posted by Large
Pascal’s wager is a suggestion posed by the French philosopher Blaise Pascal that even though the existence of God cannot be determined through reason, a person should wager as though God exists, because so living has everything to gain, and nothing to lose.
Jean Pascal took quite a gamble last night. Never known as the hardest of punching 68’s, he jumped to light heavy to take a shot at a title belt against the rugged Romanian, Adrian Diaconu. It was a brilliant promotion, two Montreal-based fighters duking it out at the Bell Centre, and the fight was a corker from start to finish, as Pascal took his familiar approach of boxing, then brawling, then boxing/brawling, and all the while relying on what is emerging as one of the most cast-iron jaws in the entire sport.
There was a time when I was not all that enamored of Jean Pascal. He talks a big game, and about two years ago he started generating a buzz as the next big thing at 68. The fates seemed to be pointing towards a high-profile showdown between him and Edison Miranda, and Miranda showed up ringside in Florida to watch Pascal face off with Omar Pittman on FNF. In that fight, Pascal danced and showboated and then nearly got whupped, as Pittman went hardhead on him and turned the tables mid-fight in what almost turned into one of those ever-so-satisfying hunted-becomes-the-hunter moments.
But Pascal survived, got the UD, and then got into a farcical screaming match with Miranda that didn’t impress me much. On the whole, I came away that night thinking that Pascal was another good-looking bag of hot gas at 68, Jeff Lacy on the bike.
Read the rest of this entry »
June 18th, 2009
posted by Ariel Helwani
Here’s what you need to know about last weekend’s UFC 99 event:
1) Marcus Davis looked tentative against Dan Hardy. He lost their grudge match, and is still upset about it. He would like a rematch. Not sure what it’s in it for Hardy, though.
2) Caol Uno’s return to the UFC didn’t go as planned. He was too focused on taking Spencer Fisher down and was unsuccessful in doing so.
3) Mike Swick blew by Ben Saunders. He’s now 9-1 in the UFC, and itching for a title shot. One more big victory (Matt Hughes?) and he just may get it.
4) Mirko Cro Cop returned, eye-poked, won and then went back to Japan. Is it fair to compare this whole situation to the Carlos Boozer-Gordon Gund debacle from 2004? It’s pretty darn close.
Read the rest of this entry »
June 15th, 2009
(For another take on the Cotto/Clottey drama, I bring you a piece from our man Shoefly, who sees fit to hit Josh Clottey when he’s down - L)
posted by Shoefly
I scored the Cotto/Clottey fight for Clottey 114-113, but I’m glad he lost. I found the whole thing sort of sick and depressing, like a slow-motion car accident or one of those science shows where they show you the details of the digestive system.
To be fair to Josh Clottey – and I won’t be after this – he probably did deserve to win that fight on points, and I think if he had committed the fouls Cotto did (the body slam, the blatant rabbit punch, the low blows) he would have had points deducted. Still, I have no sympathy for him, even when considering the egregious 116-111 card which had him winning only four rounds.
Joshua Clottey deserved to lose because he fought like a loser. He deserved to lose because he’s a natural second-best, taking over the mantle from the previous title-holder Luis Collazo as the “hard-luck story of his generation.” But the truth is… it’s not a matter of luck.
Read the rest of this entry »
June 14th, 2009
posted by Large
I can’t believe what I’m reading, in the recaps and opinion pieces at other boxing sites and in the comments here at the Mas. What the hell were people watching last night that they can conclude after that fight that, “Cotto has lost it, Cotto isn’t that good, Cotto is still haunted by Margarito”?
To all of these people drawing these conclusions, I have a question: DID YOU NOT SEE THE CRATER OF A CUT OVER COTTO’S LEFT EYE THAT HE FOUGHT WITH FOR NINE FUCKING ROUNDS? JESUS!
To me, the cut essentially invalidates the fight and the result, period. It probably should have been stopped - that might have been in the better interest of both parties. Clottey is right to call for a rematch, and he’ll never get it, which is a shame, although he would have had his rematch if he’d manned up and gone out there and conclusively won those last three rounds, so he’s left to think about that when he’s fighting some up-and-comer on Friday Night Fights in November.
I’ll get to the decision later. It’s definitely debatable. But it was clear to me that Cotto would have been well within his rights to opt out of that fight at any point after the third round. Fights have been justifiably stopped for much lesser cuts. It also was clear to me that around the seventh round, when it was obvious that the cut was not going to stop pouring blood into his eye and making him all but defenseless to right hands, when even the announcers were starting to say, “man, they should probably stop this thing”… if the fight had been stopped then, Cotto would have had an indisputable lead on the scorecards. You can debate whether he deserved that decision after 12, but there is no debate that he was up after seven.
Read the rest of this entry »
