It is a cliche to recognise the judgement of a fight is a subjective undertaking. But like all cliches, it is forged in fact. True, two observers can arrive at different results from different sides of the ring and no matter how self-disciplined, it is close to impossible to be truly impartial. Certainly as fans, we all view the spectacle of a fight with some conscious or sub-conscious bias. Its human nature. Its also human nature to be influenced by those around us, and Juan Diaz was the ‘home’ fighter in his split-decision victory over Michael Katsidis.
The nature of the scoring from last weekend’s clash between the two warriors, Diaz earning a split-decision nod, left ambitious HBO anchor Max Kellerman indignant.
Ultimately, the right man won the fight and usually that is enough to overlook a disparity between one judge and, as in this case, his two colleagues. The offending official, Glen Hamada, scored the fight 115-113 for Katsidis who though game and earnest throughout was out-punched 2-1 one by Diaz and while punch-stats are notoriously misleading a return of 2-1 is hard to ignore. Hamada gave Katsidis 7 of the 12 rounds.
As Damon Ealy blogs at Boxing Times – The Blue Corner in his article Boxing in the Eye of the Beholder, Kellerman’s comments looked “showy”, they certainly struck me as opportunistic. Perhaps he was encouraged to generate some heat for a clash that didn’t quite combust in the manner HBO hoped, or more plausibly, Kellerman is trying to raise his own profile as the “voice” of boxing.
There is a vacancy. Boxing needs a independent voice, a young, energetic opinion to whom young fans can gravitate. Someone willing to ruffle the ‘suits’, disturb the closed shop sanctioning bodies and heartily delve into the bubbling undercurrent of mistrust fans hold for the sport’s power-brokers.
However, is the HBO anchorman’s position really the best place to do that? Isn’t Max a little too close to a major player’s agenda, i.e. HBO to truly confront and explore these issues? As I commented on Damon’s blog, I embrace anyone willing to voice a heart-felt opinion but one couldn’t help surmising Max had more than simply the competence of Hamada on his mind.
Read Damon’s article for some interesting links to other scoring travesties a little further beneath the radar than the commonly summoned cases of Holyfield v Lewis or Hagler v Leonard.
For a host of unique, unofficial, unendorsed tribute wear, made to order and shipped within 48 hours visit www.boxingwriter.spreadshirt.net or click on the image below.