It shouldn't matter who the champion is because a round is based on performance, mostly who lands the most punches. If that cannot be decided then it goes to clean/effective punching. Then effective aggression and finally defense.
Again, you're relying on a human to give his/her opinion (which is all the score really is) on who won the round. Yes a round is based on who lands the most punches and then on to other things if that can't be established but look at things for what they are. You have judges who score based on where a particular fighter is from. You have judges who give the whole fight away because for the last three rounds the fighter wasn't "aggressive enough." So no, it shouldn't matter but it does matter when you're in a hole or you're fighting for a belt. If you don't convince the judges that you beat the champ, you don't get the belt (unless their is some tomfoolery going on.) Before the results were announced I had already said he lost and the judges saw it in similar fashion. He didn't do anything to take the belts. Was he a better boxer that night? Yes, I've said that earlier, but he didn't beat the champ.
So in every single round, hopkins out landed pascal. The close rounds should go to hopkins by out working pascal alone, based on how to score rounds.
No they shouldn't. He could have outlanded him but you're comparing that to what exactly? Pascal countering? Pascal being the agressor? Pascal landing the cleaner shots?
Well obviously. I'm just arguing on how fights should technically be scored, defined by the rules of boxing.
The rules? What rules? Again, I'm not disputing that it isn't how it should work, I'm just saying in reality it doesn't work like that.
Well you're definitely in the minority with that opinion based on all the articles I've been reading and public polls, etc. Most people believe Pascal won 3-4 rounds total with hopkins taking the rest.
Now this goes back to what I was saying about beating the champ. You're fighting the champ. In the champs back yard. In order to walk away with that W and those belts, you need to beat him within an inch of his life every round, knock him out, beat his ass so bad that he doesn't answer the bell or beat him so bad that the ref stops the fight. Plain and simple. All the ring generalship, technical savy, etc is nothing when you aren't effective and Hopkins was not effective. Did he knock pascal down? No. Did he ever have Pascal in any serious trouble? No. Did he take Pascal out of his element? No. Did he do things that stopped Pascal from countering? No.
Other than getting knocked down early, he did everything he needed to. Out landed him by nearly double. Out threw him/was busier. Nearly doubled him in total power punches. Was more accurate. Fought at his pace. Backed Pascal up the entire fight (like Nazim said in the corner, "you have him running in his own town, X!").
Nazim should have told him, "You're in his backyard, you have to knock him out, X."
And no he didn't back him up the entire fight. There was like 2 rounds were Pascal stayed moving away, but others than that he stayed in there and exchanged. So Hopkins did everything you listed but it wasn't effective. Pascal walked out of the arena. He was never seriously injured, no major cuts, etc. Hopkins was the better fighter that night, I agree, but he didn't do enough as challenger to take those belts.