Marquez won Marquez vs Pacquiao 2 - Comments

I doubt very seriously that what you say would have happened had Pac lost.......

.....there are just to many proffesional ring columnist and fans that had JMM winning 8 of the 12 rounds for people who claimed Pac was robbed to have been taken seriously.

Alot of people had that 8-4 score for JMM.....and hardly any, even *******s in this forum had that score for Manny Pacquiao.

Can anyone explain to me why so many people had Marquez winning 8 of 12 rounds, and hardly any had Pacquiao winning that many rounds????

8-4 in rounds is or at least very close to being called dominant, yet hardly anyone that saw the fight would have the audacity to take up that stance for Manny Pacquiao........
......dont tell me that the ******* is the objective scorer in this case, which would be the reason that they would'nt call his rematch with JMM dominant in Pac's favor.:rofl:rofl

......get serious here people, anyone that has followed this sport for any lenghth of time, knows that fighters with a bigger name and following will more than get the benefit of the doubt in a fight thats competitive.
Its simply why Pac won this fight, and had JMM been given the decision, what would have been the excuse for the reason he got it???? Certainly he was'nt the more popular fighter????

A good reason for JMM getting the decision would be that he plain just deserved it!

 

I had Pacquiao by two points.

 

The fight was so close. I think the judges weighed the KO as the decision clincher. There are atleast two to four swing rounds (or 5: rounds 1, 7, 9, 11, 12). I personally have it JMM by 1. But i don't blame people who will have it as Pac by one, especially if they took the KO (and the 1st fight) into consideration. You simply can't force people to have "your" same "opinion", they have their "own".

Anyhow, this thread proves that the fight was so close it's easily forgiveable if some saw it the other way around.

 

As per record, Pac won the 2nd fight and the 1st fight was a draw. Let's move on.

 

peace.

 

Hillarious how you spewed all kinds of rhetoric with nothing really of substance to say.....thats awesome stuff for those that cant formulate an opinion of their own.:rofl


Would what you like for the common poster in this forum to do......if someone say's 1+1=2, would you like them to back that up with a deep analytical Harvard type theory, so that you can accept it as valid??

 

This is the type of nonsensical mindset that the common ******* and many fight fans in general have......

......I'm not saying you're a *******, as obviously you're saying you had Marquez up by a point.....but I'm just pointing out that rationalizing that you can accept others scoring for Pac because he scored knockdowns, is seriously flawed.


You're pointing out that you cant blame people for having it for Pac, especially if they took the knockdown into consideration.


You further elaborate and assume that its OK to consider the happenings in a prior fight to score a current fight by stating....

.....this my friend is so flawed. Each round of a fight is scored seperately from the other rounds. In fact, a judge in a fight turns in a scorecard after each round, for that round only. If a knockdown occurs in a round, thats part of the scoring for that round only. You dont take that knockdown into any of the following rounds with a mindset of "this round was close enough that I'm going ot give it to the fighter that has already scored a knockdown in the fight.nut

You take it even further Cocteau, by stating that you can see someone scoring for Pacquiao especially "taking the knockdown and the 1st fight into consideration."

You dont take any round but the round you're scoring into consideration.....much less take a different fight altogether into consideration when you're scoring rounds in a rematch!


Cocteau, I'm assuming you're not a *******, so dont have the flawed mentality of scoring like one my friend!

When a round is over, its over......score that round, and start off with a fresh slate for the other. Thats how proffesional judges are instructed and are supposed to put into practice.:good

 

Totally agree with you !!! I cant stand the people who try to give the fight to pac because of the kd ... the kd was taken in to consideration in the 3rd round, THATS WHY IT THE ROUND WAS SCORED 10-8 and THATS IT you CAN NOT TAKE IT IN MORE THAN A ROUND MUCH LESS DECIDE THE WHOLE FIGHT BECAUSE THE OTHER BOXER A KD BOXER B IN ROUND 3... THATS LIKE AT THE END OF THE FIGHT A JUDGE GO BACK TO THE 3RD ROUND SCORE CARD ERASE THE 10-8 AND WRITES 10-7 OR 10-6 IN THIS CASE BECAUSE BOXER A HAS A KD IN THE FIGHT SO HE HAS TO WIN, IS IT CORRECT? HELL NO, SO PEOPLE STOP SAYING THIS BS !!!

 

this shows that not only are you **** for brains, but you're also an illiterate dip****. i - sarcastically [can you even grasp that concept?] - asked for the harvard REFERENCING system, not some theory out of harvard. ****ing **** for brains! but it's good to sometimes talk to people who obviously have no brains cause their attempts at formulating some form of logic is just plaing ****ing hilarious.

and what's with your insistence that people are more emotional 1 year after a fight? ****ing everyone here disagrees with you.

 

yes, and professional judges gave the 2nd fight to pac.

but i'm sure you'll come back with some crap like, "oh, but those judges were obviously blind dipshits. heck they were probably *******s, or they were considering that pac is the more popular fighter hence he should get the decision."

 

****, these two idiots are convinced that they're the only ones who know that fights are scored round by round. :rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl
probably because us *******s are not true boxing fans, but only pac fans.

 

What fresh minds just right after the fight? What in the blue hell are you talking about? It doesn't matter whether the fight happened yesterday, last week, last month, last year or even 30 years ago. We, boxing fans, will ALWAYS have fresh minds about boxing matches. You know why? Because in case you've been living in a cave for the past 30 years, we actually have this thing called the Internet in the 21st century, and in this thing called the Internet we have websites that we can upload videos of all kinds. I think one of those websites is called Youtube, I'm not really sure. But yeah, here in the 21st century we can watch FULL BOXING MATCHES in the Internet all day everyday throughout the whole goddamn year.

So I don't know what in hell your talking about. Having the freshest mind right after a fight is bull**** and frankly is a very weak argument coming from you.

Now please explain to me how the further away from the fight, the more it becomes a popularity contest when in fact that is exactly the TRUEST just right after fights. Stop twisting things just to suit your argument. I have yet to see someone get more emotional months or years after the fight than if the fight just happened yesterday.

Your complete and utter devotion to JMM's dick is what's preventing you from actually becoming a very good poster. Your completely blind to what is really going on.

 

The fight was as close and dead even as it can get. I'm a Pac fan but I wouldn't have much to argue if it was called a draw or given to Marquez by a point by all 3 judges. Marquez landed 12 more punches than Pacquiao the whole fight, meaning he landed an average of 1 more punch than Pac per round, how close is that?

So here's my opinion. If this was amateur boxing, where number of punches connected is how scoring system goes, by all means Marquez won the fight. But this is pro boxing, where perceived damage done to the opposing boxer weighs heavily on judges scoring the fight, then I think Pacquiao won, but only by the slimmest margins. I mean Pac knocked Marquez down once, nearly knocked him down a second time but held the ropes which the ref missed, and got rocked and off balanced by a hard left (Pacquiao ducking punch). It's nice to see all these opinions after the fact, but the only ones that really count are the scorecards of the 3 judges that night. Those are the official results like it or not. It was a split decision in favor of Pacquiao. If you think it was fixed, stop watching boxing.

 

pacman wins that fight by slimmest margins...

 

Typical of a ******* that cant comprehend what he reads......go back a few posts and find the post where the ******* initiates the theory that watching a fight much later is a better indicator of who really was the winner.....

I never initiated anything about emotions or anything that has to do with emotional.

Go back and read and clean yourself of the turd you just laid on your pants!









.......and btw, my point was never that a fightfan is more emotional watching a fight much later.....that was'nt my point.......my point was that back when the fight happened, more members in this forum clicked onto a thread poll to vote and voice their opinion on one hell of a fight......

Now for instance, there would'nt be nearly as many forum members caring to even vote on a poll of a fight that has long been passed......so obviously, the poll is'nt going to be indicative of the whole vast forum as a whole......

When the fight happened, nearly the whole forum saw and wanted to talk about it......
.....now only the Pac and JMM fans would chime in, in such a poll......

......what the poll would come down to now is Pac fans vs JMM fans......and we already know that Pac fans far outnumber JMM fans.....so obviously anyone with a brain knows who would win a poll right now!

Comprende?????

Now go clean yourself of the manure in your pants!