JMM vs. Pac II: Respected columnist Dan Rafael's take

:good Just out of interest, How'd you score both fights mate?

Like I said, I had JMM winning both

 

If your an athlete who strive hard to achieve a glory of winning and losing by a hair lenght, it leave a painful feeling. However for the declared winner which lots thinking he wasn't, would be haunted by doubts!

 

LOL...how can you make a case for JMM on winning when he lost? He preformed well but he was not the better man. Even in thier first fight...he was GIVEN the Draw which allowed him to keep his belts. PAC should have been outraged....but he wasn't...he was merely gracious in defeat and wanted a rematch.

JMM faught well...as he did in 2004....unfortunately for him both times proved that PAC was the better fighter....maybe not a better boxer...but he won both times they met.

Regarding the KD....that was the icing on the cake. That sealed the victory although even with out the KD I still think PAC won by one pt. It was a great fight and I understand JMM being upset b/c he lost but he's being a ****ing cry baby.

 

Hell of a post:good

 

You're right! JMM has to be frustrated b/c he has never really lost convingingly.....he is kind of like DLH but DLH has won some major fights where JMM seems to loose his BIGGEST fights aside from edging MAB.....but I think MAB pulled that one out myself. He's a great fighter and I hope he continues to beat the best.......I just think PAC beats him again if they decided to do it again.

 

I truely don't understand statements such as this (and for the record you are not the only one to express them, nor are these statements even limited to this site). How can you honestly make the statement that Marquez has never lost a fight when he was just in a fight which he didn't win, but Pacman did. To me at least... that seems like a loss. I won't deny that it was a close fight that could have gone either way, but being in close fights doesn't somehow eliminate the losses from your record. Similar to any sport, especially ones with judges, having an incredibly close competition such as the fight between Pacman and Marquez can result in decisions one doesn't necessarily agree. However to constantly make remarks implying that Marquez was robbed, or somehow was denied something he rightly deserved, like that merely cheapens the entire event. If Marquez or Manny wanted to avoid this sort of occurance while one of them should have knocked the other out and then it would be conclusive. They didn't, it wasn't, and the judges had Pacman winning a close one. That is the way the cookie crumbles.

That being said I kind of wish Marquez had won because then we would have had a third fight. In any event I do hope Marquez gets a few more big money fights because a) they will probably be good fights, b) he derserves to make some good cash.

 

Duane Ford is a ****ing JOKE. He also gave Taylor Round 12 against Hopkins. I've seen him **** up so many scorecards that I can't believe he's still judging.

 

Agreed. Marquez was by NO MEANS robbed, and yes, he has lost.

 

I also had him winning Round 11.

 

Dan Rafael scored it 114-113 for Juan Manuel Marquez

 

The fight wasn't a robbery, at least not if you define robbery like I do, which is a gross misjustice or negligable decision on the behalf of the judges. The fight was just too close to claim that.

Simply put, Marquez is just frustrated. People say a lot of things after fights, I'm more interested in what he says in a week.

It seems like many or most writers had the fight going to Marquez. He has a gripe, but the gripe he is pursuing is the wrong one.

 

I had it a draw being completely unbiased in scoring. I had 3 close rounds, I gave 1 to Pac, 1 to JMM & 1 even. Those 3 rounds could have easily gone to either JMM or Pac altogether. Besides with the KD the wasnt called on the 3rd, this just further lessens the suppose "controversy" in the score.

 

Rafael is dead on. Marquez's camp's post-fight actuations (Rafa & Jmm's) had cheapen their warriors' standing in my book. Unless prima facie proof can be supplied, there is no grand conspiracy, as there is no ammonia-sniffing whatsoever after that fateful 3rd rd...:nut

 

Agree

What about this little gem:

"Schaefer: “I find it hard to believe that a judge was changed in the week leading up to the fight. That same judge scored the fight 114-113 for Pacquiao. There is no fight fan in the world that doesn’t want to see this again. We can all agree that there was controversy.”

And the fact that Arum became so incensed when Bereinsteing insinuated that the fix was on, he protested like a guilty man, like he knew they were up to something.


Although JMM did enough in my eyes to win the fight it was still very close an have no problems with PAC winning , the only problem I do have is that during my pre-fight predictons I stated that JMM had the cards stacked against him because Manny was the money-man.

ANd whether you guys want to believe it or not the judges are subconsciously biased in situations like this, it has been proven over
and over!

Another fishy thing is the way the Diaz contract was already before this fight even took place, which means things were already in motion
and what was suppossed to happen did.:deal