Paradox creates questions that allow no clear answers yet convey abstract truths that cannot otherwise be made plain.
“Pacman” must win even if “Dinamita” should not lose in their third face-off. The official judgment must be conclusive to declare the winner even if the outcome of the fight should be decisive in favor of the loser.
What basically defines the result of a boxing event when the “actual numbers” of the two fighters set to battle it out are opposed to the “horse sense” majority of people harbor such as what happened in the De La Hoya-Pacquiao “Dream Match” that shattered popular sentiments on December 6 of 2008?
And what awkwardly changes the entire scenario when skill, size, strength and strategy are rendered irrelevant? Such irony in fight sport may be quickly attributed to a “disappointing performance” of the heavy favorite boxer in spite of excellent preparation. Or to a sudden turn of “fated event” which is outside of the referee to avert but well within the un-contemplated “contriving” in the judges’ scorecards and decision-making.
The question afterward lingers, soon when the steam disappears: Where have the four “S” gone? So you try to find answers from galactic asteroid by accusing a fellow boxer of using PED. Then comes stubborn “unblemished” pride which “stands tall” down under; ever asserting its point midst the endless excuses to justify “ducking” acts of great disservice to the sport you so dearly profess to advance by “cleaning” it. Clean up your acts and that would be good enough.
Hard to imagine indeed if one wouldn’t care to understand what’s fastened within the realm of his capacity to grasp or within his “right” to refuse believing that which transcends the natural but echoes deep inside every time you “disagree” to make the bout happen. How else can you do it “better,” or worse?
Floyd Mayweather, Jr has only himself to fight in front of a two-way mirror to face “Pacquiao,” away from the ring and limelight. What now?
“Start doing what is necessary, then do what is possible as much as you can, and you will find yourself doing the impossible.” – St. Francis of Assisi
Here are practical guideposts in boxing; just tiny bits of neglected items that don’t seem to matter in the discussions of a highly anticipated matchup like the upcoming welterweight contest between Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez when such leads could be factors to determine who would win or “win”; scores to tell us why things didn’t turn out the way we expected in certain “uneventful” affairs in the past such as the wrestling episode in Hopkins-Dawson last October 15 or the recent “kiss and sorry” tear-jerker of Victor Ortiz.
Coming soon is the “breaking of dawn” for boxing when two long-rivals wage a war in a few days to unravel two different “convincing” answers to one pervading question, or “question”?
The following concerns are intersecting roads in the middle of side-streets, straits that could be alley-ways to destiny or “destiny” which are often overlooked in boxing, if not ignored or simply brushed aside. Some of it call for the alertness of the world boxing authorities to awaken a sport in slumber, or in sickbed . Trivial as they may seem, however, certain parts of it merit every determined boxer’s solicitude three days before and during fight night:
1. Prayer 2. Focus 3. Moral Support 4. Dirty Tricks 5. Accidental Head Butt 6. Incompetent “Bias” Referee 7. Sightless “Expert” Judges 8. Scheming “Indulgent” Promoters
The boxer himself and those close to him including supporters are to be held responsible with the first four tasks. The fifth is beyond anyone’s control. The sixth and seventh are preventable at the discretion or approval of the boxing sanctioning commission involved in the bout. While the last one is partly up to the fight fans or wholly depends on the promoter’s morals or “morals.”
That’s why.