Pac/Floyd investigation, documented punches (disputed rounds) blow by blow

[Spoon23]

Yes he was...he was larping as a f@ggot.

Awwwww it's just fashion, you are so affected like a...

Gay dude

[Real King Kong]

Awwwww it's just fashion, you are so affected like a...

Gay dude

Lol...now you're defending floyds outfit. You're so confused.

[Spoon23]

Lol...now you're defending floyds outfit. You're so confused.

You love Floyd's get up? Yes or no? Or are you confused?

[tangalog2200]

Sure, commentators can sometimes alter your perception of what is happening (same as in the slow motion videos). I usually find some broadcasts to be a bit less biased than others. That being said, I've also disagreed with commentators while watching fights, so I don't think they altered my perception at all.

Are you asking me to watch the fight over muted and come back with a scorecard? This fight was almost a year ago now. I am currently on vacation, so perhaps I will consider it, if that's what you want.

By the way, I appreciate that we can discuss this in a cordial manner. Much respect.

yes, this fight was about a year ago....

but like other high profile fights or fights that did split fans in so many ways, i will be happy for you to given your take on the 5 rounds presented...

your objective and unbiased review/analysis on these, please...

just a friendly reminder for you to set aside any commentaries, score cards or opinions of other boxing personalities and even differences with other posters here..

[travestyny]

yes, this fight was about a year ago....

but like other high profile fights or fights that did split fans in so many ways, i will be happy for you to given your take on the 5 rounds presented...

your objective and unbiased review/analysis on these, please...

just a friendly reminder for you to set aside any commentaries, score cards or opinions of other boxing personalities and even differences with other posters here..

What rounds are you referring to?

[tangalog2200]

What rounds are you referring to?

the 5 rounds presented in this thread....

will be happy to compare your scores with that of spoon, zaroku and others who care to give their review/analysis of these 5 rounds subject of this thread...

[travestyny]

the 5 rounds presented in this thread....

will be happy to compare your scores with that of spoon, zaroku and others who care to give their review/analysis of these 5 rounds subject of this thread...

Ok, I watched it on mute.

Gave Pacquaio rounds 3, 4, 6

Gave Mayweather 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12

Round 3 was close, but I went with Pac's work a little more. Round 8 was close to me, but I went with Floyd's work more. Round 12 was close to me, but I liked Floyd's work.

If you give the rounds that I thought were close to Paquaio out of generosity, he still loses on my card 7-5, and there is absolutely no way he deserved all of the close rounds. I could see it 8-4 or 9-3 Mayweather only.

Now, a note on this slowmotion video commentator:

Please look up his videos and notice how many are about race. Please note how he hates on black fighters. Please note how he has a video that is titled "White Supremacy" where he states "White people are the ****. White people are supreme." Really?

Please note the number of videos he has stating his dislike for Mayweather. This is not the type of man that is worthy of unbiased analysis of this fight.

Also note that in his last video about this fight, he admits that he only said Pacquaio dominated just to "turn the mirror onto" people that said Floyd dominated, and he finished by yelling "suckersssss!" He admit that in his estimation, neither side dominated, after going through all that trouble to make it seem Pacquaio dominated. Really?

So what we have is someone with some clear racial hatred, and this is what Spoon brings to us? Really? This commentator is literally the Mark Furman of the Mayweather/Pacquaio bout. His "evidence" should be thrown out. Point blank Period.

But it's no wonder that Spoon brought this dude to us. I don't even have to state it. Everyone already knows what I mean.

[Spoon23]

Ok, I watched it on mute.

Gave Pacquaio rounds 3, 4, 6

Gave Mayweather 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12

Round 3 was close, but I went with Pac's work a little more. Round 8 was close to me, but I went with Floyd's work more. Round 12 was close to me, but I liked Floyd's work.

If you give the rounds that I thought were close to Paquaio out of generosity, he still loses on my card 7-5, and there is absolutely no way he deserved all of the close rounds. I could see it 8-4 or 9-3 Mayweather only.

Now, a note on this slowmotion video commentator:

Please look up his videos and notice how many are about race. Please note how he hates on black fighters. Please note how he has a video that is titled "White Supremacy" where he states "White people are the ****. White people are supreme." Really?

Please note the number of videos he has stating his dislike for Mayweather. This is not the type of man that is worthy of unbiased analysis of this fight.

Also note that in his last video about this fight, he admits that he only said Pacquaio dominated just to "turn the mirror onto" people that said Floyd dominated, and he finished by yelling "suckersssss!" He admit that in his estimation, neither side dominated, after going through all that trouble to make it seem Pacquaio dominated. Really?

So what we have is someone with some clear racial hatred, and this is what Spoon brings to us? Really? This commentator is literally the Mark Furman of the Mayweather/Pacquaio bout. His "evidence" should be thrown out. Point blank Period.

But it's no wonder that Spoon brought this dude to us. I don't even have to state it. Everyone already knows what I mean.

Lol such a detailed analysis and an imaginative mind. So detailed that it felt so short and general lol

Or was it So detailed I can't seem to grasp how much depth and technicality is captured in your critical analysis

I believe you see things differently. You really are special, since you comprehend what people say differently or you must have a special case of comprehension disorder lmao

And that is why...

You are still red.. Smh..

[travestyny]

Lol such a detailed analysis and an imaginative mind.

So detailed I can't seem to grasp how much depth and technicality in your critical analysis lol

And that is why...

You are still red.. Smh..

You and the creator of those videos have already been exposed. Here's a hint. Never utilize the work of a racist to help you prove anything regarding a Black man. Furthermore, never utilize the work of someone who makes it clear that he is not only biased against, but has pure hatred for a specific man, when it comes to judging that specific man. How stupid are you?

Go tell me how many of his videos are about race. Then tell me how many are about his dislike for Mayweather.

Then come back to me and explain why you thought his analysis would be unbiased, truthful, honest, and worthy. Clown.

Once again, you are dismissed.

[Spoon23]

To those who want to attempt to dispute the videos.

This is how you prepare a dispute and a counter dispute.

# time stamp your arguments

Why not?

In the first video (round 2),
At 5:30, you say that Pac's third punch landed and it rocked Floyd, when in reality the sound came from Floyd's left hook. If anything, Pac was the one left off balance as he was diving in and Floyd connected, leaving Pac off balance and stuck in the corner.

From 7:40, you go on saying that Floyd's 4 punches in the clinch don't count. This is wrong since if the ref doesn't tell the fighters to break, the fighters have to fight their way out of it. Before you go "it's Kenny Bayless' fault", Bayless had refed 7 of Pac's fights before, showing that Pac's team had no problem with him as the ref.

At 9:15, you say that Pac lands a left to the body, when Pac CLEARLY misses and almost hits the ring post, followed by a left (a pit-pat punch) and a right that completely misses (you can easily see it at 9:20). You yourself admit that at best they're "grazing shots" not clean punches. Also, for whatever odd reason you think that hitting on the "orbital bone" is less valuable than the chin. The most important factor in judging is if they're clean shots (to the face or the front and sides of the torso) and if they hurt the fighter, not where specifically they land on their face.

At 10:20, the 3 punches by Floyd do count, even if they are in the clinch.

At 10:29, Floyd lands a clean right to Pac's face, and Pac retreats while throwing a right jab. According to you, Pac landed his jab but 1) you can't hear the sound of Pac's punch, 2) Floyd's head doesn't snap back or react.

At 10:31, you very quickly give a point to Pac for his right, with no explanation, even though it lands on Floyd's shoulder/armpit.

At 10:37, you give a point to Pac for landing with his left to Floyd's body. This is incorrect as the sound comes from the second right jab by Pac that lands on Floyd's glove. The left misses.

At 11:06, you don't count the left punch by Floyd to Pac's face that forced Pac to retreat

At 11:26, you give two points to Pac for 1) a right that doesn't connect and 2) a left to Floyd's body that's not visible when they're clinched together.

In summary, 8 of the blows you give to Pac are disputable or nonexistent, while you leave out 9 of Floyd's hits (7 coming from the clinch). If anything, watching the fight in slow motion is more favorable to Floyd since his blows are mainly to either quick jabs or straights to the face.

Also, you claim that the videos go blow by blow and are the FULL three minutes of each round. Yet the videos skip around, for example the first video starts at 2:43 of the second round.

At the end of the day, let it go. Pac lost decisively. He couldn't cope with Floyd's reach and kept on getting hit by Floyd's rights. In terms of defense, Floyd barely got hit by anything Pac threw. Pac didn't have effective aggression because he was just coming forward and not landing anything. If anything, Maidana was more effective than Pac in first fight by smothering Floyd. The sequence at 5:30 shows how much Pac was uncomfortable by lunging in and losing balance. Lastly, Floyd showed greater ring generalship since he was making Pac fight his type of fight. Pac spent most of the fight chasing Floyd and being too out of range to land on him.

Compubox gave round 2 an 11-6 score in favor of floyd





As the author proves Pac had a solid 17 connected shot which clearly landed while, compubox only gave 6 in total. Far cry from the truth.

That said, I needed to answer Andreward's arguments.

Andreward's First argument debunked. Score still remains 17-9 Pac

@ 5:30 - Pac landed a solid left to the body which the author clearly says it had a thudding sound.

For better review @ 5:18 better view of the same action shows the exchange clearer. Pac lunges with a left that hits Floyd shoulder (even if it did hit the author did not count it) then Floyd fires a check hook that graces at the side temple that shows it was more of a gracing push than a punch which obviously wasn't a scoring blow as I do agree with the author.

Then Pac follows up with a stiff left to the body which the author wasn't sure that it landed. So he didn't score it, but the Third shot Pac did land a lunging right hand to Floyd's head then after that Floyd counters with his check hook that graced pac's head which more of a push than a scoring blow. (The thudding sound was a dead giveaway Pac obviously landed to Floyd's chin when he fired that lunging right)

The sequence was Pac fired a right jab to the shoulder, followed by a stiff left to the body, then fires a lunging right to Floyd's chin easily showing the thudding sound came from pac's since the thudding sound happened before Floyd's check hook.

Pac's all 3 shots actually landed, but the author was generous to Floyd so he only gave Pac 1 shot from that 3 punch sequence pac did. So giving 1 point for Pac was more than fair.


Andreward's 2nd argument debunked -Score still remains 17-9 Pac

@ 7:40 - illegal blows to the side doesn't count while clinched buddy. This is pro boxing not the amateurs. Those 4 shots couldn't hurt a fly, no leverage means no effect, means weak and not scoring blows. Those shost were like child like desperate shots to frustrate, don't fool yourself those are lame punches my friend. This Is the hurt biz. that isn't a scoring blow.

In addition, Pac has no problem with Bayless doesnt mean what Bayless did was good refereeing that night. As a result. The irony is Pac couldn't do more because of too much allowed clinches by Bayless hence, Pac with all the diffusing exercise of floyd's clinching and running while Pac chased till the marathon event was over, in the end Pac still found away to score.

Andreward's 3rd argument debunked - Score still remains 17-9 Pac

Regarding the orbital bone you're complaining about. It was a gracing shot to pac's orbital Bone but the author clearly said he scored it for Floyd. So what's the problem?

@ 9:15 pac's right foot was planted firmly on he ground and still had leverage when he fired a 4 punch combo. The left to the body didn't land clean, then @ 9:17 a very short right hand to the chin of Floyd, followed up by a left hook to the temple then @ 9:20 a right hook to the chin of Floyd.

His argument was if your going to score that weak gracing shot by Floyd when his jab graced pac's orbital bone. You should obviously score those shots Pac landed it was more Than a gracing shots it even landed cleanly to Floyd' head 3 times and the other one was a chin check to boot. As the author says it wasn't great shots but at least Pacquiao gets the chin here and there. Easy 3 points for Pac.

Andreward's 4th argument debunked -Score still remains 17-9 Pac

@ 10:20 --- 3 punches in the clinch position. As I said these have no leverage. No bite. Lame weak punches. Not scoring blows. This is not the amateurs this is not the hurt business. Those punches don't hurt lol


Andreward's 5th argument debunked - Score still remains 17-9 Pac

@ 10:29 - you say the author didn't score Floyd's right straight, but he did @ 10:23 the scores were 9-6, then after Their tit for tat exchange it became 10-7. So both lands, nothing to complain about.

Andreward's 6th argument debunked - Score still remains 17-9 Pac

@ 10:37 - no score were given to Pac that time. Must be your hallucinations. The point he gave was @ 10:41 Pac slips a right hand to the body which it clearly did land.

Andreward's 7th argument debunked - Score still remains 17-9 Pac

@ 11:06 - lol Floyd pushes Pac. My gosh! That is not a scoring blow. Do you really know boxing? Really?

Andreward's 8th argument debunked - Score still remains 17-9 Pac

@ 11:25 the score was 15-9 then at 11:31 it was 17-9, the 2 landed Pac shots were these, the first connect shot is @ 11:26 a chin shot and @ 11:30 a short stiff left jab to the chest before Floyd grabs Pac for dear life, thus giving Pac those clear 2 shots.


Sigh.. Nice try.. All disputed. That's just round 2. Score remains @ 17-9. Pac the clear winner.

You can see the dominance of Floyd is merely an illusion. Pac was in the driver seat the whole 2nd round. Pac convincingly won round 2 , 17-9.