Paquiao Bradley promoter Bob Arum calls for investigation–just to make it look good

News that boxing promoter Bob Arum is calling for an investigation on the Paquiao-Bradley split decision, and refusing to grant a rematch until the Nevada Attorney General’s office makes an inquiry, should come as no surprise.

You’d be calling for an investigation too if you had a record of bribery and suspected corruption like Arum that goes back to 1995. 

Arum’s record, of course, is old news. But the shocking results of the Pacquiao-Bradley fight, where such an obvious winner is declared a loser, makes the past suddenly relevant again, if only to let everyone realize who we are dealing with and the kind of “sport” professional boxing has become.

A call for an investigation merely takes a little heat off Arum and lets the world know he appears to be just as outraged over the  controversial split decision as any sane unbiased observer of the fight. .

Never mind that Arum’s still likely to make millions no matter what happens in the aftermath.  As the promoter of  both Pacquiao and Bradley, he’s no different from a bookie or a hedge fund manager, who balances his books and profits either way. He can’t lose.

Conflict of interest is just part of the professional game. Boxing promotion is as close to a monopoly as it gets. And if it wasn’t, what do you get? Don King? If  the state of boxing  didn’t bother us before the weekend, maybe it shouldn’t bother us now.  

That only works if you can separate the seamy business side of boxing from the actual sport, the fight between two opponents going at each other.

Some of us really are interested not in the betting and the money side, but in the “sweet science,” the sport of boxing.  And that’s where some of us finally realized this weekend it really can’t be done.

We saw the fight.  So did the judges,  who scored it 115-113.

Judge Jerry Roth called it for Pacquiao.

Duane Ford and C.J. Ross called it for Bradley.

I’ve watched fights and studied boxing. I know a jab from a hook.  Incompetence in athletic judging is nothing new. I’ve mentioned the French Olympic skating judges. It comes up even in legitimate sports. In the PacBradley fight, three of the judges were over 70. No age discrimination from me. But this is where subjectivity appears, and where generational  differences come into play as to boxing judging standards. New computer stats that show actual punches thrown and landed are supposed to smooth out the subjectivity and take away the guess work. By those numbers, Pacquiao landed at least 100 more punches than Bradley.  Pacquiao’s display in the fourth and fifth rounds were enough to give him the decision. Bradley never came close to performing at that level.

Those who bring up Pacquaio’s victorious fights with Juan Manuel Marquez and say Marquez should have won them are comparing apples to oranges. Those were actual close fights and really could have gone either way. No complaint from me. Those were razor close.

The Pacquiao Bradley fight was not 115-113 close. Not in Bradley’s favor.

Before the fight, there was some talk about why these three judges in particular were called in for this fight. Just their luck? Commentators were surprised that more experienced judges weren’t called in.

Still, any calls for some kind of investigation on the judges and the judging process seem all for show at this point.

I don’t expect anything to happen to change a thing. In a few weeks, all this will be conveniently forgotten and more pay-per-view matches will be scheduled.

Just not with my hard-earned money.

Will they take yours?

See also previous posts on SFgate.com and on the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund blog.

The Pacquiao-Bradley debacle: Boxing’s shame

You don’t really have to know boxing to understand that Timothy Bradley, Jr. did not win that fight against WBO welterweight champ Manny Pacquiao.

If you were one of the millions who plunked down their hard-earned cash to watch a “fight,” you could see it with your own eyes. Bradley was handed the championship belt, as if it were a pre-scripted fantasy. Or maybe the New Wrestling.

Before the decision was handed, it was a decent enough show. Pacquiao, the more experienced champ landed more punches and completely outclassed the younger Bradley, who tried to keep up with Pacquiao, but rarely got to him. Bradley did get in some body punches, especially while holding Pacquiao, but there was nothing from Bradley that appeared to stagger or even pose a threat to Pacquiao.  Indeed, throughout the fight, Bradley’s trainer, by his use of the “F” word, seemed frustrated by his fighter’s inability to take the fight to Pacquiao.  Bradley threw a lot of punches, but he also missed a lot. Meanwhile, Pacquiao was able to land his straight left against Bradley that staggered him again and again.

In my most charitable assessment, I didn’t see Bradley win one round. Bradley did nothing to Pacquiao that was close to the pounding Pacquiao put on Bradley in the fourth and fifth rounds.

But the judges saw it differently and gave the fight to Bradley.

Maybe this was boxing’s “affirmative action.”

Athletic judging is after all, subjective. We  know this from watching Olympic skating judges from France.

There’s always the plausibility of an implausible result. Injustice happens.

Still, there are enough real injustices in the world to care about instead of this one, where Pacquiao reportedly got over $20 million for this fight to Bradley’s $5. (Nevermind what the judges might or might not get. All I can think of is the odds must have been so good on Bradley, and all the money bet on Pacquiao, that certain gambling interests just couldn’t resist a massive score.)

In a previous column on the fight, I had suggested that this be Manny Pacquiao’s last fight. Considering what boxing does to your brain, and with all the other interests Pacquiao has in politics, religion, and show business, leaving the ring now just sounded like a good exit strategy—before anyone gets hurt.

For Pacquiao’s sake, I wanted this fight to be his last. I just didn’t think it would be my last fight.

They’re already talking about Pacquiao Bradley II, to correct the injustice, and to, of course, enrich a few boxing promoters. (Ever wonder how Bob Arum has a piece of both fighters?  It makes his claim of being ashamed for the sport ring very, very  hollow.) 

Sorry, boxing.  As Roberto Duran would say,  “No mas.”

I’ll be back when the game gets a massive infusion of integrity.

Triple Crown hopes dashed as I’ll Have Another is scratched from Belmont; Let the speculation begin about trainer “Drug” O’Neill

It’s too bad we can’t take Doug O’Neill, the trainer for I’ll Have Another at face value. Tendonitis? I just think all the scrutiny given to the Belmont and the special detention barn made it impossible for the trainer to perform his “magic.” O’Neill’ has a record of using drugs to get horses to run through their ailments. It’s hard not to stop any further speculation now. 

The only real positive here  is that the horse was scratched in the end.

It’s not the happy ending O’Neill and the racing establishment needed and wanted. But it’s the right thing and the humane thing. I’ll Have Another is spared exposure to a breakdown.  In the long run that’s far better than any false glory that O’Neill may have been chasing.

Obama and Aquino talk China in D.C., but media can’t get past Obama mini-gaffe on private sector

Below is the White House transcript on the press briefing after the meeting between President Obama and President Aquino of the Philippines.

As usual, what’s news is a function of the audience, and the most important issue here really is the international one:  the territorial dispute between the Philippines and China in the oil rich shoals of South China Sea. It’s resulted in some tense moments within the last month between the Philippines and China, and most Americans don’t even know about it.

What makes this briefing valuable is how it shows China the strength of the relationship between the U.S. and the Philippines.

If you’re in China, you’re seeing the U.S. remind us all that it sees itself as a Pacific power, and that the Philippines is a really, really good friend and ally.  Don’t mess with it. 

What else can China do but realize it has a lot invested in the U.S. If they want us to pay them back, it should put up with a little Filipino sabre-rattling. 

Frankly, the whole thing is a little too colonial for my taste.  The Philippines isn’t “Little Brown Brother” anymore. But the Philippines is so anemic it still needs the U.S. to play “Big Brother.” 

Maybe that’s all right if you find yourself in a pissing match with China over oil. 

Too bad the press chose to go domestic and followed up with a question focused on Obama’s earlier statements about the economy and the private sector doing well.

Is a mini-gaffe over language really more important than what happens in the South China Sea?  

Here’s the White House transcript of the Washington press briefing:

President Obama: It is a great pleasure to welcome President Aquino to the Oval Office and to the White House.

I had the opportunity to spend a lot of time with him, most recently during my Asia trip, when we met most recently in Bali. And at that time, we discussed how important the U.S.-Philippine relationship was, the historic ties, the 60 years of a mutual defense treaty, the extraordinary links between Filipino-Americans that have brought our two countries so closely together.  And we pledged to work on a whole host of issues that would continue to strengthen and deepen the relationship for the 21st century.

We talked about how we could work on security issues, on economic issues, on people-to-people exchanges, and on a whole host of regional issues.  And I just want to thank President Aquino for his excellent cooperation, because we’ve made a great deal of progress since that time.

On economic issues, the Philippines is the recipient of a Millennium Challenge grant that is helping to foster greater development and opportunity within the Philippines.  We have a partnership for growth that is working on how we can make sure that we are structuring a relationship of expanding trade and commerce between our two countries.

I want to congratulate President Aquino for the work that he’s done on the Open Government Partnership that is consistent with his campaign to root out corruption that can facilitate greater economic development within the Philippines.

And on security and military issues, we had discussions about how we can continue to consult closely together, to engage in training together, work on a range of regional issues together — all of which is consistent with the announced pivot by the United States back to Asia, and reminding everybody that, in fact, the United States considers itself, and is, a Pacific power.

Throughout all these exchanges and all the work that we’ve done I’ve always found President Aquino to be a thoughtful and very helpful partner.  And I think that as a consequence of the meeting today in which we discussed not only military and economic issues, but also regional issues — for example, trying to make sure that we have a strong set of international norms and rules governing maritime disputes in the region — that I’m very confident that we’re going to see continued friendship and strong cooperation between our two countries. 

So, Mr. President, thank you for visiting.  We are very proud of the friendship between our two countries, and we look forward to continuing in the future.

PRESIDENT AQUINO:  I would like to thank President Obama for all the support that the U.S. has given us in our quest to really transform our society.  Ours is a shared history, shared values, and that’s why America is just one of two that we have strategic partnerships with.

Today’s meeting has really even deepened and strengthened a very long relationship we have, especially as we face the challenges that are before both our countries in the current situation.

And again, we’d like to thank them for all the expressions of support that even now has led to the resolution of situations within our territory.   

Thank you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  All right.  Thank you, everybody.

  Q    Mr. President, Mitt Romney says you’re out of touch for saying the private sector is doing fine.  What’s your response?

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Listen, it is absolutely clear that the economy is not doing fine.  That’s the reason I had the press conference.  That’s why I spent yesterday, the day before yesterday, this past week, this past month, and this past year talking about how we can make the economy stronger.

The economy is not doing fine.  There are too many people out of work.  The housing market is still weak and too many homes underwater.  And that’s precisely why I asked Congress to start taking some steps that can make a difference.

Now, I think if you look at what I said this morning and what I’ve been saying consistently over the last year, we’ve actually seen some good momentum in the private sector.  We’ve seen 4.3 million jobs created — 800,000 this year alone — record corporate profits.  And so that has not been the biggest drag on the economy.

The folks who are hurting, where we have problems and where we can do even better, is small businesses that are having a tough time getting financing; we’ve seen teachers and police officers and firefighters who’ve been laid off — all of which, by the way, when they get laid off spend less money buying goods and going to restaurants and contributing to additional economic growth.  The construction industry is still very weak, and that’s one of the areas where we’ve still seen job losses instead of job gains.

So if we take the steps that I laid out to make sure that we’re not seeing teacher layoffs and we’re not seeing police officer layoffs, and we’re providing small businesses with additional financing and tax breaks for when they hire or if they’re giving raises to their employees; if we refinance housing — or allow homeowners to refinance so they’ve got an extra $3,000 in their pocket so that they can spend money and contribute to further economic growth; if we’re making sure that we’re rebuilding, work that has to be done anyway, deferred maintenance on roads and bridges that could put construction workers back to work — all those things will strengthen the economy, and independent economists estimate it would create an additional million jobs. 

Now, you can’t give me a good reason as to why Congress would not act on these items other than politics — because these are traditionally ideas that Democrats and Republicans have supported.  So let me be as clear as I can be.  The economy needs to be strengthened.  That’s why I had a press conference.

I believe that there are a lot of Americans who are hurting right now, which is what I’ve been saying for the last year, two years, three years, what I’ve been saying since I came into office.  And the question then is what are we going to do about it?  And one of the things that people get so frustrated about is that instead of actually talking about what would help, we get wrapped up in these political games.  That’s what we need to put an end to.

So the key right now is for folks — what I’m interested in hearing from Congress and Mr. Romney is what steps are they willing to take right now that are going to make an actual difference.  And so far, all we’ve heard are additional tax cuts to the folks who are doing fine, as opposed to taking steps that would actually help deal with the weaknesses in the economy and promote the kind of economic growth that we would all like to see.

All right.  Thank you very much, everybody.  Thank you.  Thanks.  Thank you, guys.

Emil Guillermo's amok commentary on race, politics, diversity…and everything else. It's Emil Amok's Takeout!