understood what I wrote, notwithstanding my clear misreading of part of yours.

The link should have made it clear that I don't need your lessons on what constitute a 2:1 decision, but thanks anyway.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

ok, let bygones be bygones

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites