Was a ROBBERY Please look :D

[Beanz]

[chris6878]

Now it's just getting sad. It's to the point now that people are saying PAC didn't land a fuckingnpunch.

[Beanz]

NOBODY...NOBODY said pac didn't land a punch.

How did you score Pac/Marquez 3?

the thread quoted to support the NOT a robbery please look thread has received only 716 views despite being quoted as the reason for the NOT a robbery post. Whilst the NOT a robbery post itself has recieved 2270 views! So the misinformation pedalled is making a sad situation sadder. To the point where now people are accusing anyone who thought Marquez won as being obsessive JMM worshipers. It is sad that people who had not watched the fight would have their crackpot opinions given more importance than the original opinions of people who took the time to not only watch the fight but then go through it again and score it. This is not a lets have a pop at Pacqiao thread it is a plea for sanity from a fan of Boxing. The judges decision is not going to be overturned but lets not let the measured opinion of decent fight fans who saw a clear injustice be rubbished by the ignorant few who seek to twist their views and then get congratulated for it by a forum moderator.

[:::PSL:::]

Okay. I think it's time for you to clean your crack pipe home skillet

[miron_lang]

Just finished the fight again


JMM has ROUNDS 5 and 7 as TOTALLY his. If you have any other round that you think were CLEARLY a MARQUEZ round please tell me.



You have it as 116-112 Marquez and you say its a robbery?

[Gandalf]

Manny did not look to be outlanding Marquez to any obvious degree though and it was clear who landed the more telling blows throughout.

And I debunk compubox, clearly they are in with Arum, the judges and HBO in being completely biased. The post fight outrage speaks for itself.

Manny walked away after the final bell looking like a broken man, the crowd booed the result in a way we haven't seen since forever, forum polls show Marquez dominating as the favoured winner. The Manny won camp boils down to Lederman, the judges and half a dozen diehards scattered over the internet.

The fix was in and the powers that be robbed the man who once again outboxed the poster boy.

[Fenster]

I'll send you a signed photo if you like?

I'm not arrogant enough to believe my scorecard is 100% bombproof definitive. I accept scoring fights is open to interpretation. It's subjective.

It was utterly IRRELEVANT whether or not miron_lang had seen the fight. His post highlighted a contradiction in peoples scorecards. It was a great expose on the hypocrisy of "robberies" in boxing. His idea could be put to use on all the robbery claims over the years, the fact it was this bout is irrelevant.

So, unless you believe your opinion is far superior to anyone elses (like Miles ), then it should be perfectly reasonable to accept people interpeted a fight different. Simple as that.

[generalbulldog]

I'll send you a signed photo if you like?

I'm not arrogant enough to believe my scorecard is 100% bombproof definitive. I accept scoring fights is open to interpretation. It's subjective.

It was utterly IRRELEVANT whether or not miron_lang had seen the fight. His post highlighted a contradiction in peoples scorecards. It was a great expose on the hypocrisy of "robberies" in boxing. His idea could be put to use on all the robbery claims over the years, the fact it was this bout is irrelevant.

So, unless you believe your opinion is far superior to anyone elses (like Miles ), then it should be perfectly reasonable to accept people interpeted a fight different. Simple as that.

[Beanz]

I'll send you a signed photo if you like?

I'm not arrogant enough to believe my scorecard is 100% bombproof definitive. I accept scoring fights is open to interpretation. It's subjective.

It was utterly IRRELEVANT whether or not miron_lang had seen the fight. His post highlighted a contradiction in peoples scorecards. It was a great expose on the hypocrisy of "robberies" in boxing. His idea could be put to use on all the robbery claims over the years, the fact it was this bout is irrelevant.

So, unless you believe your opinion is far superior to anyone elses (like Miles ), then it should be perfectly reasonable to accept people interpeted a fight different. Simple as that.

It was not IRRELEVANT whether miron_lang had seen the fight. His post called out all those people who thought they had witnessed a robbery and then used a very flawed piece of naive statistical analysis to propagate his massively prejudiced views. Imagine a crime occurring and being captured on cctv, people witness it and there is video evidence available, but before watching the cctv footage you start to question peoples interpretation of it and call into question the crime occuring at all. The only people who believe their opinion is far superior to anyone else, are those who draw conclusions without examining the evidence first hand. How was it a great expose on the hypocrisy of "robberies" in boxing. Great exposé's draw together numerous threads from extensive research to make irrefutable points. The fact that there is a contradiction in the scorecards of the super 5 is not a supporting fact for your argument at all, if anything it undermines your hypothesis. Judges scorecards very rarely tally exactly round for round, the discrepancy proves that the super 5 were being honest in their interpretation and no collusion has occurred.Not agreeing on rounds is minutiae, small and trivial compared to the overriding FACT that they all had JMM as a clear winner. If you used the idea that 5 separate people would have to agree round for round on the scoring of individual exact rounds before any decision could be questioned it would mean Judges have never ever have been corrupt, inept or flawed ever. It is only when 5 scorecards are identical round for round that you can then question their authenticity.Even the crackpot judging ringside by the official judges was not identical round for round.You are quite right people interpret a fight differently, so why is it using your own logic you can not see that the super 5's different interpretation of rounds won does nothing to undermine their conclusion that JMM won a fight erroneously awarded to Manny Pacquiao ? the only people suggesting mine or Miles's opinion is far superior to anyone else is you.You can discount both of our opinions and the overwhelming evidence of a ROBBERY will still be there. Simple as that, and yes a signed photo would be lovely