No not really. I am not entertained because like all things in life our opinion in this great sport that we call "Boxing" means nothing. I say this because although what our eyes see to be truth, we tend to either give in and convince ourselves that the majority is right we did see someone win convincingly or we did see a brilliant performance. Points mean nothing, judging means nothing, the sport means nothing. The powers that be, whoever they are, dictate what fighters we like, who we think won a fight, who is an elite fighter, and on and on.
Before this post gets all chaotic like the thoughts in my mind I will say that not all boxing fans are subject to the brainwashing of the majority. There are fans who are not blind and see with true eyes. Fans who love Chavez Jr, but will concede that someone has a case that Vera did beat him. Fans such as myself who rooted for Trinidad, but know damn well he did not beat De La Hoya.
There are fights that are hard to argue because lets face it we can't help to be bias when it involves our favorite fighters. Such is the case in Mayweather vs Cotto. I can not stand Mayweather for so many reasons that I can write a whole other article on that subject alone and Cotto is my favorite boxer hands down, but Cotto did lose. I know this. As a boxing fan I can't bring myself to think otherwise, but I did not agree with the judges cards. And there lies the problem.
The outcome of a fight doesn't necessarily dictate that a fighter is a loser. A great effort gives the boxer respect, builds on their reputation, opens up some opportunities in certain cases. But it also has negative effects on the winner and the opinion of the public eye. A bogus win adds to their legacy. It puts them on a pedestal that they do not belong on and that casual boxing fans will worship because lets face it everyone loves an undefeated fighter and can deal with someone who has just a few losses. We all know that a few boxers' so called "0" is just that on paper because we've witnessed their loss it just wasn't recognized.
But the numbers never lie. Yes they do. I hate that saying. I can argue against that in so many ways, but to argue that is to argue the majority and I just don't have the patience. So I will get to my point. Judging doesn't work. It doesn't because all our perceptions are too far apart. What one calls an ass whooping another will call a tactician who put on a valiant display of his art. What one sees as a fighter just squeaking by with a win another sees an intelligent boxer doing what he does to get the "W".
I don't watch boxing to see two fighters do "enough" for the win and wait for the cards to tell us who won. The point system to me is a last resort after two fighters gave it their all and tried to beat the living shit out of each other, but remained standing and now we have no choice but to pick a winner. Styles make fights so yes all boxing matches can not be epic wars like Gatti and Ward or Pacquiao and Marquez and they won't all end in a knockout, but when we let the majority dictate to us that our perception is not even close, that what we saw is not validated by opinion, then what is the purpose of them fighting and us watching? We watch to cheer and have hope of a certain outcome. To watch two individuals prove to one another that someone is wrong and that the other is stronger or smarter than them and will beat their opposition.
I don't have a solution. I don't even know if I presented a problem because I am not the majority. All I know is perception rules and as long as there is bad judging, wreckless scorecards, casual boxing fans worshipping false pedestals, boxing will continue to lose its value to those who appreciate it for what it really is when it involves the best of the best and leaves bad judges out of it; a sweet science. Until then I can only pose one question. Are we not supposed to be entertained?