Not a ROBBERY Please look :D

[Gandalf]

I can only assume some of the more longer term residents here are trolling. You cannot argue with popular opinion and the facts are that Marquez was deemed to have won by about 2/3rd of the public. Only a few diehards and a couple of corrupt judges give it to Pac and some argue for a keep the peace draw. Those saying that Manny might have won are a tiny minority.

I had it 8-4 and GAVE two of my 'even' rounds to Pac. Unless you are giving Manny every benefit you can only have him losing by a closer margin. To have Marquez losing 8-4 is sick. To have Marquez down at the half way mark is sick. There was something terribly wrong with the scoring and the fix was in.

How people are defending that is disgusting and shame on anyone that does so.

How many people is that public that you are pertaining to in here? And what is the source of your information?

Do you really live with your head in the sand? Take a gander at some of the polls on general forums. Fightnews, Eastside, here etc. Take a look at the scores of so called boxing experts. You will see an obvious correlation in the viewpoints and the consensus is that Marquez won.

We even have filipinos here who admit he lost and so did the people they were watching the fight with. Pac looked defeated himself.

Everyone but the diehards sees this.

[Gandalf]

Clearly nations haven't done referendums on this, but most people who watched the fight and aren't afraid to get their views out there saw Marquez winning. Fact.

[miron_lang]

This thread makes me want to fart violently on every single person who think that it wasn't a clear victory for JMM.

That sounds like you want to be poetic or something. do you have 7 clear rounds for marquez?

Yes I have 7 rounds for Marquez (which i think he won clearly) and no, I don't make farty poetry though I can write one for you if you want.

What are those rounds that you thing Marquez clearly won? can you post it here pls?

[Beanz]

I am sorry to burst the bubble but this is not a brilliant post.The fact that 5 people who scored the fight round by round could not agree on which ones to give to Pacquiao does not prove it was not a robbery.Typing

THERE's ABSOLUTELY NO ROBBERY HERE
does not prove it was not a robbery either. All 5 people had JMM winning the fight, not one amongst the 5 had a draw let alone a win for Pacquiao. The judges on the night did not judge the fight fairly they deprived JMM of that which was rightfully his and therefore robbed him. The fact that 5 people could not agree on which rounds Pacquiao won is demonstrable evidence that he was clearly outfought and beaten on the night by a masterful display of boxing from his opponent. It was hard to give him more than 4 rounds because whatever criteria you use he came second best.Accuracy ? Aggression ? Technique ? Manny failed to evolve. In the face of overwhelming aggression he can clearly pick his punches but Juan refused to lose his head and Manny could not adjust.

its a close fight that went to Agressor/Belt holder/More popular fighter but no robberies here. The reason for the ruckus is the HUGE Expectation from Pacquiao from both side.

If giving a fight to the more popular fighter is not a robbery then what is ? It was not a close fight. The reason for the ruckus is despite the huge expectations of Pacquiao destroying a so called shot over the hill fighter it was that same fighter who took Manny to school, and then that same fighter was denied a victory he deserved. It now seems unless Marquez knocked Pacquiao out he was never going to be given the decision on winning more rounds.

I think the judges in the Pacquiao Marquez fight proved judges are actuallyconsistent

what consistently inept,blinkered ?


Only rounds 2 and 3 were clear for Marquez and that is not a robbery.

This just proves the judges had no intention of rewarding Marquez fairly, even in rounds he dominated.


Those scores arent my scores. and what i am saying is not an opinion, since these 5 posters gave those rounds to Pacquiao not me.

What you are saying is an opinion one which you have inflicted on other peoples data

Professional bouts arent scored on emotion. but technically round by round.

By no technical criteria does Pacquiaowin more rounds. Bias and preconception skewered the scorecards at the very least.

Marquez's beautiful connections weighs the same with Pac's harder awkward looking connects.

How can Marquez's the larger heavier mans connections weigh the same as Pac's HARDER connects ? either they are the same or pac's are harder


and Fenster

miron_lang that is a truly BRILLIANT post.

Impossible to argue against.

How can it possibly be a robbery if everyone is scoring rounds differently?

Great stuff.

miron's was not a truly BRILLIANT post. It is impossibly easy to argue against because the fact that people score rounds differently does nothing but confirm the unbiased objective way in which 5 people struggled to award Pacquiao any more than 5 rounds and 3 people gave him only 4 rounds and one person 3. Witnesses to a crime rarely describe the scene in exactly the same way but will often all describe the same offence and in this case it was a robbery.

[miron_lang]

That is a genious post miron_lang. You did not render an opinion but came up with a solid conclusion based on available evidence. Nobody can argue with that.

i'm pretty sure a person who can't spell the word genius would think that a pointless thread such as this one would also be in fact genius

Genius is not the proper world.

but this thread has a point. all rounds were close that could have gone either way.

It is also true that Marquez exceeded expectations primarily because he was written off by almost everybody. except me and Cutemick

[miron_lang]

There was close rounds that could of went either way but to give Pacquiao a win i think a judge would have to give Pacquiao all of the close rounds.

I think Pacquiao did enough to get a draw but a win ? i don't think so.

Most rounds were competitive but Marquez got the better of them in most in them based on his cleaner harder shots and the fight was fought at a Marquez pace for the most part.

Pacquiao did enough to win the 1st and 2nd fights like Marquez did but i just can't see how you could have Pacquiao winning this 3rd fight.

You're evaluating the fight in its entirety. Judges do it round by round.

If you look at the whole content. then there's no doubt about it Marquez won. but that's not the way judges score it.

[FinitoElDinamita]

I am sorry to burst the bubble but this is not a brilliant post.The fact that 5 people who scored the fight round by round could not agree on which ones to give to Pacquiao does not prove it was not a robbery.Typing

THERE's ABSOLUTELY NO ROBBERY HERE
does not prove it was not a robbery either. All 5 people had JMM winning the fight, not one amongst the 5 had a draw let alone a win for Pacquiao. The judges on the night did not judge the fight fairly they deprived JMM of that which was rightfully his and therefore robbed him. The fact that 5 people could not agree on which rounds Pacquiao won is demonstrable evidence that he was clearly outfought and beaten on the night by a masterful display of boxing from his opponent. It was hard to give him more than 4 rounds because whatever criteria you use he came second best.Accuracy ? Aggression ? Technique ? Manny failed to evolve. In the face of overwhelming aggression he can clearly pick his punches but Juan refused to lose his head and Manny could not adjust.

its a close fight that went to Agressor/Belt holder/More popular fighter but no robberies here. The reason for the ruckus is the HUGE Expectation from Pacquiao from both side.

If giving a fight to the more popular fighter is not a robbery then what is ? It was not a close fight. The reason for the ruckus is despite the huge expectations of Pacquiao destroying a so called shot over the hill fighter it was that same fighter who took Manny to school, and then that same fighter was denied a victory he deserved. It now seems unless Marquez knocked Pacquiao out he was never going to be given the decision on winning more rounds.

I think the judges in the Pacquiao Marquez fight proved judges are actuallyconsistent

what consistently inept,blinkered ?


Only rounds 2 and 3 were clear for Marquez and that is not a robbery.

This just proves the judges had no intention of rewarding Marquez fairly, even in rounds he dominated.


Those scores arent my scores. and what i am saying is not an opinion, since these 5 posters gave those rounds to Pacquiao not me.

What you are saying is an opinion one which you have inflicted on other peoples data

Professional bouts arent scored on emotion. but technically round by round.

By no technical criteria does Pacquiaowin more rounds. Bias and preconception skewered the scorecards at the very least.

Marquez's beautiful connections weighs the same with Pac's harder awkward looking connects.

How can Marquez's the larger heavier mans connections weigh the same as Pac's HARDER connects ? either they are the same or pac's are harder


and Fenster

miron_lang that is a truly BRILLIANT post.

Impossible to argue against.

How can it possibly be a robbery if everyone is scoring rounds differently?

Great stuff.

miron's was not a truly BRILLIANT post. It is impossibly easy to argue against because the fact that people score rounds differently does nothing but confirm the unbiased objective way in which 5 people struggled to award Pacquiao any more than 5 rounds and 3 people gave him only 4 rounds and one person 3. Witnesses to a crime rarely describe the scene in exactly the same way but will often all describe the same offence and in this case it was a robbery.

haha.. Greenbeanz done owned a whole army..swatting down foos left and right..

Good work..

[miron_lang]

Pacquiao did enough to win the 1st and 2nd fights like Marquez did but i just can't see how you could have Pacquiao winning this 3rd fight.

I'll tell you but you have to forget about ultimately deciding that Marquez won it.


the 5 posters ( including you ) gave rounds to Pacquio that justifiably and potentially can give Pacquiao a wide decision win. The 5 of you gave 9 potential rounds to Pacquiao.

ALL 5 of you were'nt bias. ALL 5 of you were'nt paid off. ALL 5 of you had it for Marquez but ALL 5 of you ultimately showed that 9 rounds are there that Pacquiao can claim that he had won.

[Pugilistic]

There was close rounds that could of went either way but to give Pacquiao a win i think a judge would have to give Pacquiao all of the close rounds.

I think Pacquiao did enough to get a draw but a win ? i don't think so.

Most rounds were competitive but Marquez got the better of them in most in them based on his cleaner harder shots and the fight was fought at a Marquez pace for the most part.

Pacquiao did enough to win the 1st and 2nd fights like Marquez did but i just can't see how you could have Pacquiao winning this 3rd fight.

You're evaluating the fight in its entirety. Judges do it round by round.

If you look at the whole content. then there's no doubt about it Marquez won. but that's not the way judges score it.

I watched the fight from rounds 1-12 and i had Marquez winning more rounds.

Every fan judges a fight round by round then evaluates there scores at the end. The fight as a whole was a win for Marquez.

The fact you have to twist and take other fight fans scores and mix them up to get a Pacquiao win is a joke.

The point is those 5 posters (including me) had Marquez winning. Not Pacquiao.

[miron_lang]

Clearly nations haven't done referendums on this, but most people who watched the fight and aren't afraid to get their views out there saw Marquez winning. Fact.

Yes you think JMM won

Yes many others do think JMM won


But matured individual like you should accept the facts presented here. You have your preference regarding Pacquiao that maybe clouds your analysis on this one.


Your expectations of the fight and cheering for Marquez in your mind concluded that Juan Manuel Marquez have no way of losing this fight, but as presented here. that is not the case.

[miron_lang]

Greenbeanz


ROBBERIES = FIGHT you CLEARLY WON but was AWARDED TO THE OTHER FIGHTER


IF 9 Potential rounds are there for Pacquiao to claim then this is not a robbery. I thought that was simple enough.

[miron_lang]

The fact you have to twist and take other fight fans scores and mix them up to get a Pacquiao win is a joke.

The point is those 5 posters (including me) had Marquez winning. Not Pacquiao.

I am not twisting anything. I got the data from the 5 of you.


and its SHOWS that 9 ROunds were not CLEAR


If 9 ROUNDS werent clear. some of the judges can see it for Pacquiao as they did.

[FinitoElDinamita]

There was close rounds that could of went either way but to give Pacquiao a win i think a judge would have to give Pacquiao all of the close rounds.

I think Pacquiao did enough to get a draw but a win ? i don't think so.

Most rounds were competitive but Marquez got the better of them in most in them based on his cleaner harder shots and the fight was fought at a Marquez pace for the most part.

Pacquiao did enough to win the 1st and 2nd fights like Marquez did but i just can't see how you could have Pacquiao winning this 3rd fight.

You're evaluating the fight in its entirety. Judges do it round by round.

If you look at the whole content. then there's no doubt about it Marquez won. but that's not the way judges score it.

I watched the fight from rounds 1-12 and i had Marquez winning more rounds.

Every fan judges a fight round by round then evaluates there scores at the end. The fight as a whole was a win for Marquez.

The fact you have to twist and take other fight fans scores and mix them up to get a Pacquiao win is a joke.

The point is those 5 posters (including me) had Marquez winning. Not Pacquiao.

lol Pwned again.. pactards are used to getting shown up..

These guys do not understand logics, point blank.

[miron_lang]

lol Pwned again.. pactards are used to getting shown up..

These guys do not understand logics, point blank.

What do you mean by that?


The point and the supporting arguments i presented were very clear.

[Pugilistic]

The fact you have to twist and take other fight fans scores and mix them up to get a Pacquiao win is a joke.

The point is those 5 posters (including me) had Marquez winning. Not Pacquiao.

I am not twisting anything. I got the data from the 5 of you.


and its SHOWS that 9 ROunds were not CLEAR


If 9 ROUNDS werent clear. some of the judges can see it for Pacquiao as they did.

So according to the results you displayed us 5 posters agreed that 9 rounds were up for debate but that means there was 3 rounds Marquez definitely won which means he only needs another 4 rounds for a win.

To give Pacquiao a win it would mean giving him all the close rounds.