My unbiased scoring of the Pac vs Marquez HBO recast.

:yikes U sshouldn't even have the right to believe that! I refuse to believe any intelligent individual can say any atrocity like the above statement!!!!!!!!!!!! :admin:scaredas:

 

Three words sum it up for me: CLEAN-EFFECTIVE-PUNCHING!

 

Exactly... if he's trying to say he used the sole rule of scoring rounds properly - clean effective punching - AND he had Pac winning based on that, there's nothing else to say. I remember having the same argument with people scoring Alexander-Kotelnik for Devon. You could do literally nothing to change their mind. An opinion is good as any other - unless it's complete bull**** based on bedtime fantasies, then it's time to say my opinion beats yours because it's based on reality.

 

watch the fight again and you will see that pac did landed regularly with his right hand (hook) and slipping those lefts more often. if he is not landing them, marquez' face would not turn red as it was even in the first few rounds.

i'm actually surprised that people refuse to give pac some credit for it. i'm not actually arguing for people who saw jmm won (since i can see that most rounds are close), i'm arguing that it was actually a very close fight where i have pac winning and was not actually a bad performance for him either. i gave both an A+, performance-wise during their second fight. i probably give them around B+ this time since this is a purely technical chess match where both fighters doesn't want to over commit.

 

I don't think anyone is denying pac landed punches. However, it was clear Marquez landed the more effective punches throughout the fight.

 

I can agree with that. Problem is that if both fighters are fast and move around it is very hard to see what lands cleanly or not.

It makes no sense to score the fight for JMM because Pacs head snapped back a few times, if Pac actually landed more shots who where if not as good at least decent. Boxing is not a contest about who landed the best punch, but the best punches.

People watching in is slow mo tends to say the fight could have gone either way. People scoring it clearly for JMM seems to be fans that saw how Marquez landed a few good ones, and after that assumed most of Pacs shot missing.

 

To the idiot above. The vast majority of people whether it be casual fans, boxers or writers ALL say Marquez won. What the hell are you talking about Marquez fans? Last time I checked Pac is the attraction and the guy that had more fans coming into the fight. Watching the fight in slow mo, reverse etc the vast majortiy STILL score it for Marquez.

 

:deal That's the bread and butter of pro boxing. I like a good close fight not only because they are competitive, but you, as a fan, are challenged to notice the slightest details and score accordingly. Nobody said it's easy, but if you understand the basics and have a pair of sharp eyes, it's not too hard either.

Too bad officials are either disadvantaged and/or biased/corrupt.

 

I had it a tad closer but I agree for me Pac won the fight and Marquez did not do enough to win

 

As if there was such a thing as a human judgement that is flawless

Have you ever asked yourself how it can be that there are three judges for every fight, and why they score the rounds differently in many cases?

 

Even if I had not watched the fight at all, such a statement would make me sceptical. You understand the basics while the real judges and everyone disagreeing with you can be written off as biased? Hmmm ...

I would like to make a short comparasion. When Haye faced off with Wlad his own trainer believed Haye avoided a heavy right hand in the 6th. It was not until he watched the slow mo replay he realized Haye was tagged cleanly. Now we are talking about a trained observer who fallow his own boxer close up. Is Booth biased/have bad eye sight/unable to score a boxing match, or can it be things just happends so fast in the ring that it is hard to keep up with?

Marquez fought a good fight, and if he would have been rewarded the UD it would have been resonable. But it remains a close fight that could have gone both ways.

 

This is basically the same as people saying Pacquiao acted/looked like a loser after the final round. So....

 

... in other words pac acting/looking like a loser doesn't mean he felt he lost. He was just disappointed he didn't win convincingly.

 

Quoted for truth! An excellent post.

 

I scored it 7-4-1 for Marquez, the first time I scored it. Last night 6-5-1 for Marquez. If I gave Pac the rd I scored even, the fight would be a draw. If I gave that rd to Marquez, he would win by 2 points. At best Manny gets a draw on my card, at worst, he loses by two points, based on how I scored it last night.

As an aside, the Hbo commentating was very biased for Manny. Only Kellerman had a relatively objective view, IMO. The Primetime telecast seemed more objective, which is where I originally saw the fight.

Not sure if this was by design, but I noticed certain angles of the action, which showed Marquez landing clean head shots on Primetime were not captured by the Hbo cameras. Not claiming conspiracy, just found it interesting.