How do you rank Marquez/PAC robbery with other fights historically?

Need to review the match, but from last night I would say pretty high

 

they scored it wrong, no way was there a 4 point gap

 

Well, there are robberies of different scales. I rank ATG robberies on how big the fight was and what it meant on the overall history of the sport. Pea v Chavez and Holy v Lewis 1 were big for the fact the fights were so big. I mean, **** like Burton v Augustus outright were worse than almost any other robberies, but in the end they didn't mean anything to the overall history of the sport.

This was a big one, it changes history. Pea and Chavez are remembered for that robbery, and whenever someone mentions Holy v Lewis, it's what is talked about.

From now on, the debate will always be raised that Marquez was robbed against Pacquiao... and there is no other trilogy where you can say the guy who is 0-2-1 was clearly the better fighter in arguably all 3 fights, and was robbed the worst in the last fight.

ATG robbery last night.

 

LOL at people stating this was a robbery. It was CLOSE fight that would have gone either way. So stop whining that your boy JMM has been robbed.

 

This was up there. I cant beleive the judges robbed Pac of a UD. Sure JMM was landing and bustin Pac up but Pac won the fight on footwork. OMG Ive never seen some one shuffle and slide so magnificent in my life.

 

Get out of here with top 10 robberies, there's probably been more then that this year alone

 

i have no problem with pacquiao winning but 116-112 was bull****, marquez dominated the rounds he won, pacquiao scraped the rounds he won.

 

Assoon as I saw hbo scores in the 5th round and they had pac up I already started to feel disappointed and thought I wonder if this is how ppl felt in the chavez whitaker fight........ "pacquiao had blood on his face, it could be marquez's" I knew they wouldn't give out to jmm

 

It's not how blatant the robbery is, because that **** happens all the time, it's the significance of the robbery.

This was an important big time fight, and the judging was shady at best. The polls show about a 3-1 edge to JMM winning, yet somehow 2 out of 3 judges went the opposite way.

That's a significant robbery. I guarantee if you come back to ESB 10 years from now, go to the classic forums, they'll bring this fight up every-time Manny is mentioned.

 

:good

Real talk from Bunce and STEVE COLLINS, you could tell they were disgusted.

"There was no fix here. But everyone knows the score, lets put it that way."

When they read out the draw from the first judge I was already pissed off, presuming the next two scores were in Pacquiao's favour. I agree it was a close fight, but not so close that it is a pick 'em. It is only a Pacman win under amateur boxing rules.

Also an excellent example of why HBO boxing should stop with the punch stats every round which I believe showed Pacman landing and throwing more.

 

Definitely. Which is unfortunate as he has done nothing wrong. I would love it if he had said after "I thought I had lost" but you can't expect that of any fighter.

 

it wasnt a robbery...it was close...

it wasnt like pac was busted up so bad and jmm had no welts or bruises to show for...in fact jmm looks more busted up with those puffy eyes.....

 

Without the Punch stats haters in here in here will not give Pac any round and will declare it as a blow out for Marquez.. though not as a sole basis for a fight but Punch stats are there to serve as a reality check. Stop discrediting the punch stats just because your boy lost:deal

 

Matthysse v. Judah // Matthysse v. Alexander

 

I had it 117-111. Most observers have had it 116-112 meaning Manny only won 4 rounds.