Pacquiao is awaiting Trinidad's Fate

morancito doesnt know ape shit :D yeah and yall dumbfuck do.

Rounds 7, 8 and 9 were JMM's. Even with a 10 - 6 score in the first round, JMM should have won the fight 113 - 112. Gee, I wonder why. :rolleyes: morancito doesnt know ape shit :D

Rounds 7, 8 and 9 were JMM's. Even with a 10 - 6 score in the first round, JMM should have won the fight 113 - 112. Sorry, but a strong majority of fans and writers disagree with that.

Rounds 7, 8 and 9 were JMM's. Even with a 10 - 6 score in the first round, JMM should have won the fight 113 - 112. Gee, I wonder why. :rolleyes: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH! So Manny won 2-3 round in yo opinion?! Please leave. You kill me wit these laughable posts.

Ahhh, no, we can't. http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44025&highlight=Pacquiao+Marquez http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b163/dantzu/LedermancardPacquiaoMarquez.jpg You're free to have whatever opinion you want, but if you felt Marquez won that fight you are in the minority. Giving him the 9 rounds he needs inbetween 3-12 is very generous to JMM. Rounds 7, 8 and 9 were JMM's. Even with a 10 - 6 score in the first round, JMM should have won the fight 113 - 112. No Pac should've won that fight & if you look at all the polls most people think Pac won, even the Boxingscene poll had Pac winning by a big margin. Gee, I wonder why. :rolleyes:

No, a boxer. JMM is a bitch for running from Pac. Do you think JMM will make the fight now that Pac took out better fighters in Morales and Barrera? No, he's content with hiding from Pacquiao. The truest bitch in the sport, JMM. Juan Manuel Marquez already proved this! Take away that first round, and Pacman gets his ass handed to him. Lucky for him he built enough of a lead on the cards to get a "draw." He better stay the hell away from Zahir Raheem, because we will see a Winky-Tito type a$$ whoopin once again. :boxing:

if you like being a pretensious asshole, that ur problem. but dont go flaunting it to the world by pointing out mistakes. You don't see the irony in the fact that this all started when you thought you were pointing out a mistake, but that it turned out you had no idea what you're talking about? lol. You were wrong, it was pointed out. Deal with it.

Ignorance such as jumping in to correct someone when you couldn't be more wrong is offensive to me. I thought it was as offensive to me as the response would have been to you, but evidently, I was wrong. You seem quite broken up about it. Like I said, if you don't like having it pointed out, just don't correct someone when you don't know what you're talking about. if you like being a pretensious asshole, that ur problem. but dont go flaunting it to the world by pointing out mistakes.

why would you be offended by ignorance? do you realize that the world is filled with flaws that you will eventually have to admit and live with? you couldve just posted the article instead of saying how ignorant my statement was. Ignorance such as jumping in to correct someone when you couldn't be more wrong is offensive to me. I thought it was as offensive to me as the response would have been to you, but evidently, I was wrong. You seem quite broken up about it. Like I said, if you don't like having it pointed out, just don't correct someone when you don't know what you're talking about.

Would you like a tissue? As I said, I was offended by your ignorance, so I pointed out it was ignorant, and derrived from misinformation. There was no personal insult in there, but it's obvious the degree of ignorance which was pointed out was painfull to you. As I said, this can be avoided by not jumping in to correct someone when you don't know what you're talking about. why would you be offended by ignorance? do you realize that the world is filled with flaws that you will eventually have to admit and live with? you couldve just posted the article instead of saying how ignorant my statement was.

Yea most polls I've seen on this fight, people had Pac winning. Also I agree with you you with the 10-6 round. I apreciate that, but it's really a given.

u didnt jump in to correct me, u jumped in to blatantly insult me THEN correct me, leading me to believe that you have no tolerance of any imperfections and ur first impulse is to insult; the mentality of a child. Would you like a tissue? As I said, I was offended by your ignorance, so I pointed out it was ignorant, and derrived from misinformation. There was no personal insult in there, but it's obvious the degree of ignorance which was pointed out was painfull to you. As I said, this can be avoided by not jumping in to correct someone when you don't know what you're talking about.

No Pac should've won that fight & if you look at all the polls most people think Pac won, even the Boxingscene poll had Pac winning by a big margin. The HBO poll a week or so later (I think it was the Jones Tarver renmatch) also had Pacquiao winning the fight by a wide vote.

I believe jumping to correct someone when you're wrong and don't know what you're talking about is a clear sign of having your head up your ass. Don't be mad at me, just don't jump to correct someone when you don't know what you're talking about. u didnt jump in to correct me, u jumped in to blatantly insult me THEN correct me, leading me to believe that you have no tolerance of any imperfections and ur first impulse is to insult; the mentality of a child.

its hard to see stuff with ur head up ur ass. I believe jumping to correct someone when you're wrong and don't know what you're talking about is a clear sign of having your head up your ass. Don't be mad at me, just don't jump to correct someone when you don't know what you're talking about.

I just can't fathom why you'd look to correct something when it's clear you had no idea what you were talking about. The ignorance was met with a blunt pointing out of the ignorance. I see nothing wrong with that. :boxing: its hard to see stuff with ur head up ur ass.

jesus christ bozo, is it possible to make an ignorant statement without you insulting them like a child? I just can't fathom why you'd look to correct something when it's clear you had no idea what you were talking about. The ignorance was met with a blunt pointing out of the ignorance. I see nothing wrong with that. :boxing:

That's so ignorant and derrived from misinformation that it doesn't even deserve a response. LOLZ, ROFLMAOVL at that comment o his.

That's so ignorant and derrived from misinformation that it doesn't even deserve a response. jesus christ bozo, is it possible to make an ignorant statement without you insulting them like a child?

3 KDs cannot make a round 10-6. That's so ignorant and derrived from misinformation that it doesn't even deserve a response. LAS VEGAS, Nevada -- Manny Pacquiao could've ended up the unified world featherweight boxing champ if not for an error in scoring Saturday. In fact, the fight judge who scored it 10-7 instead of an apt 10-6 after Pacquiao knocked down Juan Manuel Marquez three times in the opening round admitted to the mistake on Sunday. "I just screwed up. I feel badly because I dropped the ball, plainly and simply," said Mark Clements of Nevada whose final score could've made the difference if not for the slip. He scored it 113-all. John Stewart of New Jersey picked Pacquiao, 115-110, while Canada's Jay Gutras, whose conduct was also questioned, voted 115-110 for Marquez. "You can make a lot of arguments that it was a very close fight, that's immaterial. The fact is I dropped the ball," Clements was quoted as admitting by the Las Vegas Review-Journal Sunday. It used to be that a 10-6 score was not allowed, but this was in fights where the 3-knockdown rule was in effect. "Before three knockdowns was only 10-7. I take full responsibility for it," Clemens explained. "It was not that I was unaware. I just screwed it." Had he called it right, his card would've totaled 114-113 and Pacquiao would've automatically been declared winner. (The two other judges both scored the first round 10-6 for Pacquiao).