(“I feel bad for the fighters and the judges for being a part of perceived controversy, and I feel bad for Arum being falsely accused…but I’m glad there are passionate fans out there.”)

The June 9th boxing title fight in Las Vegas between Manny Pacquiao and Tim Bradley ended in controversy after Bradley was awarded a split decision despite being routed in nearly every round. Last Saturday many more fans got to see the fight when it was replayed for free on HBO. The sanctioning body for the match’s title belt, the WBO, has announced that they are reviewing the fight, and promoter Bob Arum called for the Nevada State Athletic Commission (NSAC) to be investigated after he himself was accused of somehow being involved in corrupting the judges decision.

Basically, it’s another mess for boxing and its beleaguered fans to sort through. We thought it would be a good time to check in with the Executive Director of the NSAC, Keith Kizer, to discuss judging in boxing, the controversial decision itself, how he saw the fight and what, if anything, the state commission is doing to review the fight.
- Elias Cepeda

CagePotato: Thanks for taking time to discuss judging in the Manny Pacquiao vs. Tim Bradley bout. Before we get into that fight specifically, let’s set up some general context. Can you describe how judges are selected in Nevada? Not for specific assignments but overall. How does someone become a judge in Nevada?

Keith Kizer: There are three different ways, basically. Sometimes we bring in outside judges for events. For example, on that very card we had several judges from California. What happens in those instances is I’ll call [California State Athletic Commission Head] George Dodd and ask him to give me a couple names of great judges. He is really good about doing that for us. So what happens after that is I have those judges included on the list that I give to the sanctioning bodies and fighter camps, as I did with this event.

But we also have a regular roster of judges. Another way that people can become Nevada judges is when there might be somebody who is a world class judge but lived elsewhere and moved to Nevada. That doesn’t guarantee that they would be added to our roster, but when there is an opening sometimes they are chosen.

(Calmly explaining the Atlas philosophy: Life is generally bullshit.)

Michael David Smith talked to legendary boxing trainer and analyst Teddy Atlas about the upcoming Vitali Klitschko/Juan Carlos Gomez fight and about the state of boxing in general.  When asked whether the rise of MMA and the UFC was partly responsible for the decline of boxing, Atlas couldn’t resist putting his way with words to work, saying “the sport’s good and the participants are tough guys — but Ultimate Fighting’s not a pimple on the ass of boxing.”

We beg to differ, Teddy.  Not only is it a pimple on the ass of boxing, it’s a great big boil that will continue to fill with puss and other gross stuff until it bursts at the most inopportune moment, leaving an embarrassing stain on the ass of the boxing world’s slacks that everyone will see but won’t tell you about because it’s just too awkward.  Then you’ll get home and realize you’ve been walking around all day like that, and you’ll never want to leave the house again except for groceries and maybe to rent a movie.  But you’ll run into people you know at the video store and they’ll still remember the ass stain incident.  They won’t say anything, but you’ll know they’re thinking about it and you will feel shamed.

See?  Now that’s how you craft an extended motherfucking metaphor, Teddy.

Okay, but seriously, Atlas did give MMA its due and admitted that the UFC does a better job of consistent promotion and marketing than boxing.  And he has a point when he says that the big boxing matches still outdraw and out-pay the UFC, but he also has a point when he laments that this is all boxing has become, “one big fight a year.”