Not a ROBBERY Please look :D

[CutMeMick]

No worries, next time...

[Pugilistic]

Pac's were harder. JMM is visibly shaken everytime. and Pac were almost on attack mode when receiving those blows while Marquez was always on defensive stance.

notice how most of the time Marquez were still back pedalling despite landing some combos.

==

Pac move forward when he lands and move forward when got tagged
JMM move backward when he lands and move backward when got tagged.


This has INFLUENCE on the judges as Many times been mentioned before.

What fight were you watching ? shaken up everytime Pacquiao landed ? please.

Marquez was the one shaking up Pacquiao with his punches.

Marquez is a counter puncher. If backing up/ fighting on the backfoot in a fight even after landing means you deserve to lose then Mayweather shouldn't be undefeated.

Being over aggressive against Pacquiao cost Marquez in previous fights so he was smart to back up after landing good combinations.

The majority feel Marquez landed the better punches and got the better of Pacquiao in the other scoring criterias like ring generalship, defence and effective aggression.

I was basing that comment on their last sat's official scorecards. He needed to score multiple KDs to win.

Knockdowns counts. They are big deal. A 10-6, 10-7, or 10-8 round is always better that 10-9 round.

10 - 8, 10-7, etc is obviously better than a 10-9 round and it can be the difference between a fighter winning and losing especially when the fights are close.

In regards to their first two fights it had it's effects on the scorecards. Those fights were very close and I have no problem with those fights going either way.

I thought Pacquiao was the the winner of the first fight and Marquez was the winner of the second fight.

This third fight was a Marquez fight. He should of won. The majority of fans agree with me. A judge would have to be generous to Pacquiao to give him a win imo.

[miron_lang]

What fight were you watching ?

Probably the same fight.

BUT

We;re not looking at the same thing that's why we dont have the same score.

That fight can be interpreted in a lot of different ways that even 117-111 either way is justifiable.

[miron_lang]

What they do need is a screen to look into on their bench when the ref or the other fighter gets in the way of their view. ( that happens allot in a fight.)

Many other sports in the world are going the way of instant replays to denote if somethings out of play so thats a obvious installation to make boxing more fair.

Why not have that when someone whole career could be on the line?
It doesnt stop the fight, it just makes the judges job a fair one cause they can see clearly the whole time.

JMM have a less chance on winning in a replay. review the rounds mate, Pac's combinations are so fast you might miss a whole lot.


add the equation that everybody expects him to roll over JMM enhanced the image of how Juan was winning the fight where its was totally dead even in most rounds. with Pacquiao landing more and Juan landing the eye catching shots.


NO objection in JMM pts win BUT a Pac pts win is equally fair.

[Pugilistic]

What fight were you watching ?

Probably the same fight.

BUT

We;re not looking at the same thing that's why we dont have the same score.

That fight can be interpreted in a lot of different ways that even 117-111 either way is justifiable.

Just curious ? how did you score the fight ?

116-112 in favor of Pacquiao was a joke. I think Pacquiao deserved a draw at best.

[miron_lang]

I'm not sure what's wrong with Trowbridge's scorecard?

He gave Marquez rounds 4, 5, 7 and 12. Cutmemick and Elterrible gave Pac round 4, CutMemick gave Pac round 5, Miles gave Pac round 7 and CutMemick and Elterrible gave Pac round 12.

Theoretically, if Trowbridge had seen those rounds the same way these particular forum members did, then Pac wins 120-108.

This is hilarious.

a close fight can have a wide decision for the winner if the judge consistently scores the rounds according to what he is looking for.


I would assume that many boxing people knows this.

[miron_lang]

Just curious ? how did you score the fight ?

116-112 in favor of Pacquiao was a joke. I think Pacquiao deserved a draw at best.

a joke according to you because you think all people should judge like you. wherein retired official judge Leddermen has explain WHY and HOW he did scored those rounds.

You think the whole world should judge a round like you do and not like Leddermen who was official judge for many years?


You have to accept the fact that you scored the fight according to your preference and NO fighter dominated in this fight. simple right?

[miron_lang]

Clearly it does have obvious rounds, as there appears to be an obvious pattern if you are willing to go beyond the opinions of just the 5 Saddo's posters. There is a general pattern of the rounds people are giving to Manny and to Marquez.

All suggesting that Marquez was a relatively clear winner and thus making the fight a robbery.

LMAO

What? hhhahaha

sorry i missed this one Miles

[:::PSL:::]

I'm not sure what's wrong with Trowbridge's scorecard?

He gave Marquez rounds 4, 5, 7 and 12. Cutmemick and Elterrible gave Pac round 4, CutMemick gave Pac round 5, Miles gave Pac round 7 and CutMemick and Elterrible gave Pac round 12.

Theoretically, if Trowbridge had seen those rounds the same way these particular forum members did, then Pac wins 120-108.

This is hilarious.

a close fight can have a wide decision for the winner if the judge consistently scores the rounds according to what he is looking for.


I would assume that many boxing people knows this.

THERE YOU GO LADIES AND GENTS...



THERE WAS NO ROBBERY!

[Pugilistic]

Just curious ? how did you score the fight ?

116-112 in favor of Pacquiao was a joke. I think Pacquiao deserved a draw at best.

a joke according to you because you think all people should judge like you. wherein retired official judge Leddermen has explain WHY and HOW he did scored those rounds.

You think the whole world should judge a round like you do and not like Leddermen who was official judge for many years?


You have to accept the fact that you scored the fight according to your preference and NO fighter dominated in this fight. simple right?

I think everyone should judge a fight based on the four scoring criterias which are Clean effective punching, effective aggression, ring generalship and defence.

I don't have a preference and no judge should. They should score based on the scoring criterias right ?

Lederman has had loads of odd looking scorecards in the past. I'm not saying i'm the best judge in the world because i'm not but when the majority of fans/experts,etc are all coming up with similar scores as me with the same winner then i must be doing something right.

I never said Marquez "dominated" the fight. Pacquiao was able to have his moments in there but for the most part Marquez was able to do better in all of the scoring criterias imo which i why after scoring round by round, i had him the clear winner.

You still didn't tell me your scorecard by the way. What is it ?

[miron_lang]

Just curious ? how did you score the fight ?

116-112 in favor of Pacquiao was a joke. I think Pacquiao deserved a draw at best.

a joke according to you because you think all people should judge like you. wherein retired official judge Leddermen has explain WHY and HOW he did scored those rounds.

You think the whole world should judge a round like you do and not like Leddermen who was official judge for many years?


You have to accept the fact that you scored the fight according to your preference and NO fighter dominated in this fight. simple right?

I think everyone should judge a fight based on the four scoring criterias which are Clean effective punching, effective aggression, ring generalship and defence.

I don't have a preference and no judge should. They should score based on the scoring criterias right ?

Lederman has had loads of odd looking scorecards in the past. I'm not saying i'm the best judge in the world because i'm not but when the majority of fans/experts,etc are all coming up with similar scores as me with the same winner then i must be doing something right.

I never said Marquez "dominated" the fight. Pacquiao was able to have his moments in there but for the most part Marquez was able to do better in all of the scoring criterias imo which i why after scoring round by round, i had him the clear winner.

You still didn't tell me your scorecard by the way. What is it ?

Clean effective punching = You define this, Judge define theirs both fighters landed good shots
effective aggression = You dont think Pac wasnt effective as the agressor? I think so
ring generalship = You define this, Judge define theirs
defence.= Both fighters were able to him the other with combos


Round 1 Pacquiao ( Slightly Clear ) * 2 straight lefts landed @30 and @10 secs
Round 2 Pacquiao ( Could have gone either way )
Round 3 Pacquiao ( Could have gone either way )
Round 4 Pacquiao ( Slightly clear )
Round 5 Marquez ( Clear )
Round 6 Pacquao ( Could have gone either way )
Round 7 Marquez ( Clear )
Round 8 Marquez ( Could have gone either way )
Round 9 Pacquiao ( Terribly close Could have gone either way )
Round 10 Pacquio ( Terribly close Could have gone either way )
Round 11 Marquez ( Terribly close Could go either way *Right hand by JMM cliched it at the end )
Round 12 Pacquiao ( Slightly Clear )

I had it 116-112 Pacquiao


Pick a round that you like to dispute and lets debate about it.

[Pugilistic]

Just curious ? how did you score the fight ?

116-112 in favor of Pacquiao was a joke. I think Pacquiao deserved a draw at best.

a joke according to you because you think all people should judge like you. wherein retired official judge Leddermen has explain WHY and HOW he did scored those rounds.

You think the whole world should judge a round like you do and not like Leddermen who was official judge for many years?


You have to accept the fact that you scored the fight according to your preference and NO fighter dominated in this fight. simple right?

I think everyone should judge a fight based on the four scoring criterias which are Clean effective punching, effective aggression, ring generalship and defence.

I don't have a preference and no judge should. They should score based on the scoring criterias right ?

Lederman has had loads of odd looking scorecards in the past. I'm not saying i'm the best judge in the world because i'm not but when the majority of fans/experts,etc are all coming up with similar scores as me with the same winner then i must be doing something right.

I never said Marquez "dominated" the fight. Pacquiao was able to have his moments in there but for the most part Marquez was able to do better in all of the scoring criterias imo which i why after scoring round by round, i had him the clear winner.

You still didn't tell me your scorecard by the way. What is it ?

Clean effective punching = You define this, Judge define theirs both fighters landed good shots
effective aggression = You dont think Pac wasnt effective as the agressor? I think so
ring generalship = You define this, Judge define theirs
defence.= Both fighters were able to him the other with combos


Round 1 Pacquiao ( Slightly Clear ) * 2 straight lefts landed @30 and @10 secs
Round 2 Pacquiao ( Could have gone either way )
Round 3 Pacquiao ( Could have gone either way )
Round 4 Pacquiao ( Slightly clear )
Round 5 Marquez ( Clear )
Round 6 Pacquao ( Could have gone either way )
Round 7 Marquez ( Clear )
Round 8 Marquez ( Could have gone either way )
Round 9 Pacquiao ( Terribly close Could have gone either way )
Round 10 Pacquio ( Terribly close Could have gone either way )
Round 11 Marquez ( Terribly close Could go either way *Right hand by JMM cliched it at the end )
Round 12 Pacquiao ( Slightly Clear )

I had it 116-112 Pacquiao


Pick a round that you like to dispute and lets debate about it.

I will have to rewatch before i get into a debate about what fighters won what rounds exactly.

Don't worry though, i will be back.

[miron_lang]

when the majority of fans/experts,etc are all coming up with similar scores as me with the same winner then i must be doing something right.

When you and the majority have the same scores and having different winner accross all rounds simply means that you and the majority are looking for the same thing and feeling the same looking at the fight.

[miron_lang]

I will have to rewatch before i get into a debate about what fighters won what rounds exactly.

Don't worry though, i will be back.

Thanks. I'll wait.

[elvis]

this is getting interesting. i think this is the best thread so far in all boxing fora regarding the controversy in last saturdays fight. im with miron lang here that the fight is not a robbery either fighter can win it is so close if you watch it carefully and with no pretense what so ever.