it's marquez's fault anyway you look at it.. norwood and chris john are prime example. he's just the best drama queen in boxing.
Pretty much this. In the end, because the rounds that I gave to Marquez were so clearly Marquez rounds, it left me with the impression that Marquez really won it. The rounds Pac won were rounds were not much happened and you had to go with who was more "busy" not who was landing the better shots. I didn't note down my scorecard though but I think I had it 7-5 for Marquez and I already felt I was a bit generous to Pac for the close rounds.
For a record... and history... t'was PACs night. How can you gave a fight to waiting, non-aggressor fighter a win for a challenger of 2 belted decor champ? There will be more controversy if JMM won the fight. lets accept it. We are used to a Pac win by total demolition. Its just a close fight that fans are expecting more from Pac that none have shown up coz of JMM's calculated moves..
General rule on the scoring of a boxing bout, there are unwritten rules in judging a fight. First, the boxer who is more aggressive will often get the judges' nod in a very close round. championship bout is that the challenger is supposed to prove that he is better than the champion. If all that he could do is engage the champion is a tight fight, he will fail to convince the judges that he is fit to be crowned champion and that probably all that he would earn would be a draw.
1 and 3 were definitely pacs. I think Pac stole and outworked 9, 10, 11 and 12 too. That makes it a draw.
How can Pac win Rounds just for coming forward? He wasnt landing! He was out of range and in most rounds the clean shot came from JMM.
That is irrelevent when scoring the third fight. In my opinion, asides from the 1st round of their first fight, which was 7 years ago, Marquez has schooled Pacquiao over the vast majority of the rounds they fought. I wanted Pacman to win this fight, but I'm calling a cat a cat and Marquez won clearly. Pacman was eating leather left and right everytime he tried to get closer and land his left. His right was almost a non-factor. He looked discouraged for the most part of the fight. Don't tell me you were not surprised when you heard he was still the champion ?
I'll watch it again, but the 12th was a clear Marquez's round to me... and I was really looking for every opportunity to give Pacquiao a round.
114 is 6 rounds. Yeah, I scored a lot of even rounds. The first time out I gave even rounds to Pac and he still lost 6-5-1. I wish judges scored even rounds more often. The guy who wins his rounds more clearly deserves to win, not the a guy that gets 95% of the swing rounds when he wins like 2-3 rounds clearly. Marquez won more clearly than ever. 1st scorecard was in a lower quality Primetime view. The second and third were on HBO in HD. The last 2 scorecards are rather close and share the same sentiment, which was that Marquez deserved to win. This is good critical thinking on your part and I've thought the same thing. At the same token, maybe you're not opening your mind by not re-examining your first perception? The thing is, I really couldn't find a way for Pac to win either way in the end. That's the biggest takeaway. That's not an unwritten rule. Maybe that's the culture, but that's not the criteria for scoring fights. Ring Generalship and Defense are supposed to be equally valued to effective aggression. You're not supposed to score for whomever is more aggressive in a close round. Clean, effective punches is of the chief importance in scoring fights. The "Take the belt from the champ" is a myth. Just because Hagler said it doesn't make it true.