If you score a fight differently for the 2nd time, it only shows your lack of ability

it takes away from the excitement. i always wait to score the second time around

first time i thought marquez had it by a few
second i scored it a draw
although the rounds for marquez were more convincing than the ones i gave pac

 

BOOM...end thread!!!:deal

 

First time I saw it I scored it 7-5 or 6-6 (couldn't remember who I gave an early round to)

I rewatched it and had it 6-6. The fight was super close and was a fantastic boxing spectacle by both men imo. It underlines the level these two greats are operating at.

Kinda indirectly alludes to floyd being on a higher ww level at present but a lot of people suspected as much anyways.

Either way, those willing to rewatch a fight in order to attain some certainty about their convictions should be applauded imo.

On the flipside those rewatching with an intent to score it towards a certain fighter are lame imo.

 

your avy is a hottie . . . who is she?

 

So the judges were right then? :think

 

I think when I first watched it I had a draw or JMM up one but when I watched it again I had JMM up by 2. I am a pac fan so it was kinda hard to watch the second time because it was such a poor performance. I do not think it was a robbery because it was so close almost every round. Its clear PBF is the best fighter now.

to answer the question that the OP posed, I very rarely had a huge difference on my first thoughts on a fight after watching it a second time. The one time I can remember that I did flip things up a great deal was Haglar SRL. SRL was my idol and I thought he won it clearly at the time but watching it a while later I saw that MMH easily won. Can't remember the scoring but it was a huge turn around

 

ive watched it 3 times. 116-112 every time for JMM. its day light robbery!

 

If the fight was close, even medium-sized tits and a sloppy blow-job might alter the outcome.

 

Hey genius, not only *******s have been doing this on ESB. So by your argument, fans of both fighters and Floyd fans have engaged in this "I really don't know how to score a fight" routine aren't really sure who won.

There are a group of people who are not emotionally attched to any of the boxers who scored the fight only once and never had to explain themselves: the 3 official judges.

Care to give them any credit? :hey

 

First time I saw it, Marquez had highlight moments in 3 rounds. he rest of the fight were close.

I gave the rounds that were highlight to Marquez and then decide on the other 9 rounds.

So, Pac won narrowly.

But like the good judges, I did not re-scored it again.

They say the first time is right. So the judges were right.

 

I totally disagree. Some fights are so closely contested that they can go either way legitimately. Most sophisticated boxing fans will admit that in these fights, they can see things on a 2nd viewing that they missed during the 1st. Anyone who denies this is kidding themselves.

 

or they have an AGENDA :good

 

I agree with this. Put another way, scoring a second time is OK, however, your card shouldn't change at all in most all cases... implied is that the OP is correct.

 

I rewatched the Pac-JMM 2 to tests my extra-ordinary, superfast eyesight and I still got the same scorecard. 6 rounds apiece with the KD as a decider. I did not bother to count the holding the rope to maintain his upright position as KD because I did not include it the first time.

 

i didn't watch the fight again. I had pacquiao winning a very close fight. That's it