Was pacquiao vs marquez 3 a robbery?

Absolute nonsense posting.

It was back and forth all night and ended very close. Marquez needed to turn up the heat a little bit but he didn't so Manny kept the belt. Simple as.

 

I see...you must've seen the HBO telecast. ;-) I saw the British telecast the night of the fight. Even those on the panel (including Khan, who was in Pac's camp at the time) admitted Manny took an 'L'. I then watched the HBO telecast--night and day in terms of the perspective of the panel.

It wasn't that close, man.

 

Yes please send references for these non ringside guys and do a similar breakdown for those that had Jmm ahead. If you look at the page history it was very close from day 1. And a number of credible observers had it for Pac or even, for example most of the scene staff and Graham Houston, who Id trust not to be influenced by the Hbo commentary even if not ringside. With robberies theres very little dissent, here theres obviously a ton

 

Feel free to select one at random and I'll provide one. I'm not even sure you can include 50 links in a single response given this site's hatred of advertising.

Nope. You can feel free to if you want to actually prove it evens out.

Great I don't care.

We're now on the slippery subjective slope of what does and does not constitute expertise, which completely undermines the initial usage of the list as a cudgel to strike down anyone complaining about the decision through sheer aggregation (and the myth that most of it was sourced from people attending the fight live).

 

No sources, gotcha. Theres no slippery slope in acknowledging the expertise of guys like Houston or the scene guys. And of course the numbers count, inconveniently for you.

Im sure you feel just as competent, so get someone to pay you for your boxing opinion and then you can include your score there and itll be 58-51, still ways away from robbery. Doubt that swings the average to 115-113

 

As I said, ask for a source for a given entry and I'll produce it. I'm not getting banned for posting 40 links to competing sites. If it's instead easier for you to pretend that's because I have nothing and merely made up words alongside 51 names, that's you prerogative.

Also, I don't recall you being concerned about sources demonstrating these scores did in fact specifically come from ringside experts whilst declaring so again and again. I guess you'd be the first person to know about changing evidential standards for the sake of convenience huh. Here's an article that limited its tally to that population BTW: http://ringtv.craveonline.com/news/...-fans-disagree-with-pacquiao-marquez-decision

Nah, I think we should defer to ESB and Bleacher Report scores for determining how to evaluate a decision from a fight. They have significantly more expertise than regular ol' message board peons like you and me.

 

None of the 3 Pac-JMM fights were robberies.

They were all close very close fighters that either could have won but to call them robberies is a truly stupid statement.

I personally gave Pac all 3 fights by a round or 2 for the simple reason that he made all 3 fights by coming forward, taking the most risks and being the aggressive fighter which is what i prefer in a boxer so will always be more inclined to give any close rds to that fighter and in the 36 rds between them, half of them were very close rds.

 

I dont need long sob stories from you. No links, got that already. The Ring link is a pretty small cross section, not surprised this Gbp vehicle would cherrypick what they wanted to hear. Wonder how Jmms wife scored it.

Theres both credible and not so credible guys scoring it both ways on the boxrec. The point us theres a large number of experienced, credible experts scoring it for Pac. That just doesnt happen in robberies. Think about this, thinker

 

Pick one at random or don't. You have no sources in support of your claim the majority or all of these people were ringside experts, as you were busily declaring up to this point.

Ah but it's a small cross section of people who were actually at the fight, "ringside experts" if you will, and not those who merely watched the fight on HBO. And if size is the problem, the BoxRec sample is a pretty small cross section of people who scored the fight as well. For instance there are thousands of more votes in that other poll mentioned in that article.

Why don't you tally them up and see if they even out? Or is that just a matter of faith?

Whoa sick burn at the end there. Why don't you list all the experienced credible experts on both sides then and see if the numbers magically match the ones you've been using with that list?

 

A robbery is when 1 fighter CLEARLY wins and doesn't get the decision, Marquez didn't clearly win ANY of the fights other then the knockout. I had Pacquiao winning all the rest of the fights.

 

Huge robbery

 

I watched it live and thought Marquez clearly won that fight

 

You made some factual claims youre unwilling to back up, not my problem. 140+ scores is actually a large cross section as far as US boxing writers are concerned, there arent thousands of them.

I see plenty of familiar, credible names that scored it for Pac, which is good enough to prove my case. Ive never seen so many credible names on the wrong side of a "robbery", doesnt happen. Try again next time, but do bring links

 

No.

It was a close fight and I had Pac winning, but MOST ?

No, the majority had JMM winning.

Not a big majority, mind you. Nothing like Pac - Bradley.

It was far too close to use 'robbery' regardless of who you thought won.

 

You made the initial factual claim that these scores came from ringside and should have been held to do the work in the first place. I'll show you all of my support when you show me yours.

And many listed aren't boxing writers at all, possibly come from the same people (ESB links), and in some cases are merely fans publishing content without pay.

In the future, be sure to simply say that some people scored it for Pacquiao then. Simply asserting intersubjective agreement with your position is probably always easier then having to rely on the Baylesses and Bleacher Reports of the world when erecting a pretend version of expert opinion, much less pretending they were at the fight live.