Final thoughts on Pac-JMM III

[Beanz]

A clear win for Marquez. Pac defenders and money-hungry promoters insist it was a close fight, but the majority of boxing fans agree that it was a robbery. Not at all a domination, but a clear decision win for Marquez. It's sad that corruption exists at this level of boxing.

I suspected that you were bias when you started that thread on 'Authenticity in broadcasting .....' with the way you responded to a comment and this confirms it.

Not at all a domination by EITHER fighter.

I started this thread for everyone to post some "civil" final thoughts on Pac-JMM III, BranMan is trying to hijack the thread and turn it into a pissing contest, he needs to fuck off.

How very civil of you to call anyone with a view that doesn't match your own as an asshole and then tell them to fuck off. How laughable for InThe NeutralCorner to suspect bias in Branman and not recognise it in himself or the loony views of PSL. It may comfort you to think that you know more about boxing than those on this forum that think Marquez scored a clear decision win over Paqciao , but you should also remember that view is shared by George Foreman, Mike Tyson, Oscar de La Hoya, Steve Cunningham, Marvin Hagler, Zab Judah, Joe Calzaghe,Paulie Malinaggi,Andre Berto, Andre Dirrell, Darren Barker, Julio Cesar Chavez, Andre Ward, Jean Pascal etc, etc, etc. People are entitled to their opinions and correct me if i am wrong but i thought that threads are started to generate an open and honest discussion, not to reflect the view of the Opening Poster and dismiss all others. My final thoughts ? Juan Manuel Marquez did more than enough to win decisively and set Manny up all night, Manny could or would not evolve and his inability to change cost him dearly.Pacquiao was angry and that out of character loss of concentration was capitalised on by Marquez who anticipated his punches and boxed beautifully. The judges present awarded him the fight but Manny lost a lot that night, a seeming air of invincibility, and the respect of a lot of people with the insistence post fight it was a clear win, when he clearly thought otherwise as shown by his demeanour in the ring.

I was hoping to go through all the names that you wrote above to verify the veracity of your claim. It took me a while to find out about the first on your list, George Foreman, and this is what i got.

Pacquiao-Marquez Fight analysis as tweeted by boxing experts | Features | Techie.com.ph

..... wherein he tweeted that 'Marquez did enough to keep a title; not enough to take the title'. This does not seem like an endorsement of a 'clear victory for Marquez'.

If your claim on the first on your list is inaccurate, I suspect that applies to the rest in that list. Unfortunately, I don't have time to check on all of them. You presented your case above, back it up with links.

Oh God here we go again. Ok so George Foreman was not a great choice to head the list, although even he acknowledges Marquez bar the "must clearly beat the shit out of the title holder" theory, i stupidly included him and Tyson because i had just watched
http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...1-17-11-a.html. The others are all there for you to verify on twitter with Zab Judah, Steve Cunningham and the great Marvin Hagler going way beyond clear victory and declaring robbery.

http://twitter.com/#!/themarvelous0ne

13 Nov
"Disgusting result! #ROBBERY!"
"Wake up people and realize that we can no longer tolerate corruption in our sport. There needs to be a primary governing body."

http://twitter.com/#!/SUPERJUDAH

13 Nov
"Robbery!!!!"

http://http://twitter.com/#!/usscunningham

13 Nov
"All pro fighters I know ,guys which know what to look 4 in a fight had jmm winning. It's not just entertainment to us its a #lifestyle#"
"Boxing is f#$ked up"

http://twitter.com/#!/realjoecalzaghe


13 Nov
"Just watched Marquez v Pacman and have to say thought Marquez was robbed! Thought he won the first 2 fights also!"

http://twitter.com/#!/jcchavezjr1

13 Nov
"Gano marquez hoy. Fue un robo juan manuel gano claramente. esto esto es malo para el boxeo. Saludo a todos"


"Marquez won today. It was a robbery juan manuel won clearly. This this is bad for boxing. Greeting to all"

I could go on but i don't want to hijack Mars's thread and "turn it into a pissing contest."
I didn't want to mention the R word but you both kinda forced my hand, so there you go.

Oh and Mars,

Looks like i'm the asshole hijacking this and turning it into a fucking whinefest about how Marquez, "clearly won the fight" but was robbed by a "Pactard" conspiracy...

I hope this helps..

[:::PSL:::]

A clear win for Marquez. Pac defenders and money-hungry promoters insist it was a close fight, but the majority of boxing fans agree that it was a robbery. Not at all a domination, but a clear decision win for Marquez. It's sad that corruption exists at this level of boxing.

I suspected that you were bias when you started that thread on 'Authenticity in broadcasting .....' with the way you responded to a comment and this confirms it.

Not at all a domination by EITHER fighter.

I started this thread for everyone to post some "civil" final thoughts on Pac-JMM III, BranMan is trying to hijack the thread and turn it into a pissing contest, he needs to fuck off.

How very civil of you to call anyone with a view that doesn't match your own as an asshole and then tell them to fuck off. How laughable for InThe NeutralCorner to suspect bias in Branman and not recognise it in himself or the loony views of PSL. It may comfort you to think that you know more about boxing than those on this forum that think Marquez scored a clear decision win over Paqciao , but you should also remember that view is shared by George Foreman, Mike Tyson, Oscar de La Hoya, Steve Cunningham, Marvin Hagler, Zab Judah, Joe Calzaghe,Paulie Malinaggi,Andre Berto, Andre Dirrell, Darren Barker, Julio Cesar Chavez, Andre Ward, Jean Pascal etc, etc, etc. People are entitled to their opinions and correct me if i am wrong but i thought that threads are started to generate an open and honest discussion, not to reflect the view of the Opening Poster and dismiss all others. My final thoughts ? Juan Manuel Marquez did more than enough to win decisively and set Manny up all night, Manny could or would not evolve and his inability to change cost him dearly.Pacquiao was angry and that out of character loss of concentration was capitalised on by Marquez who anticipated his punches and boxed beautifully. The judges present awarded him the fight but Manny lost a lot that night, a seeming air of invincibility, and the respect of a lot of people with the insistence post fight it was a clear win, when he clearly thought otherwise as shown by his demeanour in the ring.

I was hoping to go through all the names that you wrote above to verify the veracity of your claim. It took me a while to find out about the first on your list, George Foreman, and this is what i got.

Pacquiao-Marquez Fight analysis as tweeted by boxing experts | Features | Techie.com.ph

..... wherein he tweeted that 'Marquez did enough to keep a title; not enough to take the title'. This does not seem like an endorsement of a 'clear victory for Marquez'.

If your claim on the first on your list is inaccurate, I suspect that applies to the rest in that list. Unfortunately, I don't have time to check on all of them. You presented your case above, back it up with links.

Oh God here we go again. Ok so George Foreman was not a great choice to head the list, although even he acknowledges Marquez bar the "must clearly beat the shit out of the title holder" theory, i stupidly included him and Tyson because i had just watched
http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...1-17-11-a.html. The others are all there for you to verify on twitter with Zab Judah, Steve Cunningham and the great Marvin Hagler going way beyond clear victory and declaring robbery.

http://twitter.com/#!/themarvelous0ne

13 Nov
"Disgusting result! #ROBBERY!"
"Wake up people and realize that we can no longer tolerate corruption in our sport. There needs to be a primary governing body."

http://twitter.com/#!/SUPERJUDAH

13 Nov
"Robbery!!!!"

http://http://twitter.com/#!/usscunningham

13 Nov
"All pro fighters I know ,guys which know what to look 4 in a fight had jmm winning. It's not just entertainment to us its a #lifestyle#"
"Boxing is f#$ked up"

http://twitter.com/#!/realjoecalzaghe


13 Nov
"Just watched Marquez v Pacman and have to say thought Marquez was robbed! Thought he won the first 2 fights also!"

http://twitter.com/#!/jcchavezjr1

13 Nov
"Gano marquez hoy. Fue un robo juan manuel gano claramente. esto esto es malo para el boxeo. Saludo a todos"


"Marquez won today. It was a robbery juan manuel won clearly. This this is bad for boxing. Greeting to all"

I could go on but i don't want to hijack Mars's thread and "turn it into a pissing contest."
I didn't want to mention the R word but you both kinda forced my hand, so there you go.

But none of them couldn't really explain why robbery occured.

[Mars_ax]

Oh God here we go again. Ok so George Foreman was not a great choice to head the list, although even he acknowledges Marquez bar the "must clearly beat the shit out of the title holder" theory, i stupidly included him and Tyson because i had just watched

I could go on but i don't want to hijack Mars's thread and "turn it into a pissing contest."
I didn't want to mention the R word but you both kinda forced my hand, so there you go.

Oh and Mars,

Looks like i'm the asshole hijacking this and turning it into a fucking whinefest about how Marquez, "clearly won the fight" but was robbed by a "Pactard" conspiracy...

I hope this helps..

The nerve of you Greenbeanz! But you hijacked it with remarkable cleverness, stealth and cunning.