who do you consider as the winner of jmm vs pac trilogy

End of argument.

 

Again, irrelevant. Bouts are scored on a round by round basis. Not, who scored the most knockdowns...otherwise Pacquiao would have won the 1st bout by a land slide. This Marquez was on his arse 4 times crap is about as relevant as bringing up the total punches landed throughout the 3 bouts and declaring the winner based on those stats.

 

Like it or not, theres no "official winner" of the trilogy except by looking at the record books, which we all know isn't the true picture of what happened.

So I'll score the trilogy in my own un-official way, yawmean?

 

Pac should've win all three fights. He got robbed the 1st when the judge ****ed it up. Get over it all you ****ing *****s and JMM fans. Pac got JMM's number. deal:deal

 

Your opinion. But it's a, let's say, EASY way of scoring it. But yeah, your opinion.:good

 

Those are relevant points because I said so bruh. Are we talking official scoring or are we talking about points that form our opinions? :huh

 

Again, your opinion. :good They are points a person who doesn't follow the sport would point out.

"Pacquiao knocked Marquez down 3 times in the first round, which means Pacquiao definitely won...who cares about the next 11 rounds". :think

 

First one I always had wide for Pac: I feel all those close rounds are always scored on a flawed principal - Pac blocked many many shots that Juan threw, he just doesn't get credit for it because he looked wild. If he is aggressive, lands one shot, is countered twice clean, then hits Juan twice, I give the exchange to Pac, because he was initiating it.

The second one was close but I feel Pac edged it in the championship rounds: when Pac was hurt JMM LET HIM OFF THE HOOK, proving that if Pac wasn't coming after him he HAD NO AGGRESSION, he can't come forward against him for extended periods of time.

I think the third was a draw or JMM victory but once again a challenger who will not come forward at all EVER is asking to have rounds scored evenly because he does not create opportunities.

So 2-1 for Pac, JMM really did a great job in that third fight and he stylistically has Pac's number ... but that doesn't mean he beat him, except maybe the third time in a close fight, and then because of those clean punches, whereas Pac did not land them as much in that fight JMM really knows how to take the steam out of Pac's punches.

 

Now you are claiming that because I have this particular opinion, I don't follow the sport.

On this, you are unequivocally and absolutely wrong on all levels, ask my wife. :yep

 

thumbsup

 

****er, don't associate me with the fanboys... not even a little bit.

I answered the question in the thread-title.

 

Not claiming that at all. Your views on this particular trilogy could be confused with it though.

I have no problem with anyone scoring the 3 bouts for Pacquiao, all close bouts, I have no problem with anyone scoring the trilogy to Pacquiao. But when someone claims the difference in the 3 bouts was Pacquiao's 4 knockdowns against Marquez...they are way, way off.

Read the below. :good

 

If we are gonna count Knockdowns, then we can also state that Marquez won more rounds out of the 36 total rounds. :good