Paulie Malignaggi and Juan Diaz might want bigger opponents than one another, but there just might not be much out there. HBO is willing to back a rematch of the controversial August 22 bout.

View full size photo »

Rick Reeno reports that a potential rematch between Juan Diaz and Paulie Malignaggi could go down if bigger fights aren't available for either man, as HBO is "very interested" in the idea.

Diaz, as you're no doubt aware, won a spirited but controversial decision over Malignaggi on August 22 in Houston. The silver lining for everyone involved is that without specific numbers, HBO was pleasantly surprised by the TV rating for the fight, which surprises me as well. There was very little talk about the matchup before it took place, though a ton came about after. If this fight did good TV ratings, then people got emotional at the end one way or the other, and as Eric Bischoff said, controversy creates cash. Don't think that everyone will tune out of boxing because of a controversial score; a lot of people will want to see Paulie "make things right" should they rematch. Plus, it was a surprisingly good fight, too.

The only other talk for these guys past a rematch has been Diaz wanting to fight Ricky Hatton, which will not happen until 2010 if ever, and Malignaggi potentially fighting fellow New Yorker Zab Judah, but Judah is pulling out of fights left and right so you might as well forget about that.

It might be that Diaz-Malignaggi II simply makes the most sense for both of the fighters, especially if HBO is flat-out pushing for it to happen.

Rick Reeno has the same theoretical roadblocks I do, the big one being location. Diaz's manager Willie Savannah already said they won't go to New York to fight Malignaggi, which I wouldn't expect them to, honestly. And there is no way in hell that Malignaggi will go back to Texas, so what are you looking at then? Atlantic City sounds good, but Diaz's people might have the same reservations with AC that they do with New York. There's really nowhere else they're going to draw, even considering the talk their fight generated and the surprising TV ratings. Vegas would be a really tough sell for this fight. Anywhere but Texas, NYC or AC probably requires a strong B-side or even this fight being the B-side.

Juan Diaz's manager Willie Savannah spoke with BoxingScene.com's Rick Reeno about the scoring controversy that has dominated boxing news for the last few days, and the interview is such a total shuck-and-jive job that it made my head spin.

Before I get started here, let me clarify a few things:

1. I'm not arguing with Savannah saying Diaz beat Paulie Malignaggi. I think the fight was highly debatable and Diaz has a great argument.
2. I do not have any problem with Willie Savannah, but this interview is so full of boxing institution junk that I just could not help myself. This is not Mr. Savannah's "fault"; he's playing the game and doing his job. I'm merely using this as an example of some of the things in boxing that bug the living crap out of a lot of us, and have driven many people away. (I'm not saying they all became UFC/MMA fans, either. Most of them just probably stopped watching, period.)

Item One: Apparently, Willie wants to "take shots at factual errors going around"

"I see all these people writing about the Texas judges. [Raul] Caiz is from California and the other guy who I never heard of is from Oklahoma. There was only one Texas judge. The other two guys were out-of-state judges. We would have fought him with any judges, except three New York judges."

This ignores the problem and tries to get you to think you're wrong, and that Paulie is wrong. Malignaggi said before the fight that his problems included (but were not limited to):

• Gale Van Hoy, a Texas judge with a history of hometown decisions in Texas.
• A judge that apparently freaking nobody has heard of from Oklahoma, whose name is David Sutherland, for the record. Sutherland scored the fight 116-112 for Diaz, which I think is perfectly defensible. On the undercard, Sutherland gave Danny Jacobs a 100-89 clean sweep of Ishe Smith, which is completely indefensible and every bit as atrocious as Van Hoy's 118-110 Diaz card in the main event. Both of them proved their incompetence on Saturday night.
• Caiz, a Mexican-American judge that Malignaggi accuses of being a Golden Boy ringer.
• Referee Laurence Cole, a Texas referee with an abominable history that has no business refereeing shows at National Guard Armories, let alone championship-level fights like this one and some of the others he's mucked up.

In fact, how about we just quote a pre-fight Malignaggi:

"You have Gale Van Hoy, a judge from Texas who scored the Chris John-Rocky Juarez fight a draw. Then you have Raul Caiz, a Mexican judge from California who is anything but neutral. Looking at the fights Caiz has judged in the past, he is far from neutral when it comes to Golden Boy and Mexican fighters. The referee is Laurence Cole and all you have to do is look him up to see his past. Then they had a judge from Las Vegas, and we didn't have a problem with her, so they go and change the judge to some from Oklahoma that I've never even heard of."

Where is the great misunderstanding? We know what States the judges were from. Pointing out that they aren't all from Texas is a lame attempt at just plain not addressing the matter at hand.

Item Two: Since Juan didn't "blow out" Malignaggi, that's why people think he lost

"People are used to seeing Juan blowing people out and because he didn't blow this guy out, then he must have lost. They remember his fights with Acelino Freitas, Julio Diaz and Michael Katsidis and because he didn't blow this guy out, they think he lost. I thought we won the fight, and they think [Paulie] won the fight."

Again: It's not any problem with Diaz getting the W.

Interesting that he names the Katsidis fight, which I felt was damn near as big a blowout as the Freitas and Julio Diaz bouts for sure, but was scored 115-113 Katsidis but judge Glen Hamada. I wonder if Hamada was simply incompetent that night?

This is another attempt to simply avoid talking about this. He does not even address the fact that Gale Van Hoy's scorecard was absolutely not correct or even defensible. Yes, judging is a matter of opinion or taste to some degree, but nobody on earth besides Van Hoy thought this fight was 10-2 in terms of rounds for Diaz. He has been called out on this not just by Malignaggi and his supporters, but by Golden Boy chief Oscar de la Hoya and freaking Juan Diaz, for God's sake. Savannah, though, doesn't touch it.

Continue reading this post »

New junior lightweight titlist Robert Guerrero grades himself a C for his victory over Malcolm Klassen in Houston. (Photo via www.metrosantacruz.com)

View full size photo »

Boxing Talk's Ryan Burton had the chance to interview new junior lightweight titleholder Robert Guerrero to get his thoughts on his Saturday win over Malcolm Klassen.

Guerrero isn't overly thrilled with his win, it doesn't seem, but he does feel he acquitted himself as a fighter with heart after many questioned him following what appeared to be a quit job against Daud Yordan earlier this year:

Boxingtalk: Robert, how do you rate your performance?

Robert Guerrero:  I give myself like a C.  There is still a lot of stuff I have to improve on.  There are a lot of things I did good too.  I stuck to the game plan and did what I had to do.

BT:  You came out very fast and Malcolm Klassen seemed to start very slowly.  What do you attribute that to?

RG:  The game plan was to come out be first.  That was one of the things that we wanted to do.  We wanted to get out there and establish that jab and circle and be first.  We wanted to keep him off his game because once you let Klassen get going, he is going.  There were a couple rounds where I let him get on his game and he came out and threw some shots.   I let myself get away from my game plan and he started getting some punches through.

Guerrero sums up the fight fairly well, I think. He does a far better job of telling the fight's story than the HBO team did on Saturday, when they acted as if Guerrero was cleaning the ring with Klassen. In truth, it was a good, competitive fight where Guerrero started fast and I thought Klassen came on strong down the stretch. I scored the fight a draw, and most of us watching here during the round-by-round had it far, far closer than the HBO broadcast might have indicated.

Guerrero says he's looking forward to unifying titles at 130, but names nobody. Personally, I'd like to see him give Yordan another shot. That would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he's got the guts of a top-level guy. Yordan seemed to be giving Guerrero way more trouble than "The Ghost" might have anticipated in their all-too-brief meeting.

Brooklyn's Paulie Malignaggi isn't going to forgive and forget about Gale Van Hoy's controversial scorecard. (Photo via www.boxnews.com.ua)

View full size photo »

Texas judge Gale Van Hoy spoke on the record with Michael Marley about the controversy surrounding his awful 118-110 Diaz scorecard from Saturday night in Houston:

Speaking from his home in Dickinson, Tx., Van Hoy admitted his scoring was off the mark but stuck to his guns about Diaz being the rightful winner.

"Oscar is probably right. I could have messed up, I’m human," Van Hoy told Examner.com and Boxingconfidential.

"I never claimed to be perfect but I’m not a hometown judge. I’ve done 65 or so world title fights. I’ve done fights involving Manny Pacquiao, Floyd Mayweather and Kostya Tszyu. I did a Paulie fight in Little Rock, an eight rounder and I gave Paulie six or seven rounds. He doesn’t remember or mention that."

Van Hoy said he viewed Maliganggi’s jab and dash tactics as being less effective than Diaz’s constant aggression.

"I am not infallible but this is how I saw it. Maybe, in retrospect, I was wide in my score, maybe I was off by a round or two. Paulie’s got a good jab but it kept hitting Juan’s gloves. There was not enough power in those jabs."

Paulie Malignaggi has shot back, speaking with BoxingScene.com's Rick Reeno:

"I found this very funny. The punches weren't hard enough? Diaz's face must have cut up on its own. I have a very heavy jab. What about the fact that I threw 300 more punches than him? What about the fact that my jab stopped him from getting off with his own punches? Very rarely does any opponent out-throw Juan Diaz.

"And when the hell did we establish the power of a jab? ... He says he's not a hometown judge? I have a list of his fights. Don't worry, Mr. Van Hoy, this is not over. I am not going away any time soon. He should keep his mouth shut because he's only diggins his own grave even deeper."

Malignaggi clearly has no desire to just drop this matter. He's going to dig and dig, it would appear, and while he has to know there's no chance of this being overturned or even seriously investigated, it seems as though he's genuinely angry enough to keep this in the news as long as he can.

Juan Diaz joins the choir in dismissing Gale Van Hoy's controversial scorecard from Saturday night. He's also looking ahead to potential fights with Juan Manuel Marquez and Ricky Hatton. (AP Photo)

View full size photo »

Ben Thompson at FightHype interviewed Juan Diaz, and "The Baby Bull" touched on the scoring controversy that is all the talk coming out of his win over Paulie Malignaggi and Saturday, as well as a potential clash with Ricky Hatton.

Asked about Gale Van Hoy's moronic 118-110 Diaz card, Juan had this to say:

"I didn't get to see the fight until this morning and obviously I don't agree with that score myself. I know it was a real close fight and I gave myself seven rounds and I gave Paulie five rounds. I watched the fight and I think that was more of the accurate score: Seven rounds to five."

As for the fight being in Houston:

"This is what I want to tell all the boxing people. They say I've been fighting here in Houston and Paul Malignaggi accepted the fight here in Houston. I wasn't the one that said, 'Let's fight in Houston.' I've been fighting here in Houston because Golden Boy Promotions wants to put the fights out here. I don't care where I fight, you know? It doesn't matter if I fight in Vegas, New York, New Jersey; it doesn't matter to me. I don't beg for the promotional company to bring the fights out here. They just happen to do it."

Diaz said post-fight with Max Kellerman that he wants a rematch with Juan Manuel Marquez. Personally, I know it was a great, great fight, but that was a pretty conclusive finish and I simply think there are better and bigger fights out there for the 36-year old Marquez, but sure, I'd love to see them go at it again.

However, another name is coming up now:

"My manager mentioned Ricky Hatton. When Max Kellerman was interviewing me and he was asking me who I wanted next, him and Oscar shouted into my ear, 'Ricky Hatton!' I said, 'Is he still fighting?' I don't even know if he's still fighting, but that's a name he threw at me. If that's the case, then so be it."

When both were still undefeated and Juan was ruling (unofficially) at 135 and Hatton was the king at 140, Hatton-Diaz was a fight I thought looked phenomenal on paper. In the last couple years, we've seen both of them lose two fights, and we've seen Hatton's punch resistance probably drop a bit, while Diaz has shown some problems handling adversity.

And I still think that's a really good fight that I'd gladly watch. I wouldn't pay to watch it as a headliner, but I'd like to see where Ricky's at against an opponent that isn't Mayweather or Manny, but is sure as hell better than Juan Lazcano or the Paulie Malignaggi that showed up last November to fight Ricky in Vegas. Diaz isn't truly elite, cream of the crop, but he's a very good fighter and has a style that would test Hatton's resolve and see what he has left in the tank. I say bring that one on.

Numbers don't always tell the story, but the CompuBox stats for Diaz-Malignaggi reaffirm that Gale Van Hoy's 118-110 Diaz scorecard was way off the mark. (AP Photo)

View full size photo »

These punch stats tell us one thing: It was a close fight, and a lot of scoring for this one depends on which guy impressed you more. Malignaggi worked pretty effectively behind a jab and I thought he did an excellent job controlling distance against the shorter Diaz for much of the fight, which is why I scored it for Paulie. If you were impressed by Diaz essentially abandoning his jab (not that he's ever been a jabber) and going for power shots, and doing a fair job with that gameplan especially to the body, it's easy to see why you would score it for "The Baby Bull."

Let me be clear, since we've had the discussions in the comments of the many posts that have been dedicated to a fight I didn't think would generate too much interest: I don't think Paulie was robbed in the traditional sense that he definitely, absolutely, for sure, no arguments won this fight and had the win taken away. This was not Casamayor-Santa Cruz or Burton-Augustus.

This was really a good, competitive fight that I think could be scored either way. Juan Diaz did not win 10 rounds. Paulie Malignaggi didn't either. Most folks had it 7-5 one way or the other, some had a draw, and I was heavy for Paulie at 8-4. This is a fight that is going to play out now a lot like Cotto-Clottey did, though the circumstances are a bit different. Cotto-Clottey was a damn good fight, and 99% of the post-fight talk from everyone centered on Clottey being "robbed" or not. The same thing is, sadly, happening here, though this one is more upsetting, because it is clear that Van Hoy went out of his way to put the screws to Malignaggi.

The brief CompuBox summary of the fight even touches on what's really wrong here: "GALE VAN HOY’S 118-110 SCORE FOR DIAZ WAS AN ABSOLUTE DISGRACE."

Total Punches Landed / Thrown

Jabs Landed / Thrown

Power Punches Landed / Thrown

Final PunchStat Report                                                    

Punches  Landed / Thrown

An entertaining fight between Paulie Malignaggi and Juan Diaz last night should make Malignaggi hotter than he's been in a long time. But the worry is that his post-fight blowup will cost him professionally. (Photo via d.yimg.com)

View full size photo »

Though he lost a good fight in a highly controversial fashion, Paulie Malignaggi might be a hotter ticket right now than he has been in a long time. Some are worried, though, that his post-fight comments will get him essentially "blacklisted" from major cards.

Both Malignaggi and Golden Boy promoter Oscar de la Hoya -- who does not promote Malignaggi -- ripped judge Gale Van Hoy after the fight. Van Hoy scored the main event for Diaz, 118-110, which nobody agrees with. Malignaggi had called out Van Hoy as a judge that he felt would put the screws to him before the fight even happened.

Said Malignaggi:

"I don't understand how Gale Van Hoy keeps getting jobs. ... Boxing has no f***ing integrity left. It's been happening for years. That's why this sport has no popularity left. That's why nobody watches this s**t, because every year, there are decisions like this and probably worse than this. ... People get f***ed constantly. Nobody watches boxing anymore because of s**t like this."

Oscar had this to say:

"The fight was a close fight. We look at the landslide that one of the judges had, I don't agree with it. I'm not a judge but I don't agree with it. Paulie Malignaggi was right, but it was a close fight. ... That landslide of 118-110 -- what is that? We don't need that. It was a closer fight, there is no doubt about that. The [Danny Jacobs-Ishe Smith] fight was a close fight. Ishe put up a tremendous fight. When we see scores like 100-89, the fight wasn't seen like that."

Oscar, obviously, was a bit more reserved.

Meanwhile, Lou DiBella is already talking about matching Malignaggi with 140-pound titlist Amir Khan, which might be doable. Paulie is very fast when he's on his game, but Khan is legitimately one of the quickest guys in the sport. It'd be a pure distance boxing match for the most part, since that's what both do best, and I think Khan is just a little bit faster and obviously a stronger puncher, and my first impression is a Khan win, but I'd definitely be interested in that fight.

What's really sticking in my craw today is the talk of "blacklisting" Malignaggi. If the promoters and networks try anything like that -- and it'll be obvious, because rarely are they very stealth about matters like this -- I'll be on a soapbox for Paulie Malignaggi, which might not mean much in the grand scheme of things, but trying to rally for a deserving fighter that gave his all and then simply spoke his mind seems like a worthy cause for me.

HBO's Bob Papa seemed almost dumbstruck after they cut away from a still-talking Malignaggi, and then his face washed into something like a man at a funeral as he said something to the effect of, "Malignaggi probably didn't do himself any favors there."

You know what? Screw favors. Paulie Malignaggi called a corrupt judge coming into the fight, and he received one. I'd say that Van Hoy needs to be investigated, but we all know for a fact that he won't be. I'd also say Laurence Cole needs to stop refereeing -- he didn't live up to his hype last night, but it's been enough with him -- but his father, Dick Cole, is the head of the Texas Athletic Commission. Hey, go figure!

And 118-110 Diaz from Van Hoy wasn't even the worst card of the night! That 100-89 score for Jacobs over Smith that came from the pencil of David Sutherland was even worse. There is NO WAY you saw Jacobs winning every round of that fight. I'm not saying I'm some infallible judge of fights, because I'm absolutely not (nobody is), and certainly a fight from ringside looks different than it does on TV. But it's also not THAT different, and I'm sick of that being used as a crutch to support hack judges.

At some point, there has to be accountability for this stuff. It's been going on for years, and some people will go, "Hey, it's been going on for years, whatever," but why should we accept what appears to be absolute corruption within a SPORT? This is not professional wrestling. This is a SPORT. The athletes come in thinking they're competing, and that their skills can carry the day even if they're an underdog. Malignaggi essentially had no chance to win this fight. Barring an unlikely knockout or some sort of ungodly domination, Juan Diaz had this in the bag.

Most judges are just fine. I'm not slamming every boxing judge out there. But they get away with so much without having to take any responsibility for their actions. Will lip service be paid to looking into Van Hoy and his scorecard? Maybe, but nothing will come of it. They'll wait for us all to forget about it, the same as that supposed "investigation" of Valuev over Holyfield last December or any other number of fights that have been controversially judged.

And how hard does it get to continue to support and love a sport when guys can lose a fight, take the microphone, and flat-out call the sport a crock, and it's hard to disagree with them? We're admitting that we're watching a sport with some rather inexcusable flaws.

If Paulie Malignaggi "disappears" from your airwaves forever, he will have been proven right. And boxing will be, in the words of "The Magic Man," full of shit.

Paulie Malignaggi feared a robbery in Houston against hometown fighter Juan Diaz. Bad Left Hook believes that's exactly what happened. (Photo via img.metro.co.uk)

View full size photo »

Paulie Malignaggi called out judge Gale Van Hoy, the other two judges, the Texas Athletic Commission, and referee Laurence Cole before he showed up in Houston to fight hometown fighter Juan Diaz. The only guy he didn't rip on, in fact, was Juan Diaz.

After a fight that many felt he won, Malignaggi still had no beef with Juan Diaz. But his nightmares came true when he lost 115-113, 116-112 and a ridiculous 118-110 -- from Van Hoy -- on the scorecards.

From my view, Malignaggi (26-3, 5 KO) largely dominated the fight defensively and with speed. He looked like the vintage Malignaggi that was a legit contender at 140 pounds. Diaz (35-2, 17 KO) did survive a bad cut this time around, and didn't fight badly. But he had a horrible time closing distance on the longer, taller, quicker Malignaggi, and it was Paulie that made much of the fight go.

It was also, it should be noted, a highly-entertaining style collision between two guys that came to mix it up and win. They both needed it badly, and fought like it. But it was Malignaggi, in my opinion, that won the bout. And I'm not alone. Bad Left Hook scored it 116-112 for Paulie. HBO's Harold Lederman scored it 115-113 for Malignaggi.

Malignaggi spoke bluntly about the sport after the fight, saying something close to the effect of, "Boxing is full of s**t. I used to love the sport. Boxing is full of s**t. The only reason I do it is for a good payday."

Paulie has legitimate gripes right now. He was robbed, I think. You may disagree, and that's fine, but I'm just talking about how I saw the fight. And it was a Malignaggi win.

• The main undercard bout between Malcolm Klassen and Robert Guerrero was called by the HBO team as a dominant Guerrero win, and Guerrero got the unanimous nod. But I scored it a draw and felt Malcolm Klassen acquitted himself quite nicely. I am not arguing a Guerrero victory; not at all. What I am arguing is that he cruised to victory. He did not.
• Daniel Jacobs won a tough fight with Ishe Smith. The bout looked exactly like what most of us expected. Ishe Smith was outworked, and Jacobs won on pure talent. But Jacobs also probably learned a lot, which is best case scenario with an opponent like Ishe.

The Boxing After Dark fight card starts tonight at 9:45pm ET on HBO. We'll be here with live coverage and scoring of all three bouts. Join us!

For past articles covering this event: Juan Diaz v. Paulie Malignaggi (HBO) coverage

via www.hbo.com

UNDERCARD:

IBF Junior Lightweight Title: Malcolm Klassen (24-4-2, 15 KO) v. Robert Guerrero (24-1-1, 17 KO)

Daniel Jacobs (17-0, 15 KO) v. Ishe Smith (21-3, 9 KO)

(Photo via www.hbo.com)

View full size photo »

This three-fight card televised by HBO will begin at 9:45 ET on Saturday night, and Bad Left Hook will be here for live, round-by-round coverage and scoring of the bouts.

I'm not going to sugar-coat it like this is a great card. It's not -- but it's a solid bunch of legitimate fights and deserves the boxing fan's attention for sure.

Main Event: Juan Diaz v. Paulie Malignaggi (12 Rounds, 138.5-pound catchweight)

This (ridiculous) catchweight bout features junior welterweight fringe contender Malignaggi and former lightweight titlist Juan Diaz meeting in the middle in a bit of a crossroads bout for Diaz and a make-or-break fight for Paulie. Brooklyn's Malignaggi (26-2, 5 KO) hasn't fared well against his best opponents, getting routed and stopped late last year by Ricky Hatton and taking a vicious beating from Miguel Cotto back in 2006. Since losing to Hatton, he has fought just once, beating unheralded Christopher Fernandez over eight rounds in April of this year.

Diaz (34-2, 17 KO) has lost two of his last three, getting upset in 2008 by Nate Campbell and knocked out by Juan Manuel Marquez in February of this year, a Fight of the Year contender that we'll be remember for a long time. In between losses, he dominated Michael Katsidis in a fight that was mind-bogglingly scored for Katsidis by judge Glen Hamada, something I still can't get over. How anyone saw that fight for Katsidis is beyond me.

What we have here is a matchup between a fighter that lives and dies on speed and technique (Malignaggi) and one that lives and dies on pressure and keeping his guts unchecked. Katsidis, a warrior by trade, made the awful decision to try and box Diaz last September, and in turn, Diaz had a pretty easy night. Campbell and Marquez put him to the test, and he came up short both times. He, too, is a warrior; I do not doubt his spirit. What I doubt is his ability to persevere when challenged by a top opponent.

Because of this, I see Malignaggi having almost no chance to win this fight. Diaz has home field advantage in Houston and Paulie has even complained massively about Golden Boy allegedly stacking the deck with biased officials. But the real problem Malignaggi is going to have is the problem he usually has: He can't punch for beans. Diaz is not heavy-handed by any means, but he keeps the pressure on and that should overwhelm Malignaggi, whose speed seems to be in an early decline. Hatton and Cotto showed Malignaggi no respect and put the hurt on him. I'm not saying Diaz is Hatton or Cotto, but Malignaggi hasn't really looked good in his last four fights.

Pick: Juan Diaz by dominant unanimous decision

Continue reading this post »