Rios-Abril Was A Worse Decision Than Pacquiao-Marquez 3

not even comparable. i felt that Pac JMM 3 was a close fight and i don't have any beef with people claiming pac won Pac and JMM was close. But that was not a robbery. This was a clear robbery. I agree with a poster on the first page. Abril didn't even break a sweat.

not even comparable. i felt that Pac JMM 3 was a close fight and i don't have any beef with people claiming pac won

Im watching the fight again. Santa Cruz vs casamayor is still the worst robbery Ive seen in my short life.

Definitely rios vs Abril was a worse decision than PAC vs Marquez 3. I had it as a draw for PAC vs Marquez 3 whereas rios vs Abril I had rios winning only two rounds maybe 3 rounds max but that's it.

weak poll, should be deleted. last night was a clear robbery, whereas pac man won his fight. debating the two is like night and day. like mayweather is a felon and pac is not, total opposite comparisons

I didnt see Rios Abril last night but imo Marquez Pac 3 wasnt a robbery at all just a very close fight. From what I have read today it seems that Abril was robbed badly but considering most of you think Marquez was clearly robbed against Pac i dont know how accurate that really is.

OP took this opportunity to bash Pacquiao-Marquez 3. Get over it. 90% of non-floyd fans say Pac-Marquez 3 was competitive. This decision was far worse. I know of several journalists who regularly write negative articles about Floyd who had Marquez dominating Pacquiao. Kevin Mitchell (The Guardian) and Gabriel Montoya (Max Boxing) are two examples who both had Marquez dominating the fight. The vast majority of boxing writers and fans had Marquez winning and a large quantity of them had him winning clearly rather than close. I only know about 10 people (maybe even less than that) who had it a draw or had Pacquiao winning. Rios-Abril might have been a worse robbery, it was, I agree, but Pacquiao-Marquez 3 is still one of the worst robberies in the history of the sport.

Abril won 11-1. Marquez won 9-3. Both were awful.

OP took this opportunity to bash Pacquiao-Marquez 3. Get over it. 90% of non-floyd fans say Pac-Marquez 3 was competitive. This decision was far worse.

http://images.yuku.com.s3.amazonaws.com/image/gif/7a21548180166f8ac2c0024ee18d4e9e77c2351.gif be scientific, douchebag

Marquez vs Pac wasn't a robbery at all, I thought it was a close fight and I scored it a draw I had Rios winning against Abril, just because a guy is acting madd calm and acting he's in an easy fight doesn't mea anything to me, i thought all is punches were just as irrelevant as Rios'. I picked Rios to win on constant pressure and work rate :0 No way, I found the unicorn... a person who actually thought Rios won.

There is a big difference in the 2 fights. In the Marquez/Pac fight, there was a lot of close rounds. It just depends on who you give the close rounds to, is the person that wins the fight. It isn't a robbery since you would have different results by flipping around close rounds. In the Rios/Abril fight, there was about 3 close rounds. If you give all the close rounds to Rios, Abril wins by a big margin. If you give all the close rounds to Abril, then Abril wins by a shutout.

I had Rios winning against Abril, just because a guy is acting madd calm and acting he's in an easy fight doesn't mea anything to me, i thought all is punches were just as irrelevant as Rios'. I picked Rios to win on constant pressure and work rate http://images.yuku.com.s3.amazonaws.com/image/gif/7a21548180166f8ac2c0024ee18d4e9e77c2351.gif

No shit, Sherlock. Pac-Marquez 3 was a close fight, not a robbery. Rios-Abril could have been scored 120-108 to Abril fairly easily, and even being kind to Rios, the guy only won 3 rounds.

yes rios hardly won a round simmilar to lara and williams. williams hardly won a round. rios hardly won a round. abril beat the brakes off of him

Waaaaaay worse. Pac/Marquez was competitive all throughout. This was a COMPLETE shutout. Absolutely nothing close about it. What a disgrace. I can't agree that Pacquiao-Marquez was competitive throughout. There were several rounds that Marquez completely dominated and if you watch the fight on silent with no HBO cheerleaders there to influence you, you will realise that there really wasn't any rounds that Pacquiao dominated or won clearly except round 12. Marquez controlled the pace and did more damage. Offcourse it was. Pac-JMM was close and competitive. Rios-Abril wasn't. Marquez beat Pacquiao in a close fight Abril dominated Rios... Saying Pacquiao-Marquez 3 was competitive is like saying De La Hoya-Sturm was competitive. It wasn't. It just wasn't. There's no logic in saying it was. If you watch without the HBO cheerleaders desperately trying to influence you, you will realise that Marquez dominated the fight. He controlled the pace and landed the harder punches. Manny hardly landed any meaningful punches in their 3rd fight. Calling Marquez - Pacquiao III a robbery is PC for Floyd fans. That was no robbery. It was a close fight that I thought was a draw but a point here or there could take it one way or the other. How can you insinuate that only Floyd fans think that it was a robbery when you have journalists like Lem Satterfield, Steve Kim, Gabriel Montoya and Michael Marley, journalists who are known for being biased towards Pacquiao, all scoring the fight for the Marquez? That speaks for itself. I also remember reading that there was a poll in the Phillipines and like 60% of people had Marquez winning the fight. Again, that speaks for itself. Even the people who train with Manny (Amir Khan, Jorge Linares) said that he lost the fight. If it was really a close fight and really could have gone either way, then they wouldn't have been saying that. Atleast you could make a case for Manny beating Marquez, I don't think he did but I can understand why some people thought Pac won. I gave Rios 2 rounds and those 2 were close rounds. It was probably the worst robbery I've seen. I thought Ottke-Reid and Helenius-Chisora were bad but this was an out and out disgrace. I don't think you can make a case for Pacquiao beating Marquez in their third fight at all. The most common argument seems to be "well he landed more punches" but what the idiots who say/post that fail to understand is that boxing is supposed to be scored round by round and Pacquiao only landed more punches in 4 rounds. I thought that Campillo-Shumenov 2 was worse than Pacquiao-Marquez and Ottke-Reid. People should watch that fight. Shumenov arguably lost every round. I gave him two, as apposed to the one for Rios against Abril.

Atleast you could make a case for Manny beating Marquez, I don't think he did but I can understand why some people thought Pac won. I gave Rios 2 rounds and those 2 were close rounds. It was probably the worst robbery I've seen. I thought Ottke-Reid and Helenius-Chisora were bad but this was an out and out disgrace.

Calling Marquez - Pacquiao III a robbery is PC for Floyd fans. That was no robbery. It was a close fight that I thought was a draw but a point here or there could take it one way or the other.

Casamayor vs Santa Cruz is a better comparison. That was just as bad if not worse.

Marquez beat Pacquiao in a close fight Abril dominated Rios...