Was a ROBBERY Please look :D

[Fenster]

Jesus fucking Christ!!!

I give up. OK It was a robbery. The judges were corrupt. Marquez clearly won. Happy? (even though no-one could agree on who won what fucking rounds )

For a fiver, I'll throw in a signed poster too

[Gandalf]

You thought he won the fight too, Fenster. And so you must be added to the list of 135, 634, 963 others who thought so too. The Manny won camp still stays at the 2 judges, HBO, Miron Lang and PSL. Oh, and Compubox who is now dead. Nothing more than a numerical Goebbel's exercise as far as I am concerned.

[Fenster]

Some respected boxing writers scored it for Pac too. And lots had it a draw.

I know, I know, they are obviously corrupt/inept/thick. They should all be sacked and never allowed to watch boxing again. Or better still horse whipped to death. How could anyone possibly have got such a clear-cut, and in no way ambiguous fight so wrong.

[Gandalf]

Some respected boxing writers scored it for Pac too. And lots had it a draw.

I know, I know, they are obviously corrupt/inept/thick. They should all be sacked and never allowed to watch boxing again. Or better still horse whipped to death.

I would like to see a long list of them all emerge as I recall in the wake of the second fight where Marquez seemed to be the dominant winner. I would be surprised if it wasn't the same here. And when I say dominant winner, I just mean the person with the most W's in the column.

[Fenster]

Some respected boxing writers scored it for Pac too. And lots had it a draw.

I know, I know, they are obviously corrupt/inept/thick. They should all be sacked and never allowed to watch boxing again. Or better still horse whipped to death.

I would like to see a long list of them all emerge as I recall in the wake of the second fight where Marquez seemed to be the dominant winner. I would be surprised if it wasn't the same here. And when I say dominant winner, I just mean the person with the most W's in the column.

Does it matter? It's not like you'd give their opinion any credit anyway

[Gandalf]

Some respected boxing writers scored it for Pac too. And lots had it a draw.

I know, I know, they are obviously corrupt/inept/thick. They should all be sacked and never allowed to watch boxing again. Or better still horse whipped to death.

I would like to see a long list of them all emerge as I recall in the wake of the second fight where Marquez seemed to be the dominant winner. I would be surprised if it wasn't the same here. And when I say dominant winner, I just mean the person with the most W's in the column.

Does it matter? It's not like you'd give their opinion any credit anyway

Agreed or not, I would be curious to see such a list and more so if their viewpoints went with them. I have my views, but I do read and listen too.

I don't just read a newspaper and take it at face value. You read it and then evaluate what you read.

It's the same with posters and fight reviews. I read every word, but it doesn't mean I need to agree with it all. But it's interesting nonetheless.

[Fenster]

Some respected boxing writers scored it for Pac too. And lots had it a draw.

I know, I know, they are obviously corrupt/inept/thick. They should all be sacked and never allowed to watch boxing again. Or better still horse whipped to death.

I would like to see a long list of them all emerge as I recall in the wake of the second fight where Marquez seemed to be the dominant winner. I would be surprised if it wasn't the same here. And when I say dominant winner, I just mean the person with the most W's in the column.

Does it matter? It's not like you'd give their opinion any credit anyway

Agreed or not, I would be curious to see such a list and more so if their viewpoints went with them. I have my views, but I do read and listen too.

I don't just read a newspaper and take it at face value. You read it and then evaluate what you read.

It's the same with posters and fight reviews. I read every word, but it doesn't mean I need to agree with it all. But it's interesting nonetheless.

Here you go then, here's Graham Houston's opinion, I've never seen anything other than total respect for this man in the boxing business -

NO CLOSURE: Manny Pacquiao W12 (maj.) Juan Manuel Marquez

Clearly though he doesn't understand boxing and his opinion is utterly worthless. How could he possibly think it wasn't a robbery. Shocking.

[Beanz]

Some respected boxing writers scored it for Pac too. And lots had it a draw.

I know, I know, they are obviously corrupt/inept/thick. They should all be sacked and never allowed to watch boxing again. Or better still horse whipped to death. How could anyone possibly have got such a clear-cut, and in no way ambiguous fight so wrong.

Your right Daniel Herbert in today's Boxing News had it as a draw but even he acknowledges most writers ringside had it as a win for Marquez. This is not the first time the judging ability of Trowbridge has been questioned and it would be a start if he was not used in future when so many of his scorecards are so at odds with reality.8 rounds to 4 for JMM seems to be the average consensus. It is a little sad that youtube is now full of people not happy with Manny's win being questioned, asserting that Juan is a cheat who used headbutts, footstomping and steroids to even win the few rounds they begrudgingly acknowledge him ! It was a very competitive fight albeit a fight clearly dominated by an accurate counter punching underdog who smashed open the doors to the BHOF on this his career defining fight, only for the bottom to drop out of his world on the announcement of his vanquished and clearly demoralised foe being awarded the decision.

[Fenster]

Some respected boxing writers scored it for Pac too. And lots had it a draw.

I know, I know, they are obviously corrupt/inept/thick. They should all be sacked and never allowed to watch boxing again. Or better still horse whipped to death. How could anyone possibly have got such a clear-cut, and in no way ambiguous fight so wrong.

Your right Daniel Herbert in today's Boxing News had it as a draw but even he acknowledges most writers ringside had it as a win for Marquez. This is not the first time the judging ability of Trowbridge has been questioned and it would be a start if he was not used in future when so many of his scorecards are so at odds with reality.8 rounds to 4 for JMM seems to be the average consensus. It is a little sad that youtube is now full of people not happy with Manny's win being questioned, asserting that Juan is a cheat who used headbutts, footstomping and steroids to even win the few rounds they begrudgingly acknowledge him ! It was a very competitive fight albeit a fight clearly dominated by an accurate counter punching underdog who smashed open the doors to the BHOF on this his career defining fight, only for the bottom to drop out of his world on the announcement of his vanquished and clearly demoralised foe being awarded the decision.

So how come he didn't think it was a robbery?

[Beanz]

Some respected boxing writers scored it for Pac too. And lots had it a draw.

I know, I know, they are obviously corrupt/inept/thick. They should all be sacked and never allowed to watch boxing again. Or better still horse whipped to death. How could anyone possibly have got such a clear-cut, and in no way ambiguous fight so wrong.

Your right Daniel Herbert in today's Boxing News had it as a draw but even he acknowledges most writers ringside had it as a win for Marquez. This is not the first time the judging ability of Trowbridge has been questioned and it would be a start if he was not used in future when so many of his scorecards are so at odds with reality.8 rounds to 4 for JMM seems to be the average consensus. It is a little sad that youtube is now full of people not happy with Manny's win being questioned, asserting that Juan is a cheat who used headbutts, footstomping and steroids to even win the few rounds they begrudgingly acknowledge him ! It was a very competitive fight albeit a fight clearly dominated by an accurate counter punching underdog who smashed open the doors to the BHOF on this his career defining fight, only for the bottom to drop out of his world on the announcement of his vanquished and clearly demoralised foe being awarded the decision.

So how come he didn't think it was a robbery?

Because he has a different opinion to the Majority of writers to which he is entitled. He points out Pacquiao's lack of a consistent weapon and the fact that he was seemingly mesmerised by Marquez's timing and distance, with Manny just following him around and even backing off in the ninth, he then gives Pacquiao all three final rounds which seems to be a little generous and would account for his draw scorecard giving
JMM
1
3
5
7
8
9
MP
2
4
6
10
11
12

Ron Borges scored it 117-111 for JMM, Thomas Hauser 116-113 for JMM, Lance Pugmire 115-113 for JMM, Bob Velin 115-113 for JMM, Ed Grainey 115-113 for JMM,Matthew Aguilar 115-112 for JMM and the Wall Steet Journal ?! 115-113 for JMM.

So Herbert was unusual in scoring a draw. I am interested to see what Hugh Mcillvaney says if he is well enough to comment in the Times on Sunday. He is always objective and IMO possibly the greatest boxing writer alive.