Not a ROBBERY Please look :D

[Gandalf]

Well, how come the vast majority of all fans had Marquez winning then. You cannot evaluate a fight not being a robbery on the basis of 5 forum posters alone. I'm sure if you did a statistical analysis of all the cards posted online of this fight that you would have Marquez winning the vast majority of them. Marquez in the eyes of most was the undeniable winner. Anyone giving Manny 8 rounds is INSANE. Anyone giving Manny the majority of rounds is mildly demented and anyone having it a draw is a serious Manny fanboy at best.

It most definitely was a robbery and the polls showing Marquez as victor suggest as much. If the poll is neck and neck you have a case for it being a close fight, but when someone is polling so much more then it has to be a robbery. The tiny minority are suggesting a draw or Pac win.

Nah.. all the best boxing writers/journos had it close either way. No robbery.

The point about the judges cards compared to your own is this - when they score the round the same as you they are correct, right? Yet when their score doesn't match yours they are clearly inept/corrupt/wrong?

You and all three judges agreed on the 1st round. Obviously they were doing a good job in the 1st. But then two disagree with you about the 2nd round, they are clearly inept/corrupt/wrong, right? But the other judge must be right because he saw it like you. Now in the 3rd round, the judge that scored the first two like you, has scored it oppposite to you. He must now be inept/corrupt/wrong, right?

And so it goes...

No I gave Pac the rounds he deserved and Marquez the rounds he deserved. It isn't only me on the planet who is seeing a Marquez win, it is most of the people who make their voices heard on the internet. See we can erase my viewpoints entirely and still the vast majority of folks saw a Marquez win. It doesn't need my viewpoint to validate it in any way. But the numbers of people all seemingly seeing the same man win most definitely counts for something.

Pac himself showed that he lost by his immediate reaction, that was a man that knew he had throw it away.

I understand the majority on internet forums have Marquez the winner. That still doesn't mean robbery though.

You gave Pac and Marquez the rounds they "deserved?" Therein lies the problem. All the other people that scored it did the same, no? They gave each man the rounds they "deserved?" Unfortunately there was mass disagreement on the exact rounds they "deserved"

Which means, it's highly probable that Pac won just by the nature of the fight. Which means NO robbery, irrelevant of whom we personally think won.

I have said this before but boxing is not an exact science. It is very rare that 3 judges ever agree on each of the rounds in a fight and that is the disparity between 3 so called 'experts' and suddenly we are to say that because 5 posters here are not perfectly correlated that this somehow signifies that the fight is not a robbery? It is a flawed statistical logic. You are bound to get an even great disparity between 5 posters rather than 3 judges, but unlike those judges each of those posters had something in common. Marquez was the winner! So something seriously went wrong with the judges if not only are they massively disagreeing on who won the rounds, but also ALL fail to have Marquez as the winner. The judges were an abortion which totally fail to correlate in ANY way with popular opinion.

What it suggests is that the posters were true to what they saw and that the judges were completely corrupt. There is no way to see it otherwise. We all saw Marquez winning the fight fairly convincingly and yet one judge gave Pac 8 rounds and no judge gave Marquez the fight. Now show me any poll that shows Marquez receiving less than even a third of the votes which is what the overall cards even refused to give us. I bet even the Pac sites would be more honest that the judges were.

It was a shocking display of officiating and it is difficult to see it any other way. I struggle to see how Marquez wasn't robbed.

OK miles... anyone that agrees with you is right anyone that doesn't is wrong. Just as I said.

I might as well just write blah, blah, blah...

No, I have no issues with accepting when my views might out of synch which at times they have been. I was definitely slanted on JMM against Barrera, but mainly because I think that KD should have been scored. But in this instance I didn't see neck and neck rounds like I saw with Barrera/Marquez where rounds were being determined by a couple of jabs here and there. Marquez certainly through rounds 2 and onwards here was sweeping the fight with his lead right and flashy combinations. It was only Pac's urgency as the rounds were running out that brought him even some way back.

I can argue my point of view all night long, but like I said before we can just subtract my own views and still Marquez is the popular winner of the fight and many amongst them would likely argue the case for a robbery.

A close fight is one where views are evenly split, views are not evenly split on this fight. And a cross reference of 5 random posters is not a valid means of statistical evaluation. You need to input the data of far more scorecards than that and actually breakdown as a percentage how many people are giving which fighter each rounds. However, just saying that 'some of these guys 5 guys disagree on which rounds to give him means it wasn't a robbery' is an extremely inconclusive way to evaluate things and especially so when the OP hadn't even seen the fight.

It was a bizarre OP and really makes no sense whatsoever.