Not a ROBBERY Please look :D

[Beanz]

I am sorry to burst the bubble but this is not a brilliant post.The fact that 5 people who scored the fight round by round could not agree on which ones to give to Pacquiao does not prove it was not a robbery.Typing

THERE's ABSOLUTELY NO ROBBERY HERE
does not prove it was not a robbery either. All 5 people had JMM winning the fight, not one amongst the 5 had a draw let alone a win for Pacquiao. The judges on the night did not judge the fight fairly they deprived JMM of that which was rightfully his and therefore robbed him. The fact that 5 people could not agree on which rounds Pacquiao won is demonstrable evidence that he was clearly outfought and beaten on the night by a masterful display of boxing from his opponent. It was hard to give him more than 4 rounds because whatever criteria you use he came second best.Accuracy ? Aggression ? Technique ? Manny failed to evolve. In the face of overwhelming aggression he can clearly pick his punches but Juan refused to lose his head and Manny could not adjust.

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.

If giving a fight to the more popular fighter is not a robbery then what is ? It was not a close fight. The reason for the ruckus is despite the huge expectations of Pacquiao destroying a so called shot over the hill fighter it was that same fighter who took Manny to school, and then that same fighter was denied a victory he deserved. It now seems unless Marquez knocked Pacquiao out he was never going to be given the decision on winning more rounds.

I think the judges in the Pacquiao Marquez fight proved judges are actuallyconsistent

what consistently inept,blinkered ?


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

This just proves the judges had no intention of rewarding Marquez fairly, even in rounds he dominated.


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.

What you are saying is an opinion one which you have inflicted on other peoples data

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

By no technical criteria does Pacquiaowin more rounds. Bias and preconception skewered the scorecards at the very least.

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

How can Marquez's the larger heavier mans connections weigh the same as Pac's HARDER connects ? either they are the same or pac's are harder


and 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.

miron's was not a truly BRILLIANT post. It is impossibly easy to argue against because the fact that people score rounds differently does nothing but confirm the unbiased objective way in which 5 people struggled to award Pacquiao any more than 5 rounds and 3 people gave him only 4 rounds and one person 3. Witnesses to a crime rarely describe the scene in exactly the same way but will often all describe the same offence and in this case it was a robbery.

[FinitoElDinamita]

I am sorry to burst the bubble but this is not a brilliant post.The fact that 5 people who scored the fight round by round could not agree on which ones to give to Pacquiao does not prove it was not a robbery.Typing

THERE's ABSOLUTELY NO ROBBERY HERE
does not prove it was not a robbery either. All 5 people had JMM winning the fight, not one amongst the 5 had a draw let alone a win for Pacquiao. The judges on the night did not judge the fight fairly they deprived JMM of that which was rightfully his and therefore robbed him. The fact that 5 people could not agree on which rounds Pacquiao won is demonstrable evidence that he was clearly outfought and beaten on the night by a masterful display of boxing from his opponent. It was hard to give him more than 4 rounds because whatever criteria you use he came second best.Accuracy ? Aggression ? Technique ? Manny failed to evolve. In the face of overwhelming aggression he can clearly pick his punches but Juan refused to lose his head and Manny could not adjust.

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.

If giving a fight to the more popular fighter is not a robbery then what is ? It was not a close fight. The reason for the ruckus is despite the huge expectations of Pacquiao destroying a so called shot over the hill fighter it was that same fighter who took Manny to school, and then that same fighter was denied a victory he deserved. It now seems unless Marquez knocked Pacquiao out he was never going to be given the decision on winning more rounds.

I think the judges in the Pacquiao Marquez fight proved judges are actuallyconsistent

what consistently inept,blinkered ?


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

This just proves the judges had no intention of rewarding Marquez fairly, even in rounds he dominated.


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.

What you are saying is an opinion one which you have inflicted on other peoples data

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

By no technical criteria does Pacquiaowin more rounds. Bias and preconception skewered the scorecards at the very least.

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

How can Marquez's the larger heavier mans connections weigh the same as Pac's HARDER connects ? either they are the same or pac's are harder


and 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.

miron's was not a truly BRILLIANT post. It is impossibly easy to argue against because the fact that people score rounds differently does nothing but confirm the unbiased objective way in which 5 people struggled to award Pacquiao any more than 5 rounds and 3 people gave him only 4 rounds and one person 3. Witnesses to a crime rarely describe the scene in exactly the same way but will often all describe the same offence and in this case it was a robbery.

haha.. Greenbeanz done owned a whole army..swatting down foos left and right..

Good work..

[Fenster]

and 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.

miron's was not a truly BRILLIANT post. It is impossibly easy to argue against because the fact that people score rounds differently does nothing but confirm the unbiased objective way in which 5 people struggled to award Pacquiao any more than 5 rounds and 3 people gave him only 4 rounds and one person 3. Witnesses to a crime rarely describe the scene in exactly the same way but will often all describe the same offence and in this case it was a robbery.

For the millionth time - Judges score round by round. They have to hand in a score at the end of each and every round.

If the fans, that all scored it for Marquez, can't agree on precisely what rounds he won then how can it be a robbery? What have the judges done wrong? The rounds were clearly ambiguous!!! Unclear!!! Not obvious or definite!!!

For it to be a robbery everyone needs to agree on the majority of rounds. If you have people giving Pac all sorts of rounds then it's possible some people will have him winning the fight. And that includes the judges. Simple as. Marquez was just unlucky not to get the decision. That's it.

(brilliant post by miron_lang. Fact.)

[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.

[Fenster]

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...

[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.

[Fenster]

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.

[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.