Jeff Horn of Australia, left, and Manny Pacquiao of the Philippines fight during their WBO World welterweight title fight in Brisbane. Photo/AP
Jeff Horn of Australia, left, and Manny Pacquiao of the Philippines fight during their WBO World welterweight title fight in Brisbane. Photo/AP
Jeff Horn fans and Manny Pacquiao supporters are playing a game. It's called "agree to disagree".
Well, it's not so much a game as a violent struggle over who has the most authority when they shout, "We're right, you're wrong" from the rooftops.
But it's not just Pacquiao fanatics raging. Ever since Horn was crowned the new WBO welterweight champion following his unanimous points victory over the 38-year-old (115-113 x 2, 117-111) in Brisbane on Sunday, fight lovers, journalists, pundits and former stars have expressed their disbelief at how the Filipino was denied a win.
Plenty agree it was a close fight, but much of the sentiment from outside Australia has favoured Pacquiao on the scorecards. And there was evidence to back up the outrage.
Many of those in the future Hall of Famer's corner pointed to the damning statistics provided by respected website CompuBOX that had Pacquiao landing 182 punches to Horn's 92. How could someone who landed twice as many punches as his opponent possibly come out second best?
CompuBOX has compiled data on thousands of fights over the past 32 years and is a credible source when it comes to analysing bouts. So are the angry voices justified in using its figures to legitimise their bewilderment? Or is there more they need to consider?
CompuBox: Don't rely on us to pick the winner
Final Punch Stats: Jeff Horn def. Manny Pacquiao by Unan. Dec. Pacquiao out landed Horn, 182-92. Horn landed just 15% of his total punches. pic.twitter.com/dImHXkowyO
If you were to give both fighters the information in the graphic above straight after the fight, even Horn would struggle to argue why he deserved to win. Given the extensive coverage these numbers have been given by those backing Pacquiao's cause, CompuBOX explained how it arrives at those figures.
"The stats are tracked by two human operators with one operator tracking stats for each fighter," CompuBOX said in a statement released on Twitter.
"The operators are extensively trained to watch a fight differently than a normal fan would.
"Each operator concentrates on only one fighter and not the fight as a whole to accurately track the stats."
But the stats provider wanted to make it clear to all those pointing at the percentages that in no way can that be considered as the only means of determining a winner.
"The CompuBOX stats in no way, shape or form, determine a winner of a fight," CompuBox said.
"The stats are used to enhance a telecast, show the estimated barometer of activity by both fighters and paint a picture of the activity on a round-by-round basis.
"Even though our database of over 7000 fights (and counting) shows that a fighter that throws and lands more punches will win 90 per cent of the time, the 10-point judging system clearly is the only way to determine winners in a fight."
To the casual observer, this may seem like a subtle way of asking the world to stop using the numbers alone to push Pacquiao's case.
It doesn't mean people who believe Pacquiao deserved to win are wrong, it just means you need to look beyond the numbers to arrive at that verdict.
Behind the numbers
Manny Pacquiao has won 11 world titles in eight different divisions. His record before Sunday stood at 67 fights, 59 wins and 38 knockouts.
Horn on the other hand had fought only 17 times professionally, winning 16 of those fights - 11 by knockout.
Everything about Pacquiao - his experience, his resume, his skill - suggested he should dominate the "Battle of Brisbane".
Even though he's a declining force and his best days are behind him, his reputation preceded him and boxing pundits around the world expected the veteran to win and win easily.
So while the numbers suggest Pacquiao did more than Horn, were the judges of the view it still wasn't enough for a man of his status?
Nobody was going to rain on Jeff Horn's parade. Photo/Getty Images
On Tuesday morning CompuBOX tweeted several telling statistics alluding to Pacquiao's performance not being as strong as it was in many of his recent fights.
The tweets also referenced Horn's aggression being a key aspect of the fight that was obvious in person, but perhaps not so when the bout is reduced to numbers and percentages.
Tim Dahlberg of Associated Press said Pacquiao should realise he didn't do enough to take the fight out of the judges' hands because bigger and better things were expected of him.
"It was Pacquiao who allowed the fight to be as close as it was, and it's hard to argue much (though those blabbering on ESPN certainly did) with the two judges who had it 115-113 in Horn's favour," he wrote.
"Besides, Pacquiao knew going in what was expected of him. He needed to dominate and he didn't, outside of a ninth round where he tried his best to take Horn out only to punch himself out and leave the final rounds in Horn's hands."
CompuBox cannot score everything
UK editor for RingTV.com Tom Gray penned an interesting piece looking at the numbers provided by CompuBOX and what they mean.
Anyone who watched the bout knows Horn came out blazing, taking the fight to Pacquiao who appeared shell-shocked at the early onslaught. However, the stats said Horn landed 9/56 punches while his foe landed 10/34 in the opening round.
"Horn was all over Pacquiao in the opening round. The Filipino legend merely had a look in what amounted to nothing more than reconnaissance," Gray writes. "Pacquiao evaded some shots but he was tagged a lot more than Horn was.
"If Horn is not credited for outlanding Pacquiao in this session, then I think we can assume that for reasons of glamour, or boxing style, that his work was simply not appreciated by the guys hitting the buttons (at CompuBOX)."
Gray also says numbers don't tell the whole story of a fight, particularly a scrappy brawl like the one seen on Sunday.
"In the early rounds Horn's lateral movement, broken rhythm, feints and angles were giving Pacquiao fits. Horn was controlling distance and I personally felt he was more effective in the first half," Gray writes.
Photo/AP
"Pacquiao was at his best at long range but he got nothing done up close. Horn punched with his free hand in clinches. Pacquiao didn't. Horn went to the body. Pacquiao didn't. Horn belaboured his opponent against the ropes. Pacquiao didn't.
"Did CompuBOX credit Horn for roughing Pacquiao up and making a strong physical impression? You decide."
Australian boxing host Ben Damon, who was in Brisbane for the fight, tweeted out Gray's story with a word of warning for those with tunnel vision for the numbers.
So who's right?
Clearly, as CompuBOX itself admits, the stats alone can't be used as a justification for saying Pacquiao should have retained his welterweight strap. But nor does it mean people who believe that are wrong.
The day after his victory, Horn brushed off the haters, saying everyone is entitled to their opinion even though he believes he won the fight fair and square. Whatever you think, all fight fans invested in this contest should be thinking the same thing: Bring on the rematch.
