With the biggest fight of the weekend now over, boxing figures are starting to chime in with their thoughts on what went down in Vegas. Native Floyd Mayweather is one of those people, and yeah, he had an awful lot to say about it. Though the first ballot future Hall of Famer agreed Canelo deserved the nod, he told FightHype the scorecards were ridiculous.
“Do I think that Canelo won? Absolutely,” Mayweather said. “Canelo won the fight, but it wasn’t no 119-109. Those crazy scores [119-109, 118-110] that they had was ridiculous…I do think the fight was a lot closer than 119-109. That is f****** ridiculous. In my opinion, I’m not saying this is what happened, but in my opinion, either somebody is handpicking these judges or something is going on that’s not right.”
Mayweather isn’t wrong there. Those two scores must have emotionally floored Cotto when they were read post fight. The Puerto Rican veteran certainly deserved much better. Cotto enjoyed his greatest moments in the first half of the fight, and so to score him just one round overall [119-109] is upsetting for any boxing fan to see, let alone Cotto himself.
Here at Boxing Base we actually had it 115-113, Cotto, but would have settled for a Draw/one point swing for Canelo given the closeness of some rounds. Anyway, Mayweather carried on with his criticism for the judges, but then turned his attention to Canelo’s promoter.
“What’s so crazy is that it seems like it [suspicious scorecards] always happens when Oscar De La Hoya is involved. They said my fight with Oscar De La Hoya was a split decision, which we all know was some bullshit. When I faced Canelo, one of the judges scored it a draw. I got a split decision with Oscar, I got a majority decision with Canelo, and you seen what just happened Saturday night. I’m just saying.”
But when it’s all said and done, there’s another man Mayweather thinks should be called in for questioning. Freddie Roach, you’re up.
“I hear people talking about Freddie Roach is a legendary trainer, but I think Cotto was fighting the same way before he got with Freddie Roach. I think Pacquiao was fighting the same before he got with Freddie Roach. Both guys were already world champions before they got to Freddie Roach.
“But when Pacquiao lost to Marquez and he lost to me, they still keep talking about how legendary the coach is. When are y’all going to get on the coach’s ass and say, ‘You know what? This coach done a f***** up job.’
“I know he’s not 100% healthy, so I’m not really taking shots at him. I’m just speaking fact. I don’t have anything against Freddie Roach, but he’s not a legendary coach. As a fighter, he was a club fighter, AKA punching bag. I’ma tell you who was a good trainer that Cotto had. The Cuban coach that was working with Cotto when he fought me [Pedro Diaz]. He’s a good trainer; a very, very good trainer.”
So there it is, fight fans. Floyd Mayweather just unloaded a ton of information for us all to try and process. I think we can all agree his ‘judge bashing’ was more than called for, can’t we? But what about his jabs at former foe Oscar De La Hoya and esteemed trainer Freddie Roach?
Real talk. I love it. Mayweather is right, those scorecards should be reexamined by another panel of judges. If they are wrong, get rid of them.
Thanks for leaving your thoughts. Agreed, Cotto was certainly short-changed on those cards.
I see where Mayweather is coming from. Boxing is corrupt as hell. But of course, Mayweather isn’t getting into his first fight with Jose Louis Castillo. In that intense, Mayweather got a robbery “win”. There’s no way he won more than 5 rounds in that one. Check it out on YouTube. Not to stick up for boxing judges, but it is subjective. And the 10-9 system is the stupidest in any sport. A 10-9 round can mean so many things. A round with no punches landed can get scored 10-9 fro the guy just coming forward, or throwing more punches. Then a round where a guy wins cleanly, lands huge shots, has opponent in trouble can also get scored 10-9 if there’s no knock down. Happens all the time. Why have 10 points in a scoring system if they don’t get used? What Mayweather i really saying, whether he realizes it or not, is that the person winning rounds more decisively should get the nod. Against De La Hoya, I honestly thought the decision could fairly have gone against Mayweather. And by the way, Mayweather Sr. thought the same thing, and said at ringside after the fight. Mayweather won rounds more decisively than Oscar did with cleaner shots. But under the current 10-9 scoring system, were there 6 or 7 rounds Oscar did enough to win? Absolutely. Similarly, a lot of the rounds with Cotto-Canello were close. And the fight looked close. So people were obviously upset at 119-110 scores. But with the current system, remember, a guy can lose 12 razor thin rounds. And the fight seems like a draw or a one point split card. But if a judge scored every super close round to one guy, the scow could be 120-108, and be completely fair and legit.
You hit the nail on the head there, Zack. The 10-point-must system seems like a prehistoric way to judge fights, indeed, but I doubt I’ll see a reform in my lifetime. One big reason is that it could undermine every scorecard which has made the history books over the last century. The worst thing with boxing is that its very definition is somewhat mysterious. I often feel for the judges who have to score close fights. For what it’s worth, I had Cotto ahead by a point. As for judging the Rigondeaux vs Francisco fight (?) on the undercard, I’m not sure anyone deserved the nod. What a dud.