Advertisement

Lampley: "Time Has Come For Fans To Occupy Boxing"

BY Michael Woods ON June 17, 2012
PDFPrintE-mail

Fight Game round4 whtThe second installment of Jim Lampley’s “The Fight Game” ran Saturday, after the Chavez Jr.-Lee fight, and the timing could not have been much better, coming so soon after the decision that blew up Twitter, and will force us to hear stale Duane Ford jokes into 2013.

Lampley called the Pacquiao-Bradley decision “the biggest boxing news story in years,” and termed the show “Anatomy of a Scoring Disaster.”

Lampley cited the Twitter blowup, and boycott petitions, and Bob Arum’s request to get the Nevada AG to look at the decision. He said Harold Lederman got it right when on June 9 he said that Duane Ford was solid, CJ Ross was “questionable,” and “mediocre,” and Jerry Roth was coming off a rough call on Abril-Rios, and maybe shouldn’t be in another big fight. “In my opinion, they should have brought in a judge or two,” Lederman said, presciently.

Lampley noted rounds in which Pacquiao had a large edge in punches landed were awarded to Bradley, and wondered how Bradley won if he didn’t land more or harder punches. Ford, to Lampley, said it was a very close fight. He noted the experience of the three judges in question, a questionable call, since even experienced people get it wrong, but I see his point. Ford said he saw the first six rounds Manny won, but that he let Bradley off the hook, and he tired in later rounds. Bradley was scoring later, particularly to the body, he said. Is he bothered that the public doesn’t see it his way? No, it doesn’t surprise or dis-hearten him? No..he said, chalking that up to Pacquiao’s stardom, not the acumen of fight fans. Hmm..another Ford misstep.

Ford said that judges see things that we don’t off of TV or what Lampley might be saying during the action. Ford was asked if judges are well trained, if the system is good in Nevada. He said the commission allows input from the promoters and the fighters, and he supports that. Because the state allows gambling, he said, the commission is stringent in choosing officials.

Cameron Dunkin, Bradley’s manager, appeared. He said Bradley won because he fought the whole of every round. He said Ford was right, that Pacquiao is a “world hero” and that’s why everyone leaned his way. Dunkin said some of the joy of winning was diminished, but now he and Bradley are extremely happy. A rematch? Dunkin said a rematch “has to happen” but isn’t sure if it will happen in November.

Top Rank’s Todd DuBoef appeared. Lampley asked about the request for the AG to look at the decision. He said he wants some trust restored, and that the commission should have made like the NBA, and had a leader come forward and deal with the furor. DuBoef said he thinks the judge pool should be made larger, and education should be improved. The consumers, he said, need to be told how rounds are judged. What about the rematch clause? Shady? No; they are common, he said. He said as of right now, the rematch is not proceeding for November, that his crew will wait to hear from Pacquiao before deciding anything, and that public needs to have their confidence restored.

Lampley then showed round seven, with no sound. After the three minutes, the host said that all three judges scored it for Bradley. “Smoking gun?” Lampley asked. Max Kellerman then came on. He said he had it 8-4 on fight night, and re-watched it, closer. He had it 7-1 and 4 swing rounds, much like I did upon re-watching, Pacquiao 5-2 with 5 even or swing rounds. Did Max think conspiracy or administrative failure? Usually he thinks conspiracy…but this whopper left him stumped. He couldn’t see reasons for conspiracy. “This was a statistically unlikely event,” he said. “Unlikely things happen all the time…It’s the best I got.”

Lampley then cited the scores offered by ringside watchers to back the case for robbery.

The host mentioned many recent robberies. He said the sport could do more to safeguard integrity. He said the big promoters and programmers need to fix the broken system. But it comes down to the promoters, he said. He mentioned the Boxing Promoters Association move to fix the judging problem. Lampley said the judges in many cases “demonstrably suck,” and are touched by cronyism. “You have to take control as fans. You see something you don’t like and don’t trust, boycott. A time has come for you fans to Occupy boxing. Be more discerning, learn more, educate yourselves, and trust only that which you believe you see with your own eyes. “

He ended with the Gatti List. He mentioned Jorge Arce, Mike Alvarado, Abner Mares, Cris Arreola, Orlando Salido, Canelo Alvarez, Manny Pacquiao, Leo Santa Cruz, Mikkel Kessler, Carl Froch and Paul Williams.

Readers, what say you? What do you make about this call to arms, and this reference to the fall movement, the minor uprising, which forced the mainstream media, oh so grudgingly, to discuss the income inequlaity gap which has been growing for the last four decades in our nation? Courageous move on Lampley's part, no? Calling for a boycott is consummate "biting the hand that feeds" move, since quite likely, his bosses would be the ones to lose dough, as the carriers of most notable PPVs.  You have to respect that "fight the power," that "speak truth to power" gesture, in my opinion. In a big way. So many of us recede when we should speak up, for fear of being fired, of being silenced. Lampley spoke his truth, spoke his mind, spoke his heart...and should be congratulated, mightily. This is a rarity in a dangerous age, where the power of the corporation is, it can be argued, as great as it's ever been. (Not going to go into a Citizen's United or SuperPac digression, but do a little Wikipedia research if you're so inclined; this issue ties in with that, I think, a little bit.) Us peons, the workers, the 99% have had their power diminished steadily, as the top tier in the last 30 years plus has skillfully set us against each other, and demonized the collectives that exist so we can negotiate (or fight, if it comes to that) with the elites who enjoy a massive leverage gap, because they control the overwhelming bulk of the cash. I can't emphasize this enough...Jim Lampley's call to arms on Saturday's "The Fight Game" was tremendously bold, and is to be applauded. My three cents...

Comment on this article

amayseng says:

didnt pacman hurt or stagger bradley in round 7 while winning the round with punches landed and effective punching?

that to me means something is fishy.

open round scoring needs to be done, could u imagine if in every sporting competition no one knows the score until the game or event is over?

sounds crazy huh.

Radam G says:

Don't waste your time, Amayseng. Inattention blindness, latent Asian hatred, jealousy, xenophobia in U.S. America and corruption straight-up won't shame and/or change an iota of syet. As I've said tons of times, "The game is banana-a$$ crooked and everybody will keep going ape-sh*t [cheat after cheat], but we'll always roll on." Holla!

Radam G says:

This occupying every d@mn thing is gettin' OLD! Just put that syet on HOLD!

Of course, corrupted HBO, NSAC and the other sorry-arse powers that be knew that they shoulda, woulda, coulda brought in fresh, stabled judges. It is not like everybodee and dey momma who are in da know don't know that Duane Ford is not only a stanch supporter of anti-and-hate foreigners jive, but a __ ___ ____. And I hate to keep beating a dead horse, but all the Sin City and Stanks and ain'ts know that C.J. Ross has notorious "Jungle Fever." Besides, among these smallies, high-powered dirtbags and scumsuckas are always up in boksin' grill. And in the Bradley-Pacquiao Bout, they got their fill. They made the BIG SCORE!

It is all about money! Ain't a d@mn thing funny. It is time to move on. OMFG! There will be honey. Tim Bradley is going to get his arse thrashed by whomever he next fights. Occupiers of every darn thing, this time don't use your civil rights. Holla!

SouthPaul says:

Lamp's rant at the end of the broadcast was pretty damn good in my opinion. Great point when he put it back in the hands of fans. One thing I think us hardcore followers could do better is not get so caught up in following one fighter so loyally and emotionally. When we do; usually become irrational and spiteful. A lot of the Pacquaio backlash is a perfect example. Great exciting fighter who has fans now being overly critical either because they hate Bob Arum or because they're fans of Mayweather and have bought into the PED accusation. Truthfully, Manny isn't perfect, but there's also not much not to like about the man. Check yo' self, fans, starts with us. I say us because by no means am I above the nonsense. Lump me in with it!

HAPPY FATHERS DAY TO ALL THE BOXING Brethren
.

JustMe says:

Ford said he saw the first six rounds Manny won, but that he let Bradley off the hook, and he tired in later rounds.

How many rounds did the fight have? Twelve (12) right? If Manny won rounds 1 to 6, and granting Bradley won the next 6 rounds, the result should have been a draw. The only possibility for Bradley to have won was if he knocked down Manny in any of rounds 7 - 12, or if Manny was deducted points for a violation. None of the two occurred, so the result should have been a draw!

Ford said that Bradley schooled Manny; it is Ford who needs to be schooled for not understanding basic math, which is 6 + 6 = 12, which will translate to a tied score of 6(10) + 6(9) = 114.

Ford cannot hide the fact that he was scoring Manny's performance against Bradley that night against the backdrop of Manny's work rate, aggression, and effectiveness when he fought Barrera, Marquez, Oscar dela Hoya, Clottey, etc.

If this inquiry were done in a court of law, Ford would have surely been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, as all his reasoning are totally flawed.

dino da vinci says:

Ford said he saw the first six rounds Manny won, but that he let Bradley off the hook, and he tired in later rounds.

How many rounds did the fight have? Twelve (12) right? If Manny won rounds 1 to 6, and granting Bradley won the next 6 rounds, the result should have been a draw. The only possibility for Bradley to have won was if he knocked down Manny in any of rounds 7 - 12, or if Manny was deducted points for a violation. None of the two occurred, so the result should have been a draw!

Ford said that Bradley schooled Manny; it is Ford who needs to be schooled for not understanding basic math, which is 6 + 6 = 12, which will translate to a tied score of 6(10) + 6(9) = 114.

Ford cannot hide the fact that he was scoring Manny's performance against Bradley that night against the backdrop of Manny's work rate, aggression, and effectiveness when he fought Barrera, Marquez, Oscar dela Hoya, Clottey, etc.

If this inquiry were done in a court of law, Ford would have surely been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, as all his reasoning are totally flawed.


A tremendous point made in this post. A judge* must forget his knowledge of a fighters past performances and solely judge (score) the one hundred and eighty second blocks of work. Fighter 'A' is not fighting his past performances, he's to be graded on the work done against the opponent in front of him/her.

*Whereas the insight of the referee pertaining to the fighters in the bout he's working can be most useful, and on the rarest of occasions, lifesaving.

deepwater says:

ladies and gentleman. the occupy movement is communism and supported by our own gov. the black bloc group is sponsered by the gov. do not support occupy. ford is coorupt. nothing more nothing less.

oneabove says:

I have been watching boxing since 1988. The sport that I love so much has become a joke. This is another reason for MMA fans to jump on boxing. Duane Ford looked like a total A** on HBO. My ? is was he watching Manny fight Bradley or was he watching old Manny fights that night. He said he based the fight on Manny"s past performances. This is a total joke then he said he had Manny winning the first 6 rds of the fight. MR. Ford needs to go back to school and learn math because not only is he blind he cant add. I think judges should be between 35 and 55 no older no younger then that.... I dont need a guy who is on his death bed judging these fights.

gibola says:

The recent Brandon Rios fight was a far worse decision in my view but that was some guy we'd never heard of so who cares? I watched Pac-Bradley twice and scored it by two rounds to Pacquaio then one round to Pacman. I watched a foreign version with commentary that didn't tell me anything, so I scored what I saw. Jim 'another round to Pacquaio' Lampley tends to score rounds to Manny on what happens after the ten-second clap so I don't take his views too seriously. You can isolate rounds both ways, Lederman scored the last round to Pacman when he clearly lost it. I thought Manny won but it was a close fight - not a robbery or a conspiracy. HBO are big on telling us Manny is one of the all-time greats and they create a storyline to back up their view. To me the big story of the fight was not who won or lost but how Manny has declined in the past two years, can't put people away anymore or fight at the pace he could 3 years ago. I love Pacquaio the fighter, but his place at the top of the p4p lists is coming to an end and there's no way in hell he beats PBF. I give Bradley a good shot in a rematch.

Aidanivan2 says:

Lampley did great, but he missed an opportunity!

He should have asked Ford the following 7 questions.

1) Ford, did you watch a replay of the fight?
2) If so, How did you score it? If not, why not since there is so much outrage over your scores?
3) If you did watch it again and still scored it for Bradley again, watch this (play round 7 without sound for him to see) Now who do you think won round 7 now that you just saw it?
4) Ford, round 7 is an example of one of the rounds in which Pacquiao landed more and landed harder, how could an experienced judge such as yourself give it to Bradley?
5) Do you wish to accept responsibility for messing up your score card in such a huge event?
6) Where you in anyway swayed to score the fight for Bradley by anyone involved with or not involved with the fight?
7) Do you want to apologize to the general public for screwing up such a huge event?

I was dissapointed when none of these questions where asked point blank, and Lampley allowed the judge to even get away with saying that "the fights don't go as you call them on televised events alot of the times".

I just wish Lampley would have grilled him with those basic questions we all would have wanted answers to. Thanks

maypac says:

Duane Ford once again, was one of the special guests in Jim Lampley's HBO program "The Fight Game". He first defended his qualificationsalong with the two judges "they are not trainees" and further said that they have more than 350 plus world titles combined.

Duane Ford said, "What I personally saw that night, is that the first six rounds, clearly Pacquiao the winner." What? He saw Pacquiao clearly winning the first six rounds of the twelve championship rounds fight. So why did he give Pacquiao an F***king five rounds in his score card? If he thinks Pacquiaowon six of twelve? 12 - 6 = 6 Ford then should have scored it a draw for both fighters. Duane Ford didn't stop there, he further elaborated and said, "What I saw on the fourth round is that Pacquiao clearly won that. He hurt Bradley. But the Manny Pacquiao that I judge in the past would have finished him. He let him off the hook." The more this incompetent judge talk the more he's digging his own grave perse'. My question to this judge is, did he judge Manny Pacquiao's performance base in the past not of what he saw happening in the ring on that bout Saturday. FYI, Duane Ford past vs present is NOT a factor in judging a fight you incompitent blind idiot! Your scoring factors have to be question and investigated by the NAC. Sad , but the incompetent judge did not stop there, on his TV appearance. He further state that Pacquiao "In the later rounds, I thought he tired and his punches were missing a bit." Missing a bit? As far as I know there is NO "BIT" in judging a fight let along a championship bout!

What exactly did you SEE and DID NOT SEE? Duane Ford, with all do respect even though you do NOT deserve any. STOP IT, STOP TALKING! You are making it worst for yourself sir every time you open your mouth! After what you said during your interview with the Las Vegas Journal that you thought, "Bradley gave Pacquiao a boxing lesson." Duane Ford your reasoning and explanations are all absurd and I can simply say you are one blind confuce old *art and should never judge in any boxing competitions especially CHAMPIOSHIP BOUTS!

Related Articles

gamboaqcrawfordisnotawalkintheparkq
kathyduvaspeaksoutonwelleverythingpart2
terencecrawfordyuriorkisgamboaison
behindthescenesatpacquiaobradley2parttwo
kathyduvaspeaksoutonwelleverythingpart1
behindthescenesatpacquiaobradley2partone
howhediditvideoanalysisofpacquiaoswinoverbradley
mayweathervspacquiaoisbulletproof
rumorterencecrawfordvsyuriorkisgamboaonhboinjuneorjuly
barclayscenterceoexplainshowanongoldenboyshowlandedinbrooklyn

Latest Videos on BoxingChannel.tv

Facebook
Twitter
Zona de Boxeo
fight results
Live Boxing Coverage
IBOFP

Prediction:

64%
36%
Loading...