115-113 cards are reasonable for Pac-Tim and i will tell you why

I think 116-112 Pac, 115-113, draw and 115-113 Bradley(generous scoring of course) are the right scores for the fight

 

how many people scored pacquiao-bradley a draw?
how many people scored pacquiao-JMM 3 a draw?

Think hard about this question, BTW i scored pacquiao-JMM 3 a draw

now do you see how your comparison is utter fanboy ****/blind pac hate and nothing more :scaredas:

 

:rofl

Now this clown thinks he's educating us on what compubox is and why they use that bull****? Yeah, we know WTF it is, moron. We also know it's woefully inaccurate far more often than not. You may as well have said "according to my younger sister..."

 

I don't care about what other people say.. I state my own opinion on the fight.
Feel free to searth through my posts and see if you can find anything that suggests that i am a ***** or a pac hater.

 

As any pacturd would have told you prior to this fight, the only scorecards that matter are those of the official judges at ringside. :yep

 

.. Everyone else doesn't know **** about boxing :rofl

 

Landing shots is the most important thing in any boxing match. Pacquaio landed damn near twice as many. These retrospective attempts to make this fight seem close are beyond ridiculous.

 

According to who? :hey

 

i dont know what any ******* said, i could give a **** about *****s and *******s, the point is all those ringside press people scored the marquez fight a draw whereas the overwhelming majority scored the bradley fight in favor of pac,

why is it so hard to understand, and if compubox is utter garbage why is it used at all, explain this conspiracy to me because every major fight since the mid 80s uses compubox stats

 

There is no "IF". Compubox is utter garbage. Don't believe me? Watch a round and count the punches yourself and then look at the compubox numbers for that round. Like I said, they're woefully inaccurate far more often than not, so I'm pretty confident they'll be way off no matter which round from which fight you choose.

 

Some people prefer to score jabs that actually, you know, land. Just pawing it out there or hitting gloves, doesn't get you anything. Same thing with body shots. They have to actually land on the mid-section -- not get blocked! -- for them to get you points, too.

And enough of this nonsense about "you can't win by taking two minutes off". Of course you ****ing can. Especially if in that two minutes your opponent doesn't mount anything significant. Rounds are scored by what's done in those three minutes as a whole, not whoever wins the most minute-segments in a round.

 

fair enough, I AGREE with you, so even if you take compubox out of the equation entirely, are you still telling me that Pac-Bradley was as close a fight as pac-jmm 3. because if that is what your saying, i seriously question your ability to judge a fight

 

Here's a good one:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0IdXVLB3_o[/ame]
:deal

 

I do take compubox out of the equation entirely, and, as I've said, I haven't seen the whole fight, so I don't know how close it was. I know JMM 3 was somewhat close, but JMM clearly won in the ring and got ****ed on the cards.

 

Okay, then almost the entire boxing world is ignorant when it comes to scoring fights.......or you are. Which one do you think is more likely? :deal