How come the Pac/Marqueerz robbery was never corrected and made into a W?

Cry more.

 

I didn't have a problem with the number you idiot, the issue was that you said literally

atschatschatsch

You've embarrassed yourself now and really should have never responded to begin as you've been left with a reputation in tatters.

I never said we should rescore everything but this is a special case

 

Nope!

Boxing does'nt change what a fight judge allready wrote down.

Pacquiao scored 3 knockdowns in that fight. Once the judge writes it down and turns it in, it cant be changed.
The judge could have scored it a ridiculous 10-9 in favor of Marquez, and it still the boxing commision would not have changed it.
The commision can criticize it and publicly admonish their judge, but they cant and wont change the scoring.

The only times that an erroneous decision has been overturned have been in cases where the error came from the scorecard tabulator.
If the guy that picks up and adds up the scorecards makes a mistake in tabulating the right final score, then the decision can be overturned.

The 10-7 first round in JMM-Pac 1 cannot. Nowhere in the rulebooks does it say that a fight judge has to score 10-6 where there are 3 knockdowns, thats the bottom line reason why a boxing commision has never taken a jotted score and changed it.
At least they've never admitted it to the public. I'm sure they biasly have and hid it from us!



Btw, imo the boxing commision should have reviewed the whole fight and have a whole different panel of fight judges score it on videotape.
They then could have scored the 1st round 10-6 to Pacquiao, and corrected every erroneously scored round after and scored those correctly as well.
From round 3 to 12, what a masterclass put on display by JMM!:yep

 

Juans nuts are lodged so far down his throat he has lost all power of reason

 

It's mostly BS, but I think their mentality is that if decisions can be changed so easily then they will lose all credibility so they have to stick to whatever they initially say.

 

Wow talk about losing your **** ... the op made a pretty simple / valid point . There's a difference between a scoring 'error' and bad scoring in general. Pac-Marquez 1 should have gone to Pac by SD, but one of the judges incorrectly scored round 1 10-7 instead of 10-6.

3 knockdowns = 10-6. Pretty simple. I have no clue why they never corrected that.

 

Historical precedent is a poor excuse to continue to make (and fail to correct) the same mistakes.

The way I see it, there should never be any error in the aspects of judge scoring where there is no room for debate (i.e. no interpretation of the rule-book is required. Only rudimentary reading comprehension needed). If a judge scores a round wrong because they don't understand the rules, or cannot count knockdowns, then they shouldn't be judging. At the very least, errors that are not a matter of human interpretation should be corrected immediately. There's enough scope for corruption in this sport already without allowing non-debatable judging errors.

I think the line is pretty easy to draw. Forget about anything that can be debated, but if the ref calls a knockdown, or takes a point for a foul, then those things should be scored, and scored correctly. No exceptions. Boxers give their lives to the sport for our entertainment, the least we can do is expect that the score cards will at least follow the rules of the sport, regardless of whether bias or corruption creeps in elsewhere.

No one is going to, or has the authority to, correct all those kinds of mistake that have happened in the past. So the onus has to be on the loser to petition the authority that has jurisdiction over the judges that presided the fight. That said, the authorities should just do it automatically in future (but wont).

Poor judging of debatable aspects of boxing is an entirely different discussion. JMM didn't get a fair shake on those terms, but it doesn't mean that non-debatable aspects should be made flexible to account for that. Like I said, we do NOT need any extra avenues for corruption to flourish in this sport.

 

They could have easily penalized Pac for hitting Marquez while he was down. Point deduction or DQ.

 

This isn't about aspects of the fight that are debatable, no matter how appropriate, it's simply that judges should always get the simple parts of adding up a score right. Two wrongs really don't make a right in the larger scheme of things. Letting scores like this stand are essentially saying that we will accept that judges can't even count - so what's the point in judges at all? We absolutely do not want to allow further power and scope to let corruption to influence fight results.

 

Hadn't a problem with the topic. It's that it was a pac-loving troll saying it.

Problem?

 

*******s are funny ^-^ lol. Get over it guys just like you would tell us before JMM finally got his W he diserved. Whats judging any way? its not like they score offical points. Boxing will & always has been a sport that results can alway be disputed. Remember judges are people just like us & no matter what any judge says, judging always has some personal prefrence into it. Some judges may like ones fighters style more then the other & another judge may totally disagree. So seems like OP is the one who is butthurt. Until they put some kind of super technology in gloves, boxing results will always be subject for review. UNLESS OF COURSE THE OPPONET IS LEFT ON THE FLOOR SLEEPING AFTER A PERFECTLY EXCUTED COUNTER THAT!!!!

 

this

 

Joe Cortez DQ Soto for grazing Lorenzo's head after he was down.
Joe Cortez did nothing about Pacquiao hitting JMM with a power shot after JMM was down. In fact, Cortez continued to count. No point deduction, no warning, nothing.

JMM won that fight by UD or DQ choose.

 

This is the answer.

 

Only if they can overturn that ridiculous 115-110 card one judge had for PAC :roflatsch


KO6. Deal with it ***s :hi: