Quote Originally Posted by powerpuncher View Post
Quote Originally Posted by erics44 View Post
I also think words like robbery and a schoolling dont apply in the marquez pac fights because opinion is so divided

they were obviously all very close fights
being a close fight doesnt mean that it isnt a robbery. i thought that JMM won the third fight 116-112. on my scorecard, it was relatively close as in if there were 2 close rounds that i gave to JMM instead of pac, it created a JMM win instead of a draw. but the difference is that in that fight there were mostly clear winners for each round. their second fight had a lot more toss up rounds while the 1st and 3rd didnt.

for example, if during a 12 round fight, fighter #1 scored a KD in 7 of the 12 rounds and fighter #2 scored a KD in the other 5 rounds. lets assume that the KDs were clear and the person who got the kd was winning the round. so essentially, every round was a 10-8 round and in the end, the fight was close, but it would be a robbery if fighter #2 won because he clearly won 7 rounds. that is how i feel about their 3rd fight in particular. even though it wasnt a blowout, marquez clearly won at least 7 rounds which would make it a robbery if he didnt win the fight.
I agree if there was a fight like that then there could be a robbery, and I don't think there would be too much split opinion, I think most would agree

none of the pac marquez fights were, they were full of close rounds

perhaps I am swayed by the aggressor in fights I don't know, but in the third pac was on the front foot throughout and was pushing the fight, marquez most of the time was landing only because pac was pushing for it and committing and I don't think he was outlanding pac, his punches at times may have looked nicer because pac was coming on to them

eitherway the fight was definitely not a robbery and pac was definitely not schooled