Not a ROBBERY Please look :D

Based on this thread

http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...rquez-3-a.html

I pick up all posters that gave their their detailed scores. ALL of them had it for Marquez.


Miles - 116 -112 JMM gave rounds 1, 6, 7 and 10 for Pac

Elterrible - 117-113 JMM gave rounds 4, 9 and 12 for Pac

Armyash - 116-112 JMM gave rounds 6, 9, 10 and 11 for Pac

Pugilistic - 116-112 JMM gave rounds 1, 6, 9, 10 for Pac

Cutemick - 115-113 JMM gave rounds 1, 4,5,9 and 12 for pac



What does this show us ?????

THERE's ABSOLUTELY NO ROBBERY HERE


here's why


These 5 posters gave Pac rounds 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 and 12

From their eyes it is Justifiable to give Pac a 118-110 Victory :o



Its a close fight that went to Agressor/Belt holder/More popular fighter but no robberies here. The reason for the ruckus is the HUGE Expectation from Pacquiao from both side.




*Pls dont hurt me ;D

I have to admire your persistence and creativity in collecting this data and molding it to further your point. Your grasp on reality (if you really believe Pac won the fight) - I don't admire as much.

I must admit that in rewatching the fight, I gave a couple of close rounds to Pac. On the paper I have beside me I actually wrote down 'even' for a few but decided on reflection to give them to Pac based on his slightly higher activity and on knowing that rounds are usually not scored as even. I was being more than generous to Manny and more so than might perhaps be expected of me.

Maybe I'm being a bit too harsh, weighing in on miles' comment ^ it wasn't the very worst robbery I've ever seen, but at this level of the sport it shouldn't be condoned by the fans.

Cmon guys.


You can see how these 5 unbiased posters have their tally. its their score. Its justifiable to give those to Pac. It means that the fight is that close and your preference is different compare d to the official judges. as what Bilbo wrote here

http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...onsistent.html


Only rounds 2 and 3 were clear for Marquez and that is not a robbery.

I agree that it wasn't a complete robbery, but to actually have Pacquiao winning more rounds you have to really want to give him any that were even close or put unreasonable emphasis on "agression". Of course considering who made this thread that is a given here. I also don't see how people had Pacquiao winning rounds 5 or 7 for the life of me. 6 MAYBE, but I felt MArquez really swept a good 3 or 4 of the mid rounds. Looking at the fight as a whole, although of course it isn't scored that way, Marquez was absolutely the better fighter last night.

Cmon man.. what happened last night was criminal. It was like an oceans eleven heist job, bobfather edition.

Miron lang, u are filipino so of course u watched the fight through a different goggle but it was a classic robjob in vegas.. It happens often at mgm..

p4p, Finito


Those scores arent my scores. and what i am saying is not an opinion, since these 5 posters gave those rounds to Pacquiao not me.


Professional bouts arent scored on emotion. but technically round by round.


Marquez's beautiful connections weighs the same with Pac's harder awkward looking connects.

miron_lang that is a truly BRILLIANT post.

Impossible to argue against.

How can it possibly be a robbery if everyone is scoring rounds differently?

Great stuff.

OMG!!!

LMFAO!!!

:appl::appl::appl:

This thread/post should be compulsory viewing for anyone that ever calls "robbery"

Even if we agree on the outcome, the very fact we see individual rounds different makes a mockery of the cry "robbery"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by miron_lang

Cmon guys.


You can see how these 5 unbiased posters have their tally. its their score. Its justifiable to give those to Pac. It means that the fight is that close and your preference is different compare d to the official judges. as what Bilbo wrote here

http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...onsistent.html


Only rounds 2 and 3 were clear for Marquez and that is not a robbery.

---

If you think rounds 2 and 3 were clear for Marquez then the judges screwed him. 2 judges had round 2 for Pac. All 3 judges gave Pac round 3.

Dougie Fisher of ring (who had it a draw) said in his mailbag, it wasn't a robbery as there was alot of close rounds. He did point out that in close fights like this it is not likely for the judging to go against the biggest PPV draw in the sport. That is just being honest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

miron_lang that is a truly BRILLIANT post.

Impossible to argue against.

How can it possibly be a robbery if everyone is scoring rounds differently?

Great stuff.

---

I for once 100% agree with Fenster. It's difficult to argue that it was a robbery when 5 Saddo Posters scored so many rounds differently. It's clear as day the fight was close.

I started watching the fight last night again, this time scoring it.

I had rounds 1 & 2 both level.

Unfortunatley I fell asleep after that! Got woke up on the sofa by the mrs, asking what I was doing with my laptop in my lap with squiggles on a bit of paper next to me! ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

miron_lang that is a truly BRILLIANT post.

Impossible to argue against.

How can it possibly be a robbery if everyone is scoring rounds differently?

Great stuff.

---

I for once 100% agree with Fenster. It's difficult to argue that it was a robbery when 5 Saddo Posters scored so many rounds differently. It's clear as day the fight was close.

---

I hope this thread is an eye opener for Miles and anyone who thinks the fight was robbery.

Bilbo made a great point too on his recent thread. It seems like the official judges are more consistent than the average viewers.

A better question, rather than asking whether it was a robbery, would be to ask people whether they believe the judges acted fairly and impartially without bias towards the 'money' fighter.

Can anyone truly say they believe that??

Perhaps we shouldn't class a fight like this as a robbery, similar to Sturm/Macklin and many other competitive fights with controversial scores favouring the home or bigger name fighter (Williams/Lara excluded as that fight was not even close). In that case, we clearly require an entirely new word for a fight where the judges have already decided the winner before the first bell sounds and manipulate their scorecards accordingly.

Had Pac fought Marquez' fight he would have won a convincing UD.

Can we all agree Marquez looked FANTASTIC at welterweight?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prosinecki

Had Pac fought Marquez' fight he would have won a convincing UD.

---

Pacquiao obliged by attacking all the time. That is playing to JMM's strength. the judges rewarded him for doing that.


a good letter for Juan

Dear Juan Manuel Marquez | Michael D. Sellers

This thread makes me want to fart violently on every single person who think that it wasn't a clear victory for JMM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nameless

This thread makes me want to fart violently on every single person who think that it wasn't a clear victory for JMM.

---

That sounds like you want to be poetic or something. do you have 7 clear rounds for marquez?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

miron_lang that is a truly BRILLIANT post.

Impossible to argue against.

How can it possibly be a robbery if everyone is scoring rounds differently?

Great stuff.

---

I for once 100% agree with Fenster. It's difficult to argue that it was a robbery when 5 Saddo Posters scored so many rounds differently. It's clear as day the fight was close.

---

For once? We don't disagree on that much surely?

Nothing more pathetic in boxing than people crying "robbery" then producing CLOSE scorecards :rolleyes:

psl, u dont know shit about boxing period. I know ur also a pactard troll from esb and boxingscrne cuz u sound just like them. Buncha annoying ass bums who dont know shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nameless

This thread makes me want to fart violently on every single person who think that it wasn't a clear victory for JMM.

---

This thread unequivocally proves it wasn't a robbery.

Whether you/we think Marquez won or not is irrelevant. The facts are people were undecided on virtually EVERY round.

How can it possibly be a robbery if people can't even agree on who won what rounds? Utterly hilarious.

i still havent seen the fight

but the bit about the expectation on pac rings true to me

everyone was saying he was gonna blast marquez, he obviously didnt and marquez's performace was a suprise, which perhaps gave him a few more points in peoples eyes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

i still havent seen the fight

but the bit about the expectation on pac rings true to me

everyone was saying he was gonna blast marquez, he obviously didnt and marquez's performace was a suprise, which perhaps gave him a few more points in peoples eyes

---

No eric. It was a classic robjob and even 95% of other elite boxers out there agree.

U gotta watch the fight first before commenting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erics44

i still havent seen the fight

but the bit about the expectation on pac rings true to me

everyone was saying he was gonna blast marquez, he obviously didnt and marquez's performace was a suprise, which perhaps gave him a few more points in peoples eyes

---

No eric. It was a classic robjob and even 95% of other elite boxers out there agree.

U gotta watch the fight first before commenting.

---

youre probly right

id like to watch it too but i cant find anywhere i can without paying for it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita

psl, u dont know shit about boxing period. I know ur also a pactard troll from esb and boxingscrne cuz u sound just like them. Buncha annoying ass bums who dont know shit.

---

Fukk you Milmascaras. And quit pretending like you're Korean. It's rediculous.

I hope they banned your ass again.

That is a genious post miron_lang. You did not render an opinion but came up with a solid conclusion based on available evidence. Nobody can argue with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nameless

This thread makes me want to fart violently on every single person who think that it wasn't a clear victory for JMM.

---

This thread unequivocally proves it wasn't a robbery.

Whether you/we think Marquez won or not is irrelevant. The facts are people were undecided on virtually EVERY round.

How can it possibly be a robbery if people can't even agree on who won what rounds? Utterly hilarious.

---

Now tell me that it is clear that Pacquiao won by 2 rounds. Everybody agrees (or almost) that Marquez won that hand down. The "not everybody agrees on the same round system" argument is one of the most ludicrous I've seen because for every damn match (except for the rare one sided whooping) the mass voting situation would be the same. Following that argument, we could turn down every robbery because in every case people wouldn't agree all on the same rounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by miron_lang

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nameless

This thread makes me want to fart violently on every single person who think that it wasn't a clear victory for JMM.

---

That sounds like you want to be poetic or something. do you have 7 clear rounds for marquez?

---

Yes I have 7 rounds for Marquez (which i think he won clearly) and no, I don't make farty poetry though I can write one for you if you want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCorner

That is a genious post miron_lang. You did not render an opinion but came up with a solid conclusion based on available evidence. Nobody can argue with that.

---

i'm pretty sure a person who can't spell the word genius would think that a pointless thread such as this one would also be in fact genius :-X

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by :::PSL:::

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita

psl, u dont know shit about boxing period. I know ur also a pactard troll from esb and boxingscrne cuz u sound just like them. Buncha annoying ass bums who dont know shit.

---

Fukk you Milmascaras. And quit pretending like you're Korean. It's rediculous.

I hope they banned your ass again.

---

Whatever you say man.. I guess Milsmascaras have been owning you as well for you to think that I am HIM... but no.. And i dont pretend to be anything.. U see the flag up there?? that's exactly what i am..

You've been acting like the biggest troll since Friday so who needs to be banned again? lol Nobody needs to be banned man..Most of us are grown men here and if you can't handle a little verbal ownage, try posting on Pacland where everyone are on the same page..

This is exactly the reason why I left ESB.. because of blind pactards like yourself..

U guys just dont get it.. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCorner

That is a genious post miron_lang. You did not render an opinion but came up with a solid conclusion based on available evidence. Nobody can argue with that.

---

i'm pretty sure a person who can't spell the word genius would think that a pointless thread such as this one would also be in fact genius :-X

---

And you didn't even think that could have been a typographical error. If you look at your keypad, the 'i' is next to the 'o'. As if you have not committed any errors in spelling.

Maybe you can tell us which rounds you think are clearly for Marquez and only a fool will score that for Pacquiao.

There was close rounds that could of went either way but to give Pacquiao a win i think a judge would have to give Pacquiao all of the close rounds.

I think Pacquiao did enough to get a draw but a win ? i don't think so.

Most rounds were competitive but Marquez got the better of them in most in them based on his cleaner harder shots and the fight was fought at a Marquez pace for the most part.

Pacquiao did enough to win the 1st and 2nd fights like Marquez did but i just can't see how you could have Pacquiao winning this 3rd fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCorner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCorner

That is a genious post miron_lang. You did not render an opinion but came up with a solid conclusion based on available evidence. Nobody can argue with that.

---

i'm pretty sure a person who can't spell the word genius would think that a pointless thread such as this one would also be in fact genius :-X

---

And you didn't even think that could have been a typographical error. If you look at your keypad, the 'i' is next to the 'o'. As if you have not committed any errors in spelling.

Maybe you can tell us which rounds you think are clearly for Marquez and only a fool will score that for Pacquiao.

---

already put my round by round up, wont get baited into a "see Manny won" bullshit argument with a blind Pactard, funny I don't hear any of the Pacquiao fan's rambling on how Manny did a better job than Floyd seeing how that's all they've been doing as of late, posting how Manny always out does Mayweather, well Pacquiao just took on Marquez at the same weight Floyd did, two years later and he still ended up beaten up while Mayweather dominated Marquez and only didn't get the stoppage cause he didn't push for it, karma...it's priceless haha

Mirron Lang great post nice work mate, NO ROBBERY. ;)

Glenn Trowbridge had Pac as unbeatable except for a KO after the tenth round !!!! with a score of 116 to 112 it was out of reach i his mind for Juan.

(That is ridiculous). That is not professional.

Think about that one in depth and this is so far removed from consistency in judging that he should be removed.

Juan deserved better than that and we all know it.


Which makes me think further..maybe this wasnt a robbery by judges but WTF is that score doing there? and wtf is he doing there? Is he there for that reason alone?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nameless

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nameless

This thread makes me want to fart violently on every single person who think that it wasn't a clear victory for JMM.

---

This thread unequivocally proves it wasn't a robbery.

Whether you/we think Marquez won or not is irrelevant. The facts are people were undecided on virtually EVERY round.

How can it possibly be a robbery if people can't even agree on who won what rounds? Utterly hilarious.

---

Now tell me that it is clear that Pacquiao won by 2 rounds. Everybody agrees (or almost) that Marquez won that hand down. The "not everybody agrees on the same round system" argument is one of the most ludicrous I've seen because for every damn match (except for the rare one sided whooping) the mass voting situation would be the same. Following that argument, we could turn down every robbery because in every case people wouldn't agree all on the same rounds.

---

You score boxing matches by the round. The judges have to hand a score in at the end of every round.

In almost ALL robberies people will be in agreement on the exact rounds won. Real robberies are clear cut.

However, in this fight, the rounds were so ambiguous that FIVE random people, that scored it for Marquez, gave Pacquiao NINE different rounds between them.

Which means, even if the majority think Marquez won, it's highly probable using the WINNING Marquez scorecards to find Pac the winner. You can't argue with that.

NO robbery. Fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

already put my round by round up, wont get baited into a "see Manny won" bullshit argument with a blind Pactard, funny I don't hear any of the Pacquiao fan's rambling on how Manny did a better job than Floyd seeing how that's all they've been doing as of late, posting how Manny always out does Mayweather, well Pacquiao just took on Marquez at the same weight Floyd did, two years later and he still ended up beaten up while Mayweather dominated Marquez and only didn't get the stoppage cause he didn't push for it, karma...it's priceless haha

---

Weren't you one of those who think the fight result is a robbery? If not, then I apologize but if you are, then I have given you just a simple question.

I did not ask your round by round, I asked which rounds you think clearly belongs to Marquez and only a fool would give it to Pacquiao.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nameless

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nameless

This thread makes me want to fart violently on every single person who think that it wasn't a clear victory for JMM.

---

This thread unequivocally proves it wasn't a robbery.

Whether you/we think Marquez won or not is irrelevant. The facts are people were undecided on virtually EVERY round.

How can it possibly be a robbery if people can't even agree on who won what rounds? Utterly hilarious.

---

Now tell me that it is clear that Pacquiao won by 2 rounds. Everybody agrees (or almost) that Marquez won that hand down. The "not everybody agrees on the same round system" argument is one of the most ludicrous I've seen because for every damn match (except for the rare one sided whooping) the mass voting situation would be the same. Following that argument, we could turn down every robbery because in every case people wouldn't agree all on the same rounds.

---

You score boxing matches by the round. The judges have to hand a score in at the end of every round.

In almost ALL robberies people will be in agreement on the exact rounds won. Real robberies are clear cut.

However, in this fight, the rounds were so ambiguous that FIVE random people, that scored it for Marquez, gave Pacquiao NINE different rounds between them.

Which means, even if the majority think Marquez won, it's highly probable using the WINNING Marquez scorecards to find Pac the winner. You can't argue with that.

NO robbery. Fact.

---

Well I think that's it about this debate about the "robbery." You had a lot of ambiguous or very close rounds. People are acting like it's Holyfield-Lewis I or Whitaker-Chavez, now those are robberies.

I am willing to agree it was not a robbery. But regardless Marquez deserved the win. There is a reason the majority of viewers think so. The fact that none of the judges thought so is simply shady.

Close fight or not, what is the likelyhood that not a single one of the 3 judges thought Marquez won.

It stinks. Cant believe how people just cant see that.

So.. in summary... not a robbery, but suspicious as hell.