Post Your Manny Pacquiao Vs Juan Manuel Marquez II Score Cards

It was a close fight but i absolutely do not think it could have gone either way. Pacquiao once said that he understood why some people thought that Marquez had won. I can't imagine Marquez saying that after any of his wins. You don't say such things when u know in your heart that u won.

 

precisely. jmm is a cautious fighter and close fights are not won when you are making the other fighter bring the fight to you.

i have said before and I will say it again. in close fights, make sure you do one thing.

keep you feet on the ring and not off it. it is easy to say of course that boxing is not about kd's.

true, flash KD's don't count as much if you are dominated 10 rounds to 2. but in a seesawing fight, KD's make or break fights.

in 100 meters dash, freestyle race, .01 seconds difference determines gold and silver.

in close boxing fights, kd's will always get you ahead and that is incontrovertible.

 

Those are the margins by which pro judges score......I'm certainly not going to score round 3, 10-7 Pac, when traditionally judges always score that type of round
10-8.
To score that round 10-7 would be to go out of the traditional scoring margins judges abide by.

You might not think its fair, but I can also say that during the fight, JMM won his rounds much more decisively than Pacquiao.......I believe even you will agree with that......
Aside from the 3rd and maybe 10th round, all the rounds that were give to Pacquiao by the official judges were very debateable......in contrast, JMM won alot more round much clearer than Pacquiao did........
In a perfect scoring system, you would thing a fighter would get the benefit of a wider scoring margin in a round for winning rounds much cleaner than a fighter who's barely squeeking by in the rounds judges are giving him......

As a Marquez fan, I can complain about scoring margins in a round as well......
Its a two way street when it comes to complaining about the margins of rounds as you can see.

 

marquez slows pacquiao down with a testicle grab shot..:deal

 

LOL...Marquez even thinks all his loss were robberies...He's a great fighter,no doubt, but he whines a lot...

anyway, the fight definitely could go either way..It depends on a person how he score a round..In a close round, most judges go for the fighter who is more agressive, some would favor the most power punches connected rather than the total punches...

 

Freddie Roach said it as well......which when a trainer say's that about his fighter, it translates to "we got a christmas gift!"

9 times out of 10, the fighter and trainer getting the benefit of a bogus decision is going to say "it could have gone either way."

 

getting KD twice in rd 3 should have been scored as 10-7 divac. getting kd 3 times just like in pac-jmm 1 should have been scored as 10-6. although that stupid judge scored it as 10-7.

how can you not say that round 3 should have been 10-7 if that 2nd KD was counted and seen by the ref. we both know that jmm hung on for dear life and that should have been counted as a KD.

so we have 2 KD's and jmm so disoriented and wobbled and yet you insist that should have been 10-8 just like what you think jmm should have earned in round 8. :huh:huh

 

There was no room for interpretation in round 3. Marquez had the ropes supporting him, without the ropes he would have fallen a second time. When this occurs, what do you have? Yes, a knockdown!

Now, what puzzles me, is that some posters make an issue lobbying round 8 to be a 10-8 round, yet the third round where a definite second knockdown occurred, is conveniently swept under the rug. Is there a lack of objectivity here, or credibility is an overrated word anyway?

 

i agree, if you take away the first KD, a lot of people would have consider the rope hanging of marquez a KD and have scored the round a 10-8 round for pacquiao..

 

Please, dont sully this debate by saying JMM is a cautious fighter.....he's a counterpuncher, but he's far from cautious......he's not Pernell Whitaker....Marquez actually puts effort and punching power into his punches.....there is nothing featherfisted in what he does.

I'd describe Marquez as an aggressive counterpuncher.

Being a counterpuncher does'nt mean you're passive and non-aggressive, far from it......

Can I say, Evander Holyfield!!!!

Evander was'nt a come foward aggressor......he stood center ring and aggressively countered the crap out of fighters.......JMM is in the same mold....the fact that he has'nt stopped or dropped Pac just means the SOB can take a mean shot!

 

:rofl.

spot on bro. :happy

can you please add, jmm where-is-my-corner-oh-there-you-are-trick assisted by the referee.:yep:hey

 

imagine if the ref didnt assist marquez...it would be ****in hilarious...

i think he would shove pac and sit on the stool, ''hey fred, whats the plan...oh ****!!!'' :rofl

 

you are splitting hairs here divac. read the context wherein i described jmm. he is a cautious fighter because he is a counterpuncher first and foremost.

throughout his career, he has been known to be a great counterpuncher. you goobledygook of describing it as aggressive counterpunching is a feeble attempt to show that jmm was the one bringing the fight to pac and not the other way around.

look at the fight again and see who is the aggressive fighter and who is the counterpuncher. if jmm is not a cautious fighter, he would throw caution to the wind just like pac and attack and attack.

you argument on this point simply does not have the leg to stand on.

jmm is a cautios fighter. he is a counterpuncher first and foremost. to insinuate that jmm brought the fight to pac is simply hilarious imo.

 

:hey:yep:rofl:rofl

what is the spanish version of this bro. ****ing hilarious really.

"ey, nacho, is that you? why are you wearing filipino colors man?".
ijo, de puta!!!! :rofl

 

he would sit on the stool, drink pacs water, everybody looking at him (silent with cricket sound)....:rofl:rofl:rofl

damn that ref...