I can't decide between OMG and LOL.
I tweeted this immediately after Michael Buffer announced Timothy Bradley victorious over Manny Pacquiao in a split decision that was so preposterous, Vince McMahon became a trending topic on Twitter. McMahon was not involved in Saturday night's pay-per-view, but to the public who believed Pacquiao won somewhere between eight and twelve rounds (I scored it 118-111 for Pacquiao), it sure felt that way.
This was not the first poor decision to take place at a Top Rank event. In fact, Top Rank's last two pay-per-views in Las Vegas---Brandon Rios and Manny Pacquiao's victories over Richard Abril and Juan Manuel Marquez respectively---featured controversial decisions that contrasted popular opinion.
While unjust decisions are never good for boxing, in Rios and Pacquiao's case, the narratives were understandable. Each fighter was the headliner and the aggressor in their respective fight, winning a debatable decision that would protect bigger fights lying ahead.
What made the Bradley decision fascinating was that in the immediate aftermath, there was no clear reason why he would be awarded a controversial decision over Pacquiao.
Pacquiao is the champion. Pacquiao is the draw. Pacquiao is the aggressor. Pacquiao is the harder puncher. There are few fights in boxing where the man who controlled these four categories lost a bogus decision. If anything, boxing fans are prone to expect the opposite, making Saturday's ruling all the more bizarre. Many observers were left no choice but to deduce the worst.
For Top Rank, the perception of corruption is as negative as corruption itself. When the New Orleans Hornets won the first pick in the NBA Draft, conspiracy theorists speculated that David Stern fixed the Draft Lottery in the Hornets' favor as a thank you to Tom Benson for purchasing the team. Top Rank finds itself in a similar position. Bradley's victory constructed a path to an easily makeable rematch, tying Pacquiao to another Top Rank fight. Fans are concluding that this was clearly what the company desired all along.
Fully aware of the perception of corruption, Arum has begun a predictable run of faux-outrage. As reported earlier on FightHype, he has submitted a formal request to the Nevada Attorney General's office for a full and complete inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the scoring of the contest. But requesting an investigation is a waste of everyone's time. There is one course of action that Arum can take to prove that his company did not get what they wanted. For the very first time, Arum can pursue the fight that sports fans have long demanded: the mega-fight with Mayweather.
If Arum truly believes the decision is bogus, he must carry on as though Pacquiao won the fight.
Pacquiao submitted one of his finest performances against Bradley, looking far more impressive Saturday than he did against Marquez. To say that a Mayweather fight has lost its luster now is misguided. A Pacquiao-Bradley rematch only gives credibility to two judges' scorecards that deserve none---two scorecards that Arum claims have no credibility. If the scorecards came in as expected, there would be zero demand to see this fight again.
For years, Pacquiao has protected himself under Top Rank's shelter. When asked about future opponents, Pacquiao deflects to the desires of his promotional company. "I will fight whoever Bob Arum wants me to fight," is his common post-fight refrain. Saturday night, the shelter may have finally caved in, as Pacquiao fell victim to the same forces that once protected him. For his sake, he must change his chorus before future shenanigans cause him to miss out on a Mayweather payday once and for all.
And if Arum refuses, he should become nothing more than somebody that Pacquiao used to know. That line of thinking certainly worked for Mayweather, who made it out of Top Rank unscathed.
Email comments and questions to nxouris@fighthype.com or you can reach via my Twitter handle @nickxouris