Boxing Continues to Knock Itself Out With Bewildering, Incorrect Decisions

Boxing has always been a sport capable of extraordinary drama, but it also has developed an uncomfortable reputation for controversial judging. Few recent examples better illustrated the point than Manny Pacquiao’s 2017 fight with Jeff Horn in Brisbane, Australia.

Pacquiao stepped into the ring on July 2, 2017, as the reigning WBO welterweight champion and one of the most recognizable fighters in the world. Horn, a relative unknown challenger from Australia on the international stage, was looking to pull off the biggest victory of his career. More than 50,000 fans filled Suncorp Stadium for the so-called “Battle of Brisbane.”

Horn came out swinging right from the start. He pushed Pacquiao, tried to control the range and made the champion trade on a couple of occasions. Pacquiao, however, relied on his speed, combinations, and counterpunching. The fight grew more and more physical, and both fighters were cut.

The ninth round seemed to change the momentum significantly. Pacquiao landed again and again and looked close to stopping Horn. The referee even told Horn at the end of the round he had to prove he could fight effectively.

Next came the judges’ decision.

All three judges scored the fight in Horn’s favour. Waleska Roldan had it 117-111, and Chris Flores and Ramon Cerdan scored it 115-113. Horn then won the WBO welterweight title by unanimous decision.

The controversy came immediately.

ESPN’s Dan Rafael wrote that, in his eyes, Pacquiao looked to have won the contest, while other media also awarded the fight to him. But supporters of Horn cited his constant pressure, physical strength, and success in several early and middle rounds.

CompuBox numbers added a twist to the argument. Pacquiao landed 182 of 573 punches, reports said, while Horn landed 92 of 625. Those numbers favoured Pacquiao in terms of accuracy and total punches landed, but boxing isn’t scored by simple punch counts. Judges are supposed to take into account effective aggression, clean punching, ring generalship, and defence.

This is an important difference. A decision may be contentious, but that does not mean judges acted improperly. Scoring boxing rounds can be very difficult. This is especially true when the fighters have different styles. One judge may place more importance on forward pressure, while another may prefer clean counterpunching.

But the Pacquiao-Horn fight reignited a familiar debate: does boxing’s judging system do enough to give fans confidence in the results?

The problem isn’t that judges sometimes disagree with the spectators. In a sport where the individual rounds can be close, disagreements are inevitable. The real problem is transparency. When a score like 117-111 looks so much different than what many viewers saw, it’s natural to want to know how a judge got there.

Boxing is about credibility, mostly. Fighters train for years, promoters spend millions promoting, and fans pay to see meaningful contests. When the final bell rings, the decision should be understandable, even if unpopular.

The Pacquiao-Horn bout showed why judging is one of the most important unsolved problems in boxing. The controversy did not take away from Horn’s achievement, but it did show how quickly a dramatic fight can be overshadowed by questions over the scorecards.