Anybody think Pac has lost 5 fights and JMM has only lost 1??

[killersheep]

Because half of the people in latin america have spanish decent ? Are you kidding me !!!!! Are any of you aware of the large number of Japanese, Chinese, Portuguese, German, Lebanese and Jewish people in Latin America...... Then Filipinos are also Spanish or one could argue Chinese base on their cultural influence. Seems the majority of the people in here are unable to distinguish the difference between race and ethnicity.

Race is something you're born with an ethnicity is what your culture is. Like your race could be Chinese and your ethnicity could be American if you were born in America.

So how are Mexicans Spanish?

Let me educate you:

Mexican! Not Latino, Latinos are the white people of Latin America.
........... Not Hispanic, Hispanics are the people of Spain, European.

Mexicans are indigenous people! They are not white! So do not promote the cultural castration the their people!


To people of the USA, they are not foreigners to the land.


Mexican people of today are primarily a mixed blood and / or full blooded Indigenous people.

92% of the the so called Hispanics in Atzlan (the Southwestern USA) are people of Mexican descent. Not foreigners or minorities as generally labeled. They are also 71% of the so-called Hispanics/Latinos in the USA as a whole. So how wrong are you to call anyone in Latin America Spanish ? I say educate yourself before you make comments you know very little of and we are to believe you know anything about boxing?

Anyone of any color born in Mexico is viewed as a Mexican, ( This applies to most countries in Latin America) they are not race grouping individuals like people of the USA and their forefathers from Europe!

Study anthropology, you can't educate me on this. There are virtually no true north american natives left in mexico except in secluded groups. The indeginous population was almost totally eradicated in mexico and the carribean islands. I've taken up to 400 level meso-american anthropology courses.

As for the culture, there is no north american culture that has been more assimilated by European people than the Mexican culture. Their religion is European, they beliefs are European. Once again out of all the partially aboriginal people, how many still believe in the Aztec gods? Many have reclaimed their culture for financial purposes, but still the majority of mexicans are christians who abide by the bibles' laws.

I am not trying to say Mexican haven't developed their own culture, but its more tied into their spanish ancestry than it is into their Mayan or Aztec ancesty.

So because you've taken courses on it you know more about Mexico than Mexicans? WTF are you talking about anyway, you start off by making a statement that implies you discount anyones score because of their heritage. This further implies that an entire culture of people are unable to objectively score a fight. You further go on to say, it is impossible to go against your scoring beacause only your score is right. Would you deny there were enough swing rounds to give both fights to either fighter?

[Nameless]

These 2 fights are a bit hard to score, per moment. Personally, I would say a fight for Marquez and the other one for PAcman but both were very tight fights and some rounds are absolutely hell to judge, really. No matter who really won what, these were 2 extremely competitive bouts and there would be space for another one while JMM isn't too old. 2010? LEt's hope for it

[Deanrw]

Both fights were disputable. Both fights could have gone either way. JMM is a beast and so is Manny.

I am a huge fan of both of them. My scores of the fight do not exactly match the official scores, but I'll be dammed if I will argue with them. Too close to call and it is purely subjective.

What I do know is that they are so evenly matched, that both of them have the ability to bring out the best and worst in each other.

[blegit]

Whew! This post sure went into some dangerous territory. I think people know that either way on either fight that there were so many close rounds that a decision favoring JMM would have caused just as much controversy. Anyone who says that JMM couldn't have been the victor in either fight is in denial. You can not discount people's opinions in a close fight because we all see and favor different things. I personally thought JMM won both fights and I am black. Race has nothing to do with who thought JMM won. I have no problem with Pac being the winner in the 2nd fight because it was close. I actually think he won the 2nd clearer and the 1st was cloudy. But there were no robberies. And it is impossible to score rounds punch by punch because the round has to be judged as a whole. Every punch is different, how they land, effectiveness, etc. They are not field goals. This is not the amateur system. There would be too many variables and even more opinions mixed in. Yes, JMM could be without those blemishes on his record but this is boxing and wins and losses decisions are made on 3 people's opinions...although sometimes shady.

[Taeth]

Because half of the people in latin america have spanish decent ? Are you kidding me !!!!! Are any of you aware of the large number of Japanese, Chinese, Portuguese, German, Lebanese and Jewish people in Latin America...... Then Filipinos are also Spanish or one could argue Chinese base on their cultural influence. Seems the majority of the people in here are unable to distinguish the difference between race and ethnicity.

Race is something you're born with an ethnicity is what your culture is. Like your race could be Chinese and your ethnicity could be American if you were born in America.

So how are Mexicans Spanish?

Let me educate you:

Mexican! Not Latino, Latinos are the white people of Latin America.
........... Not Hispanic, Hispanics are the people of Spain, European.

Mexicans are indigenous people! They are not white! So do not promote the cultural castration the their people!


To people of the USA, they are not foreigners to the land.


Mexican people of today are primarily a mixed blood and / or full blooded Indigenous people.

92% of the the so called Hispanics in Atzlan (the Southwestern USA) are people of Mexican descent. Not foreigners or minorities as generally labeled. They are also 71% of the so-called Hispanics/Latinos in the USA as a whole. So how wrong are you to call anyone in Latin America Spanish ? I say educate yourself before you make comments you know very little of and we are to believe you know anything about boxing?

Anyone of any color born in Mexico is viewed as a Mexican, ( This applies to most countries in Latin America) they are not race grouping individuals like people of the USA and their forefathers from Europe!

Study anthropology, you can't educate me on this. There are virtually no true north american natives left in mexico except in secluded groups. The indeginous population was almost totally eradicated in mexico and the carribean islands. I've taken up to 400 level meso-american anthropology courses.

As for the culture, there is no north american culture that has been more assimilated by European people than the Mexican culture. Their religion is European, they beliefs are European. Once again out of all the partially aboriginal people, how many still believe in the Aztec gods? Many have reclaimed their culture for financial purposes, but still the majority of mexicans are christians who abide by the bibles' laws.

I am not trying to say Mexican haven't developed their own culture, but its more tied into their spanish ancestry than it is into their Mayan or Aztec ancesty.

So because you've taken courses on it you know more about Mexico than Mexicans? WTF are you talking about anyway, you start off by making a statement that implies you discount anyones score because of their heritage. This further implies that an entire culture of people are unable to objectively score a fight. You further go on to say, it is impossible to go against your scoring beacause only your score is right. Would you deny there were enough swing rounds to give both fights to either fighter?

I know more about Mexicans than people that haven't studied it at all, and listen to folk tales from their parents. Who would know more about the history of Canada, me or somebody from Mexico who studied Canadian History? Obviously they would. I deny 115-112 for Marquez absolutely. I also deny that there were enough swing rounds in this fight, I think each round decisively indicated who won in this fight even though there were close rounds on both sides. Round 1 Pacquiao doubled the punches landed by Marquez, and sure Marquez had the one hardest punch, Pacquiao landed a punch almost as cleanly in return, plus multiple crosses to the body. The eleventh round was one of Pacquiao stronger rounds and people somehow give it to Marquez. And I've already stated that I was wrong stating what I did about only Mexican's thinking Marquez won, I was being brash and most people that did support Marquez winning had been Mexican. IMO its like saying most people that thought Calzaghe won against Hopkins are brits, is that such a racial travesty? Obviously I am overgeneralizing, but does not everyone do it on here? I say my scoring is right because I don't think anyone watches and rewatches fights as much as I do on here(except ICB). Also its not about I am only right, I am having a real debate where you are free to disprove through fact or evidence what I am saying. People on here seem to think I just say your stupid, I am right, your wrong. Thats not what I am doing, I debate these things and obviously in presenting an arguement you believe in, unless its educational, its beneficial to fully emerse yourself into your beliefs. If people actually broke down the fight, or more importantly key round in such a way that came across convincingly I would understand their logic. When people give Marquez 115-112 scorecard, where the fuck did that come from? How the hell did he win 4 more rounds than Pacquiao? This fight was like Hatton-Collazo it was a back and forth affair, not close every round. Pacquiao clearly won his rounds and Marquez clearly won his rounds. The closest thing I could see Marquez getting to a win is a draw in the second fight. IMO giving him both the 1st and 11th round is biased because he truly deserved neither of them.

The thing I was arguing about Mexican heritage is a completely different subject where people have no idea what they are talking about, are trying to educate me about what happened because thats their cultural background without the actual research into what happened.

[Addicted to_boxing]

Study anthropology, you can't educate me on this. There are virtually no true north american natives left in mexico except in secluded groups. The indeginous population was almost totally eradicated in mexico and the carribean islands. I've taken up to 400 level meso-american anthropology courses.

As for the culture, there is no north american culture that has been more assimilated by European people than the Mexican culture. Their religion is European, they beliefs are European. Once again out of all the partially aboriginal people, how many still believe in the Aztec gods? Many have reclaimed their culture for financial purposes, but still the majority of mexicans are christians who abide by the bibles' laws.

I am not trying to say Mexican haven't developed their own culture, but its more tied into their spanish ancestry than it is into their Mayan or Aztec ancesty.

So because you've taken courses on it you know more about Mexico than Mexicans? WTF are you talking about anyway, you start off by making a statement that implies you discount anyones score because of their heritage. This further implies that an entire culture of people are unable to objectively score a fight. You further go on to say, it is impossible to go against your scoring beacause only your score is right. Would you deny there were enough swing rounds to give both fights to either fighter?

I know more about Mexicans than people that haven't studied it at all, and listen to folk tales from their parents. Who would know more about the history of Canada, me or somebody from Mexico who studied Canadian History? Obviously they would. I deny 115-112 for Marquez absolutely. I also deny that there were enough swing rounds in this fight, I think each round decisively indicated who won in this fight even though there were close rounds on both sides. Round 1 Pacquiao doubled the punches landed by Marquez, and sure Marquez had the one hardest punch, Pacquiao landed a punch almost as cleanly in return, plus multiple crosses to the body. The eleventh round was one of Pacquiao stronger rounds and people somehow give it to Marquez. And I've already stated that I was wrong stating what I did about only Mexican's thinking Marquez won, I was being brash and most people that did support Marquez winning had been Mexican. IMO its like saying most people that thought Calzaghe won against Hopkins are brits, is that such a racial travesty? Obviously I am overgeneralizing, but does not everyone do it on here? I say my scoring is right because I don't think anyone watches and rewatches fights as much as I do on here(except ICB). Also its not about I am only right, I am having a real debate where you are free to disprove through fact or evidence what I am saying. People on here seem to think I just say your stupid, I am right, your wrong. Thats not what I am doing, I debate these things and obviously in presenting an arguement you believe in, unless its educational, its beneficial to fully emerse yourself into your beliefs. If people actually broke down the fight, or more importantly key round in such a way that came across convincingly I would understand their logic. When people give Marquez 115-112 scorecard, where the fuck did that come from? How the hell did he win 4 more rounds than Pacquiao? This fight was like Hatton-Collazo it was a back and forth affair, not close every round. Pacquiao clearly won his rounds and Marquez clearly won his rounds. The closest thing I could see Marquez getting to a win is a draw in the second fight. IMO giving him both the 1st and 11th round is biased because he truly deserved neither of them.

The thing I was arguing about Mexican heritage is a completely different subject where people have no idea what they are talking about, are trying to educate me about what happened because thats their cultural background without the actual research into what happened.

Well all I can say is I hope you paid off all your student loans because your instructors are full of shit. You are trying to tell a Mexican he is Spanish. 2nd of all we are not Christians for the most part we are Catholics, Changing religion does not change your heritage only your culture. What your instructor failed to teach you is that no one in Latin America accepts being called Spanish because they are not !!! Try this shit next time you are in Mexico and see how fasrfast you get your ass kicked. Mexicans had exposure to Spanish ways but that does/ did not change their physical make up. What you are saying is the equivelant to saying all cultures having exposure to Coca Cola and that now drink it are now Americans ..... And all your classroom follies do not equate to my flowing Mexican Blood and 35 years of traveling throughout the AMERICAS 75-125 days a year.

Books lie and are nothing more than an authors interpretation and are not factual ( are books not edited? ) Try reading an American History book and then read a Mexican history book and you will see they have radical vast different stories as to how the Mexican territory became property of the USA.

So all Mexicans should be schooled abroad by your instructors? Contrary to your studies there are 62 indigenous peoples/ tribes living in Mexico protected by the constitution and still practicing old beliefs and non Spanish speaking

[BIG H]

Can you be p4p number 1 if you are 10-3 for the last 5 years?

[OumaFan]

Considering the competition sure. But he's not 10-3 Bernard actually is 10-3 over his last 13 and he's thought of as top five.

I personally think Bernard should be 12-1 with a close decision loss to a hall of famer but both Taylor fights were close enough to where you can't say he was robbed (the second was bullshit though IMO ) so he's 10-3. Same with Pac. I thought he edged both JMM fights but you don't have to work that hard to convince me he didn't. And I wasn't even a big fan then, I only became a big fan for the most part because I'm a contrarian and all the ridiculous hate started to annoy me.