Mayweather vs PAC scoring

I had it a draw
Niether guy did **** to win that fight.

 

wwwaahhhh cry cry lol. cant handle the truth

 

I scored it 115-113 Pacquiao.

I thought May's punches looked good but very few blows actually landed. (if youw watch closely). Also I do not give much credit for a weak ass touch jab .

 

I guess I'll give you the old cliche line of, " I had Floyd winning the fight" and I'm sure you won't believe me, but I'll go ahead and continue. For me personally, I'm not trying to change any rules or even suggest that fights should be viewed in slow-mo to score them, of course that would be ridiculous. But, I went to watch the slow-mo version out of curiosity when it was initially brought up, and I must admit, it was definitely an eye opener. I'm not so naive as to not admit that. I didn't watch the whole thing and I didn't rescore it, but I know what I saw and it wasn't what I thought I saw on the actual fight night. but it is what it is, Floyd won and I don't have a problem with that. But I'm not going to look like a dumbass and argue against someone who can show video evidence to contradict what I said I saw and they show me differently in hindsight. Why deny that?

On a different note, I wouldn't mind seeing replay used to see if KD were legit or not and cuts also.. They stop for rounds anyways so it would not slow anything down.

 

Why has this fight came under so much scrutiny? Has anyone bothered to watch all the other close fights in slow motion? Its not like this was a complete robbery.

 

You had 90 people at a party and were able to ensure none of them got ****ed, took drugs, knocked up some ho so that they could score the fight accurately?

 

Nah, they are probably just use able to correctly score and don't need to waste their time second guessing the obvious.

Anyone who admits to watching the whole May-Pac fight in slo-mo likes punishing themselves - and they deserve it.

 

"correctly" is subject to level of eyesight of the scorer

and obviously some are too dense to realise that no matter how good the eyesight is it is still limited to its biology. hence the need for better scrutiny under superior methods through use of technology.

people who say otherwise are either dumb/ignorant of the advantages of modern tech.. or liars who dont want the truth to come out

 

How many fights before this one were of same caliber?

How many fights before this have 2 boxers of such quality that was really hard to make a proper judgment in real time without being fooled by own biased view and pace of the punches thrown?

How many fights before this were so close and provoked conflicted views on the result in the boxing community?

You see how your argument is flawed? Special fights require special approaches to determine the real winner. Why do you have a problem with people willing to actual break down the fight and show you the unbiased result? It is needed because this was a special fight and on top of this was a really tough one to score.

Even so, let's assume that this is not the most common way to judge a winner for a boxing fight I grant you that. This is still irrelevant and you know why? Because it is a fact that counting punches landed in slow motion is the most accurate way to decide which boxer landed the cleaner shots. You can't argue with this fact and I'd like to see you try. And so if this is the proper tool, there is no way you can discard it, your only way to actually prove that Floyd won is to come up with your own video that shows this. Too lazy? Well no problem, we already have videos that prove the opposite you can at least try to show that they are false and so the result is unknown.

edit: there argue with this video (every punch thrown is shown in the span of a 10 minutes video)

[yt]fcC9_cqy2L8 [/yt]

if you can't then gtfo and admit Pac won clearly just as most boxing journalists thought

 

So if Manny can beat Floyd in slow motion then why can't he do it at regular standard speed? I scored it 118-110 Floyd in standard regulation speed. By the way, how effectively can you score ring generalship in slow motion because in normal speed Floyd is clearly in command.

 

He did. You do understand that slow motion is the same fight but it gives you the possibility to actual count the shots right?


Did you see Floyd getting smacked in the face and then shacking his head like it didn't touch him? Well slow motion proves he acted like a fool after being punched in the nose :bbb.

 

I'm not saying slow motion existed before last May, and was used to break down other fights where it was hard to see things in real time, several involving Pacman, but it was.

 

fluid fans actually think a slow play of the fight is a different fight?!?!

ahahahaha

 

I've watched bits and pieces of the fight in slow motion also, & I will admit too, that it is an eye opener. But I don't think you can make a case for Pacquiao winning the fight. I think watching the fight in slow motion Pacquiao did a lot better than a lot of us initially thought he did.

On your second note, I completely agree. I would love to see slow motion replays to add a remove a knock down.