Post Your Manny Pacquiao Vs Juan Manuel Marquez II Score Cards

Post 251 creep

 

Read post #253 Jack

 

Exactly.....those rules were written so that a referee could step in and call a knockdown on a fighter hanging helplessly on the ropes without actually stopping the fight.

Its quite evident that JMM was'nt hanging helplessly on the ropes......I think we can all agree Pac would have put him to sleep if this were the case.



.......but its no use IB......these are the same ******* that have been schooled on this matter of a phantom KD before........I dont believe that they even believe it was a KD, but they will post what they want to be so.

 

It's disturbing the way they ride his jock...

 

I had Pac winning 118-109 because I'm a *******! Joking aside, I had them tied at 6 rounds a piece with Pac getting a one-point win because of the KD in rd 3 which was ironic as I thought JMM was winning the round before that KD. I can agree to a draw because a 10-8 score for JMM for rd 8 is pretty acceptable to me. I'll post my score card later as I have to view the fight again.

 

We all know who officially won that fight, but it's nice to read something from a Pacquiao fan who keeps an open mind. Thanks. Its very frustrating talking to those morons!

 

When you said "we", did you mean you and Divac? Most pac fans have open mind. Infact, I do not have any issues if JMM won but let the scorecard speaks what happened inside the ring, a close fight (meaning that some rounds could go to either fighter). What I have issues are the JMMTards who have scorecards in the range with a 8-4 or 9-3 rounds in favor of JMM.

Try looking at the mirror and you know how it is to talk to a MORON.

 

yup, WE ALL know that pac won officialy...And its already in the record books!!!:good:rofl

 

JMM got what he deserve. The boxing gods sought justice from the 1st fight robbery

 

Come on, man. Be serious. Not many people on this thread accept the possibility that Pacquiao lost. Another thing, why don't any of u answer the questions i posed a few posts ago? Stop being yellow.

 

114-113 marquez

 

I could have skipped replying, but I don't think what I posted merits a demand from you for an apology. We can discuss things civilly, my friend.

Yes, Marquez held on to the ropes to avoid the second knock down. That only the ropes prevented him from being planted on his back merits a knockdown.

I think that if one is diligent and conscientious enough to suggest round 8 to be 10-8, then it should follow in the name of fairness to also acknowledge, even more, that round 3 should have been a 10-7 round. If one is so adamant to question the two judges in the rematch who scored it for Pacquiao, then why in the hell would one deny the fact that Kenny Bayless for all the fair calls he has made, erred when he did not call the second knockdown in that pivotal third round?

There are no phantom knockdowns here, only a legitimate second knockdown which was not correctly called. The only phantoms present are those in the minds of those who refuse to live with the specter of Pacquiao holding a win and a draw which again should have been another win over their fighter.

 

If that is your reasoning, Pac should have been disqualified for hitting JMM when he was down in their first fight. That should have been called a foul, and Pac should have gotten disqualified. Either way, JMM came back and gave Pac a boxing lesson. It really doesn't get better than that.

 

Likewise, not many JMM fans accept the fact hat JMM lost not even officially. It does take two to tango. JUst because many pacfans see the fight as a close fight, you misconstrue it as a fact that it was an admission of losing the fight, which is actually similar to Divac's line of reasoning. Like just because Roach saw the fight as a close one that could have gone to either fighter, that it was an admission that they lost. Do you really have a valid question worth answering? I was more than amused by the discussion of the "Holy Trinity" than any stupid comments in this thread.

 

That's not the point, the point is if you're going to cry about the judges who scored the rematch for Pacquiao, then you should also be aware of the fact that Bayless failed to call that second knockdown. To not do so would just be being biased in favor of your fighter.

Regarding that first fight, what you said can go both ways. Cortez could also have stopped it after the third fall.

And you can go on and on harping about "boxing lessons", but you don't give boxing lessons and then come out looking like a train wreck after. Boxing lesson is what Wright did to Trinidad. What happened was a war with ebbs and flows but nothing of the boxing lesson you have all been reciting like a mantra that is supposed to protect you from the hurts of this world.

And don't forget that officially that judge admitted on record he f*cked up and scored the first 10-7 on his card. But I'm forgetting, you have a thing with judges.