After witnessing what is being widely recognized as one of the worst decisions of our time last Saturday night in Las Vegas, NV, official NSAC ringside scorer Duane Ford issued this public statement courtesy of the Las Vegas Review-Journal after handing in the deciding verdict of the highly publicized Manny Pacquiao vs. Timothy Bradley PPV event:
"I thought Bradley gave Pacquiao a boxing lesson. I thought a lot of the rounds were close. Pacquiao missed a lot of punches and I thought he was throwing wildly."
"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 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. Effective aggression can be a guy going back. And then you look at ring generalship, and that's all about control."
It's hard to comprehend what constitutes "ring generalship" and "effective aggression" in the mind of Duane Ford. Honestly, his verdict would have been more credible had the veteran judge decided to keep his thoughts on the matter to himself.
First of all, when one refers to effective aggression, the key word here is effective.
Was any of Tim's aggression or usage of the ring effective in controlling the action of the fight on Saturday night? Was Tim ever getting the better of any exchanges with Manny whenever both men traded flurries?
Although "Desert Storm" was widely throwing more punches than Manny Pacquiao throughout the second half of Pacquiao vs Bardley, in which Duane Ford awarded Tim five rounds to one for Pacquiao, the Filipino icon out-landed Bradley in four of the final six rounds. Bradley outlanded Manny in round 9 and equaled Pacquiao's total of landed punches in round number 10.
Also, one of the reasons why the judges are literally on the ring apron when scoring a prizefight, is to feel the full impact of the boxer's punches and to differentiate who is landing the harder and more impactful or consequential shots.
While having the best seat in the house, wouldn't Duane Ford be able to see what impact Manny's punches were having on Tim Bradley?
As most witnesses could see from their living rooms as well as their seats in the back row of the MGM Grand Garden Arena, Manny Pacquiao's punches were the more damaging and impactful throughout the entire twelve round contest.
Manny out-landed Bradley in power connects in each and every round with the exception of round number ten. In the tenth stanza, both men landed nine power connects. But in no point of the fight did Tim Bradley land more power connects than Manny Pacquiao.
So what exactly was ringside judge Duane Ford rewarding Tim Bradley for in five of the final six rounds? Was Ford merely giving Tim credit for trying hard? Is throwing more shots and landing less the 74 year old ringside judge's idea of "effective aggression"?
Is consistently retreating and being on the receiving end of an opponent's power punches with a broken foot Mr. Ford's idea of solid ring generalship and controlling the action?
Without trying to sound disrespectful, they say that the mind is the first thing to go when advancing in age.