Was pacquiao vs marquez 3 a robbery?

I don't save boxing articles to my computer.

The list was of all contemporary boxers and trainers. Almost all of them had Marquez winning. Literally all of them except for Roach-stable fighters.

I would listen to boxers and trainers before media and forum trolls. Period.

No.

And I don't care about Dan Rafael, who thought Pascal beat Hopkins and thought Berto beat Ortiz. I don't care about HBO employees' opinions. Or Top Rank employees' opinions.

I care about the MASS PUBLIC CONSENSUS and if I care about select opinions, they are people I know IN REAL LIFE or are in the industry to the fullest degree such as boxers and trainers. Not writers or TV crews.

 

Marquez Pac 3 a robbery? LOL no, only robbery to butthurt Mexicans.

You know which fight was also NOT a robbery? Marquez-Bradley.

That ***** Marquez lost that fight by a LANDSLIDE which 99% of the boxing world agrees, except for pissboy and his trainer LOL.

 

And I'm consistent with it.

I have watched Mayweather/Castillo I four times and come up with the same close result for Floyd every time.

However, I acknowledge it as both a razor close AND controversial fight based on the vocal opinions of many who claim to have seen Castillo edging it. So I usually omit the victory from "greatest wins of his career" list just as I do usually omit JMM from Pacquiao's "greatest wins of his career" list. EDIT: Same with my boy Joe Louis and his win over Joe Walcott in their first fight.

I don't pick and choose what to do it on.

I value my opinion and select opinions more than the rest. After that, the majority consensus rules, as I am just one opinion and that is the fairest way to view things from a historical POV.

 

How do you measure that? Anonymous internet polls? Those resulted in Ggg Ring mags Foty 2013. Maybe esb polls?

A good cross section of named US boxing writers scored it 50-50. Credible names on both sides. Indicates a close fight, which is a conclusion you seem desperate to escape. No surprise, this is consistent with your posting history

 

Ha...

...ha.

Good effort there, buddy. Glad I've even got a fan out there, news to me...

 

For me JMM clearly won the 3rd fight. People saying Marquez should be 4-0 are dumb though, the first 2 could have gone either way.

 

I see plenty of esb, bleacherreport scores for jmm, i guess thats proof he didnt win either. Not that I believe your unsubstantiated claims for a second, but lets say most of these guys scored it on tv. Id trust Houston scoring on tv way before you or any of these esb obsessives. He has more expertise, and proven less bias. Not that hes always right but him and a bunch of other respected names misjudging a robbery just doesnt happen. Go bore someone else with your phantom facts

 

What do you mean, fan? You think im a fan of el chicano or these other idiots cause i can predict what theyll post tomorrow, just like i can write your posts for you in a pac thread?

 

Only to juantards and *****s

But their opinions are worthless and no one takes them seriously

 

Please do.

What is my opinion on the Pac/Bradley sock scandal?

My opinion on Pacquiao's place on an ATG list?

My opinion on the titles he scooped up at 135, 140, and 154?

My opinion on Pacquiao's wins over Ledwaba and Singsurat?

 

What about past and contemporary boxers and trainers alike?

Should their opinions not hold the most weight?

Because they overwhelmingly scored it for JMM...

 

They all count but what we have is a link with a lot of expert scorecards adding up to 50/50. Even if it was 65-35, thats a lot of dissent. The threshold for robbery is much higher than that

 

Why does that link not include the vast majority of boxers and trainers who, in other published lists with their official opinion, scored the fight wide for Marquez?

Why is that?

Because it is a list of selective people. What, 100? Do you think that only 100 "industry men" scored that fight?

 

A lot of people feel this way OK. The majority consensus should mean something though it is natural for an individual to deviate from the consensus by a round or 2 when the rounds are close as they were every time Pac & Marquez fought. Case in point, Nonito Smoak scored Mayweather edged Castillo 1 though I think the majority would say Castillo edged it. I scored it a draw myself.

More importantly, I personally have JMM leading the series because of the KO. If Pac takes the 5th then I won't know what to think. I'll worry about that when (if) it happens.

 

http://ringtv.craveonline.com/news/...arquez-iii-the-qrobbery-of-the-yearq-for-2011

I don't agree with the poll (Chisora vs. Helenius was ROTY for 2011), and I'm not even using it to cite the "consensus argument" as polls from that cite can have multiple votes.

---

From the article:

Press row disagreed with the official verdict. In a poll of 20 ringside boxing writers conducted by Golden Boy Promotions publicist Bill Caplan, 12 thought that Marquez won the bout, seven scored it a draw, while only one had it for Pacquiao (by one point).

Retired veteran judge Chuck Giampa, who scored the bout 116-112 for Marquez, stated that “Marquez controlled the majority of rounds with effective aggression AND ring generalship,” in his You Be the Judge column in the February issue of THE RING.

“I believe (Harold) Lederman (HBO’s unofficial judge commentator who scored the bout 116-112 for Pacquiao) and the three judges did not give Marquez enough credit for his effecive counter punching. As per the rules, a fighter should be given credit for effective aggression whether moving forward, backward, sideways, against the ropes or counter punching.”

---

Is Chuck Giampa on your linked list? I don't care if he is or not. But the list you have is of a selective particular group of opinions. I'm sure you could find thousands of folks who scored Whitaker/Chavez to Chavez. Should that opinion be respected? No.

Are the "20 mystery ringside men that Golden Boy polled" on your linked list? Who knows. Who cares about Golden Boy paid opinions on this issue, just as who cares about Top Rank or HBO paid opinions on this issue. Clear bias is shown in their affiliation or relationships and who they scored for. Just as is the same with all of you routine Pacquiao supporters. How can we take you seriously when you say Pac is right for declining drug tests (followed by his incredibly hypocritical comments and actions about testing from JMM IV-Bradley II), that socks are the reason he lost to Morales, that his first KO losses should have been low blow DQ's when they are clearly chin checks, that a forehead cut takes 6+ months to heal, and that catchweights are great when he does them but horrible and worthy of NC's when someone else does them?

This fight was clearly won by JMM. Anyone who has an opinion worth respecting saw it that way. And anyone who didn't, would admit an off night of bias unless they were... well, related to Pacquiao or had some shame in prior comments they cannot dispense of.