The WBO review cards by 5 Int judges are in.

[ElTerribleMorales]

so even with the 5 different judges they only agreed that 5 of the 12 rounds were clearly Pacquiao's?! if anything they justified the decision rather than discredited it

[InTheNeutralCorner]

so even with the 5 different judges they only agreed that 5 of the 12 rounds were clearly Pacquiao's?! if anything they justified the decision rather than discredited it

Also out of curiosity, what is now your take on the Pacquiao-Marquez III fight?

I recall that your round by round score for that fight also did not agree with the rest who claim that fight is a robbery yet you still insisted that is a robbery. Did it change now?

[ElTerribleMorales]

so even with the 5 different judges they only agreed that 5 of the 12 rounds were clearly Pacquiao's?! if anything they justified the decision rather than discredited it

Also out of curiosity, what is now your take on the Pacquiao-Marquez III fight?

I recall that your round by round score for that fight also did not agree with the rest who claim that fight is a robbery yet you still insisted that is a robbery. Did it change now?

I still have Marquez winning all 3 fights, the 3rd one the clearest of them all, I had Pacquiao beating Bradley as well just in case you're trying to kick up dust

[fan johnny]

so even with the 5 different judges they only agreed that 5 of the 12 rounds were clearly Pacquiao's?! if anything they justified the decision rather than discredited it

That's just stupid! How many rounds were clear for Bradley? You have to compare apples to apples. The justification is 5 clear rounds Pacquiao and 1 clear round for Bradley. You would have a better case scoring it 43/17.

[ElTerribleMorales]

so even with the 5 different judges they only agreed that 5 of the 12 rounds were clearly Pacquiao's?! if anything they justified the decision rather than discredited it

That's just stupid! How many rounds were clear for Bradley? You have to compare apples to apples. The justification is 5 clear rounds Pacquiao and 1 clear round for Bradley. You would have a better case scoring it 43/17.

you say this now but it's the same argument that was used to justify Marquez/Pacquiao III in Manny's favor

[fan johnny]

so even with the 5 different judges they only agreed that 5 of the 12 rounds were clearly Pacquiao's?! if anything they justified the decision rather than discredited it

That's just stupid! How many rounds were clear for Bradley? You have to compare apples to apples. The justification is 5 clear rounds Pacquiao and 1 clear round for Bradley. You would have a better case scoring it 43/17.

you say this now but it's the same argument that was used to justify Marquez/Pacquiao III in Manny's favor

Huh? Look, Pacquiao lost against Bradley same as Marqez lost against Chris John. The better fighter lost on points because he didn't do enough to get the win in the Judges eyes. They both got complacent/lazy whatever you want to call it and left the results to chance. Fighters can't do that and expect to get the sympathy vote, because they are the better figghter. Bradley had the best corner man shouting at him when he needed the motivation. "We're in a fuck'n fight! forget about your funk'n foot"

[Violent Demise]

so even with the 5 different judges they only agreed that 5 of the 12 rounds were clearly Pacquiao's?! if anything they justified the decision rather than discredited it

That's just stupid! How many rounds were clear for Bradley? You have to compare apples to apples. The justification is 5 clear rounds Pacquiao and 1 clear round for Bradley. You would have a better case scoring it 43/17.

you say this now but it's the same argument that was used to justify Marquez/Pacquiao III in Manny's favor

Huh? Look, Pacquiao lost against Bradley same as Marqez lost against Chris John. The better fighter lost on points because he didn't do enough to get the win in the Judges eyes. They both got complacent/lazy whatever you want to call it and left the results to chance. Fighters can't do that and expect to get the sympathy vote, because they are the better figghter. Bradley had the best corner man shouting at him when he needed the motivation. "We're in a fuck'n fight! forget about your funk'n foot"

You can't compare Marquez shameful robbery loss to John to Bradley-Pacquiao. Pacquiao didn't have numerous bullshit points deducted against him like Marquez had against John.

[InTheNeutralCorner]

so even with the 5 different judges they only agreed that 5 of the 12 rounds were clearly Pacquiao's?! if anything they justified the decision rather than discredited it

That's just stupid! How many rounds were clear for Bradley? You have to compare apples to apples. The justification is 5 clear rounds Pacquiao and 1 clear round for Bradley. You would have a better case scoring it 43/17.

you say this now but it's the same argument that was used to justify Marquez/Pacquiao III in Manny's favor

Huh? Look, Pacquiao lost against Bradley same as Marqez lost against Chris John. The better fighter lost on points because he didn't do enough to get the win in the Judges eyes. They both got complacent/lazy whatever you want to call it and left the results to chance. Fighters can't do that and expect to get the sympathy vote, because they are the better figghter. Bradley had the best corner man shouting at him when he needed the motivation. "We're in a fuck'n fight! forget about your funk'n foot"

You can't compare Marquez shameful robbery loss to John to Bradley-Pacquiao. Pacquiao didn't have numerous bullshit points deducted against him like Marquez had against John.

What are those bullshit points that were deducted and are they part of boxing?

[fan johnny]

so even with the 5 different judges they only agreed that 5 of the 12 rounds were clearly Pacquiao's?! if anything they justified the decision rather than discredited it

That's just stupid! How many rounds were clear for Bradley? You have to compare apples to apples. The justification is 5 clear rounds Pacquiao and 1 clear round for Bradley. You would have a better case scoring it 43/17.

you say this now but it's the same argument that was used to justify Marquez/Pacquiao III in Manny's favor

Huh? Look, Pacquiao lost against Bradley same as Marqez lost against Chris John. The better fighter lost on points because he didn't do enough to get the win in the Judges eyes. They both got complacent/lazy whatever you want to call it and left the results to chance. Fighters can't do that and expect to get the sympathy vote, because they are the better fighter. Bradley had the best corner man shouting at him when he needed the motivation. "We're in a fuck'n fight! forget about your funk'n foot"

You can't compare Marquez shameful robbery loss to John to Bradley-Pacquiao. Pacquiao didn't have numerous bullshit points deducted against him like Marquez had against John.

You missed the point completely. The comparison is not about an "opinion" of who won the fight. That was just a simple statement of historical fact. It has noting to do with my opinion. Marquez lost to John just as Pacquiao lost to Bradley.

The point was neither fighter did enough to secure the win as a result left the fight up to a subject perspective. Both Pacquiao and Marquez got complacent and that is what ultimately lead to their loss. i.e they both thought they did enough to get the win. Pacquiao started coasting whether it was to give the fans a show, he got lazy, or thought he was ahead. It was in fact too little an effort to get two of the judges votes.

[GOAT]

Crooked compu-box, corrupted judges, faked review-cards, counting phantom-punches,......

What's next

[InTheNeutralCorner]

Does anyone know which version of the fight these international judges watched and was it with volumes on?

[InTheNeutralCorner]

so even with the 5 different judges they only agreed that 5 of the 12 rounds were clearly Pacquiao's?! if anything they justified the decision rather than discredited it

That's just stupid! How many rounds were clear for Bradley? You have to compare apples to apples. The justification is 5 clear rounds Pacquiao and 1 clear round for Bradley. You would have a better case scoring it 43/17.

you say this now but it's the same argument that was used to justify Marquez/Pacquiao III in Manny's favor

Does this mean that you now agree that the judges could have been justified in scoring 2 of those fights for Pacquiao against Marquez?

[IamInuit]

so even with the 5 different judges they only agreed that 5 of the 12 rounds were clearly Pacquiao's?! if anything they justified the decision rather than discredited it

Only 1 of the 5 had it 7 to 5 for Manny and the rest had it a wash with9-3 twice and a 10-2 with one 8-4 all 5 for Manny.

Not how this confuses things? According to 4 of the 5 judges Manny kicked his ass. All 5 had him winning.

[TitoFan]

so even with the 5 different judges they only agreed that 5 of the 12 rounds were clearly Pacquiao's?! if anything they justified the decision rather than discredited it

I think you're twisting the meaning a little bit.

FACT: The more judges you have, the higher the probability that you will have at least one dissenting vote. Statistics.

The fact that 5 out of 5 judges gave Pac 5 rounds unanimously speaks volumes about the bad decision made by the 3 offical judges. You neglect to mention that in TWO other rounds, only 1 judge gave Bradley the round. That is STILL 4 out of 5 in favor of Pacquiao. Add those 2 rounds to the unanimous rounds, and you still have a clear victory in favor of Pacquiao.

Statistics always lend themselves to interpretation by way of convenience, but your claim that the 5 judges "justified" the official decision is unfounded.

[ElTerribleMorales]

so even with the 5 different judges they only agreed that 5 of the 12 rounds were clearly Pacquiao's?! if anything they justified the decision rather than discredited it

I think you're twisting the meaning a little bit.

FACT: The more judges you have, the higher the probability that you will have at least one dissenting vote. Statistics.

The fact that 5 out of 5 judges gave Pac 5 rounds unanimously speaks volumes about the bad decision made by the 3 offical judges. You neglect to mention that in TWO other rounds, only 1 judge gave Bradley the round. That is STILL 4 out of 5 in favor of Pacquiao. Add those 2 rounds to the unanimous rounds, and you still have a clear victory in favor of Pacquiao.

Statistics always lend themselves to interpretation by way of convenience, but your claim that the 5 judges "justified" the official decision is unfounded.

that flips both ways, all I take from those "stats" is that 7 rounds were up for grabs and 5 judges still struggled with who to give them to flip flopping between both fighters meaning it could have just as easily gone to Bradley, 5 judges couldn't agree who took those 7 so it's far from impossible that 3 would do the same not too complicated