Juan manuel marquez aka el dinamita army

[Gandalf]

I don't know why some posters keep saying that Marquez won twice. If they present it as their opinion, then they are entitled to it. But they make it appear as fact. Based on what? I assume it's because they have knowledge that more people (probably not even a hundred) believe that Marquez won. There are likely to have been more than 500,000 people who watched the first and second fights so whatever knowledge they have is not even a representative sample of all the people who watched. It's like saying that McCain should have won the last US presidential election instead of Obama based on their survey of 1,000 people.

The official score is a DRAW and a WIN FOR PACQUIAO in the two fights that are too close to call. Give it a rest.

Okay, Pac got the verdict of the judges in their second bout. But boxing scoring is not an exact science and when you have most boxing writers and forum members arguing that Marquez won then you have to give that its weight as well.

They say history is only written by the winners, but that does not mean that we ignore what really happened and what contemporary commentators really thought at the time.

The second fight in particular was close, but most believe Marquez edged it.

[Snakey]

Well if you saw someone murdered and the judge said the person who did it was not guilty does it mean that person didnt murder someone?


A bunch of people saw Marquez win those two fights, just coz some judges say otherwise doesnt mean it didnt happen.

[FinitoElDinamita]

OJ simpson is innocent because the judge said so.

[LobowolfXXX]

Don't worry...judges won't be needed this time.

[chip]

Heart says JMM and heart will win this time Cmon Marquez

[fan johnny]

OJ simpson is innocent because the judge said so.

OJ was declared innocent by a Jury, not because the Judge said so. Marquez lost the second fight because two of the three Judges said so. That is just a fact, not an opinion. I've watched both fights and I can honestly say that in my opinion they can both be called draws.

[Tam Seddon]

MMASUX, yep Pacman and co would do anything for an advantage.. You're right, 140 is the weight they should fight at.

VD, that just shows how limited Pacman is. I can't remember another fighter who scored 3 knockdowns in the first round only to lose the fight.

Pac is just blessed with a natural speed and punching power.. WIthout those, he's just an ordinary fighter..

Marquez= Skilled fighter

Pac= natural talent

I have much more respect for someone like Marquez..

Lose? It was a draw.

You know what Tam? You're an alright cat. Decent guy with decent knowledge of the sport. I notice you speak on things you know about and you don't make a fool of yourself by speaking on things you don't know about. And because of that, I'm a do you a great service. I'm willing to take time out of my busy schedule and help you learn how to score a fight. Free of charge. Being able to know how to properly score a fight is great gift. You're able to go by your own opinion. What you saw. As oppose to going by what other people think or saw. There opinion no longer matters. Be cuz you saw the fight. And you know how to score a fight. How that sound, buddy? Let me know when you're ready.

Cheers for the kind words VD, I appreciate it. What makes you think I need a lesson in judging a fight?? There's no way you can have Marquez winning both fights. And I have seen both of the fights and they were very close. But when you have been knocked down 3 times you really do have a mountain to climb and that WAS the factor in the first fight being a draw. Marquez did very well to come back from that and Manny should have won with the advantage. The second fight was very close, you can give arguments for and against both fighters winning, this is why they are fighting this weekend .

Advantages are in Mannys favour but no way is Marquez going to get rolled over like some people think.
Marquez knows how to hang with manny as proved in the last 2 fights. As many said himself it's his 2 hardest fights he's ever had. My pick this week is manny Pac UD and a hard fought one at that. Manny will be pushed tonight and if anyone doesn't believe that they are stupid. I think will we will have a great fight tonight, I am looking forward.

[FinitoElDinamita]

OJ simpson is innocent because the judge said so.

OJ was declared innocent by a Jury, not because the Judge said so. Marquez lost the second fight because two of the three Judges said so. That is just a fact, not an opinion. I've watched both fights and I can honestly say that in my opinion they can both be called draws.

Oj is innocent because the jury said so.. like that makes any difference.

U should learn how to score a fight properly. Do u live and by these judges scorecard. Smh

[Rantcatrat]

Cheers for the kind words VD, I appreciate it. What makes you think I need a lesson in judging a fight?? There's no way you can have Marquez winning both fights. And I have seen both of the fights and they were very close. But when you have been knocked down 3 times you really do have a mountain to climb and that WAS the factor in the first fight being a draw. Marquez did very well to come back from that and Manny should have won with the advantage. The second fight was very close, you can give arguments for and against both fighters winning, this is why they are fighting this weekend .

Advantages are in Mannys favour but no way is Marquez going to get rolled over like some people think.
[I]Marquez knows how to hang with manny as proved in the last 2 fights. As many said himself it's his 2 hardest fights he's ever had. My pick this week is manny Pac UD and a hard fought one at that. Manny will be pushed tonight and if anyone doesn't believe that they are stupid. I think will we will have a great fight tonight, I am looking forward[/I].

[InTheNeutralCorner]

I don't know why some posters keep saying that Marquez won twice. If they present it as their opinion, then they are entitled to it. But they make it appear as fact. Based on what? I assume it's because they have knowledge that more people (probably not even a hundred) believe that Marquez won. There are likely to have been more than 500,000 people who watched the first and second fights so whatever knowledge they have is not even a representative sample of all the people who watched. It's like saying that McCain should have won the last US presidential election instead of Obama based on their survey of 1,000 people.

The official score is a DRAW and a WIN FOR PACQUIAO in the two fights that are too close to call. Give it a rest.

Okay, Pac got the verdict of the judges in their second bout. But boxing scoring is not an exact science and when you have most boxing writers and forum members arguing that Marquez won then you have to give that its weight as well. This means that the boxing writers and forum members judging are likewise not an exact science. So how can one be better than the other when both are not exact science. And what do you mean by most? How many are this in numbers?

They say history is only written by the winners, but that does not mean that we ignore what really happened and what contemporary commentators really thought at the time. But you are giving great value to the scores of those commentators who agrees with you. How many commentators did you know of that expressed their opinion as to who won?

The second fight in particular was close, but most believe Marquez edged it. How many in numbers is this 'most' that you talk about with regards to all the people who watched the fight.?

You already said that boxing scoring is not an exact science so until they find a better way on how to score a fight, we can disagree with the result but in a VERY CLOSE fight, you cannot insist that your score is right and the judges are wrong.

[InTheNeutralCorner]

Well if you saw someone murdered and the judge said the person who did it was not guilty does it mean that person didnt murder someone?


A bunch of people saw Marquez win those two fights, just coz some judges say otherwise doesnt mean it didnt happen.

How many in numbers is that 'bunch'?

And how did you see both fights: are they close or was one of them dominant?

[InTheNeutralCorner]

OJ simpson is innocent because the judge said so.

OJ was declared innocent by a Jury, not because the Judge said so. Marquez lost the second fight because two of the three Judges said so. That is just a fact, not an opinion. I've watched both fights and I can honestly say that in my opinion they can both be called draws.

There you go.

Opinion: Some (we don't even know how many) believe that Marquez won both fights.
Fact: Draw and a win for Pacquiao based on the official judges scoring and recorded in the books.

Opinion is disputable, Fact isn't.

[Gandalf]

I don't know why some posters keep saying that Marquez won twice. If they present it as their opinion, then they are entitled to it. But they make it appear as fact. Based on what? I assume it's because they have knowledge that more people (probably not even a hundred) believe that Marquez won. There are likely to have been more than 500,000 people who watched the first and second fights so whatever knowledge they have is not even a representative sample of all the people who watched. It's like saying that McCain should have won the last US presidential election instead of Obama based on their survey of 1,000 people.

The official score is a DRAW and a WIN FOR PACQUIAO in the two fights that are too close to call. Give it a rest.

Okay, Pac got the verdict of the judges in their second bout. But boxing scoring is not an exact science and when you have most boxing writers and forum members arguing that Marquez won then you have to give that its weight as well. This means that the boxing writers and forum members judging are likewise not an exact science. So how can one be better than the other when both are not exact science. And what do you mean by most? How many are this in numbers?

They say history is only written by the winners, but that does not mean that we ignore what really happened and what contemporary commentators really thought at the time. But you are giving great value to the scores of those commentators who agrees with you. How many commentators did you know of that expressed their opinion as to who won?

The second fight in particular was close, but most believe Marquez edged it. How many in numbers is this 'most' that you talk about with regards to all the people who watched the fight.?

You already said that boxing scoring is not an exact science so until they find a better way on how to score a fight, we can disagree with the result but in a VERY CLOSE fight, you cannot insist that your score is right and the judges are wrong.

Yes, I can because a lot more people agree with me. I believe that boxing writers are not as stupid as they appear.

[:::PSL:::]

OJ simpson is innocent because the judge said so.

OJ was declared innocent by a Jury, not because the Judge said so. Marquez lost the second fight because two of the three Judges said so. That is just a fact, not an opinion. I've watched both fights and I can honestly say that in my opinion they can both be called draws.

You have to forgive him. He's not the sharpest tool in the shed.

[InTheNeutralCorner]

I don't know why some posters keep saying that Marquez won twice. If they present it as their opinion, then they are entitled to it. But they make it appear as fact. Based on what? I assume it's because they have knowledge that more people (probably not even a hundred) believe that Marquez won. There are likely to have been more than 500,000 people who watched the first and second fights so whatever knowledge they have is not even a representative sample of all the people who watched. It's like saying that McCain should have won the last US presidential election instead of Obama based on their survey of 1,000 people.

The official score is a DRAW and a WIN FOR PACQUIAO in the two fights that are too close to call. Give it a rest.

Okay, Pac got the verdict of the judges in their second bout. But boxing scoring is not an exact science and when you have most boxing writers and forum members arguing that Marquez won then you have to give that its weight as well. This means that the boxing writers and forum members judging are likewise not an exact science. So how can one be better than the other when both are not exact science. And what do you mean by most? How many are this in numbers?

They say history is only written by the winners, but that does not mean that we ignore what really happened and what contemporary commentators really thought at the time. But you are giving great value to the scores of those commentators who agrees with you. How many commentators did you know of that expressed their opinion as to who won?

The second fight in particular was close, but most believe Marquez edged it. How many in numbers is this 'most' that you talk about with regards to all the people who watched the fight.?

You already said that boxing scoring is not an exact science so until they find a better way on how to score a fight, we can disagree with the result but in a VERY CLOSE fight, you cannot insist that your score is right and the judges are wrong.

Yes, I can because a lot more people agree with me. I believe that boxing writers are not as stupid as they appear.

Can you put that 'lot' in numbers? Because some people consider 10 as a lot.

How many boxing writers are there in the world who watched both fights and how many of their opinions do you know of?