Is it possible for Manny Pacquiao to receive fair judging?
Probably not.
Pacquiao was robbed in the first fight with Bradley (even American wigger fans will acknowledge that, so you know it must be true!), and
recent history would show a reoccurring pattern in American boxing where foreigners are robbed or don't receive fair judging against Negro American boxers.
For the most part,
I don't believe it's possible for any foreigner to receive a truly fair decision in the USA vs An African-American. That's why I'm generally against the idea of Europeans fighting in the USA, if they do it, they must know they need to win by KO. There is the odd time where a just decision is reached, for example, a few of Tomasz Adamek's fights to Negro Americans where close decisions and he won,
but it seems like 85%+ of the time the freigner is screwed.
Manny Pacquiao can win, but he needs to emphatically dominate (like Maidana did to Broner) for the judges to recognize it, or win by KO. I don't see him winning a close, competitive, or tossup decision even if he deserves it... (Re: See Kotelnik/Alexander, Malignaggi/Broner, Pavlik/Taylor 1, Pirog/Jacobs up to the KO).
American judges side almost exclusively with Negroes in close rounds. So, someone like Manny Pacquiao needs to win rounds emphatically for it to count.
With the caste system in American sports, African-American boxers always get favored treatment from American boxing judges, referees, fans, writers, and media people like Max Kellerman.
Absolutely correct, I can recall 30+ blatant robberies in American boxing in the past 5 or so years. Almost always, the boxer-beneficiary is a Black American, and generally the boxer getting screwed is a foreigner (either European, Asian, or what have you...).
But in Las Vegas, Manny Pacquiao will need a KO to win.
Agreed, he needs a KO or a dominating performance where there is no doubt whatsoever. Then again, he dominated the first fight and was still robbed. So probably needs a KO to win against the Negro in USA.