Two Of The Most Controversial Judges In Boxing Will Be Scoring Mayweather vs Cotto

You guys are idiots if you think Barrera beat Marquez :nonono: Yeah. People will try to slowly turn that fight in to a robbery over the years.

You guys are idiots if you think Barrera beat Marquez :nonono:

I'm sure Mayweather has nothing to worry about

Yeah i got dat now ya little virgin boy, never heard of the geezer Wow don't get all butthurt..:bottle:

Don't get me wrong, I am a huge Mayweather fan, maybe the biggest on here, I think he's quite possibly the greatest boxer that has ever lived, and I fully expect him to dominate and stop Miguel Cotto next Saturday and make the judges completely irrelevant by forcing a stoppage, but I would be lying if I said that I wasn't somewhat concerned about this. The judges that I am referring to are Dave Moretti and Patricia Morse Jarman (who is quite possibly the worst judge in boxing right now). What worries me is that these two judges have shown to be very inept at scoring fights fairly in the past and both of them tend to just go for aggression above everything else, even if the aggression is completely ineffective (Like Manny Pacquiao was against Juan Manuel Marquez in their 3rd fight). Like I said before, I am fully expecting Floyd to dominate this fight and win easily, but with two judges who have the past records that these two have, I am concerned that something fishy might happen, and I think I speak for everyone out there when I say that considering everything he has done for the sport over the last 15 years, it would be a crying shame to see Money Mayweather get robbed of his undefeated record by two incompetant and/or corrupt individuals. With him being the sharp minded and incredibly intelligent individual that he is, i'm suprised that Floyd didn't object to these two people judging this fight. Here are just some of their adsurd past scorecards. Patricia Morse Jarman : Gabriel Campillo vs Beibut Shumenov - Jarman scored this fight 117-111 for Shumenov. I scored it 118-110 for Campillo and consider it to be the second worst decision that I have ever seen from all the fights I have watched. Oscar De La Hoya vs Fernando Vargas - After 10 rounds, Jarman had Vargas winning the fight 97-94 which means that of the first 10 rounds she gave Vargas 6 of them with one even, and only gave 3 to De La Hoya. I have watched this fight several times and cannot understand how anyone can give Vargas more than 4 rounds. De La Hoya clearly won more rounds. Marco Antonio Barrera vs Juan Manuel Marquez - Jarman scored this fight 116-111 for Marquez which means she gave him 8 rounds. I had Barrera winning 7 rounds to 5 (114-113). I can understand someone having it even and therefore having Marquez winning by a point but to have him winning by five points is simply wrong and out of touch with reality. Shane Mosley vs Fernando Vargas 1 - I thought Vargas took an absolute tanking in this fight, which he clearly did, evidenced by the fact that his eye was completely ****ed up by the end, while Mosley hardly had a scratch on him, but Jarman actually had Vargas ahead at the time of the stoppage which is just wildly absurd and completely and utterly ridiculous. I think I had Vargas winning 3 rounds, I could see a 4th if you wanted me to be generous, but she had him winning six. There's no logical explanation that can be made for that. Zab Judah vs Rafael Pineda - Jarman had Judah winning this fight by 3 points. I had him losing by 3 points. A couple of the rounds were close, but after round 4 Pineda pretty much controlled the rest of the fight and should have gotten the decision in my eyes. Her scorecard in this fight wasn't outstandingly bad but it was still a controversial verdict to give. Dave Moretti : Manny Pacquiao vs Juan Manuel Marquez 3 : 80% of the people you see say that Pacquaio lost this fight and many of them call it a robbery. I personally only gave Manny 3 out of the 12 rounds and thought that I was being generous with one of them. I don't see how you anyone can give him more than 4. Moretti managed to find a way to give him 7. Felix Sturm vs Oscar De La Hoya - Sturm completely dominated this fight. I gave De La Hoya 3 rounds and thought that I was being generous. I have seen fights where the loser did a lot better than De La Hoya did in this fight, but got completely shut out on the scorecards (Nonito Donaire vs Omar Narvaez is an example). Moretti had De La Hoya winning 115-113. Kelly Pavlik vs Jermain Taylor 2 - I thought that this was a very close fight and actually had Taylor winning it before he faded down the stretch and allowed Pavlik to take the last 2 or 3 rounds. I scored it 115-113 and I wouldn't have been offended if it had been ruled a draw. Moretti gave Pavlik 9 out of the 12 rounds which is once again, out of touch with reality. Jose Luis Castillo vs Joel Casamayor - This was a very close and even fight. Casamayor dominated the early rounds and Castillo dominated the late rounds. Moretti scored it 117-111 for Castillo. I had it a draw. Floyd Mayweather Jr vs Zab Judah - Yes Judah gave Floyd some trouble in the early rounds but giving someone trouble and actually winning rounds against them are two different things. I had Mayweather winning 11 out of the 12 rounds. Moretti somehow gave Judah 4. How? I don't know. I'm curious to know what people think about this. In the end I don't think it is going to matter because I think that Floyd is so great that he is going to make sure that the outcome doesn't end up being decided in the judges hands. However I still think that it's a damn shame that two people who have proven themselves to be inept and/or crooked on many occassions are getting the chance to control a bout of this magnitude, but they are. I guess all we can do is keep our fingers crossed that there will be no controversy or injustice. They would not put them in those big fights if they don't know shit.

It doesn't matter. This fight is not going the distance anyway.

Tony......Weeks.......is the ref........for Mayweather........Cotto.......you........idiot

'Two Of The Most Controversial Judges In Boxing Will Be Scoring Mayweather vs Cotto' Who's that then? the two American judges that scored the Petersen vs Khan fight to Petersen??? guarantee Floyd gets his standard biased ass referee as well, Mr. Joe Cortez... I'd bring in Joe Cooper for Floyd though, Cotto would befighting 3 men then instead of just the 2 with Cortez refereeing Weeks is the ref numbnuts.

'Two Of The Most Controversial Judges In Boxing Will Be Scoring Mayweather vs Cotto' Who's that then? the two American judges that scored the Petersen vs Khan fight to Petersen??? guarantee Floyd gets his standard biased ass referee as well, Mr. Joe Cortez... I'd bring in Joe Cooper for Floyd though, Cotto would befighting 3 men then instead of just the 2 with Cortez refereeing You wouldn't happen to be British would you????

Its funny how boxing is still allowed to be corrupt in the 21st phucking century. And everybody knows this. It may just be a part of the grimy machismo culture at this point. Cuz major boxing event operate outside of mainstream TV. Most major sports ventures in network TV. When that many ppl witness the robbery on network TV, someone is gonna act.

Its funny how boxing is still allowed to be corrupt in the 21st phucking century. And everybody knows this. It may just be a part of the grimy machismo culture at this point.

The only chance for Cotto to win in this fight is by knockout.

Did you ever think that it would be Cotto getting the screw job? Not saying Cotto wins cause I think Floyd wins easy UD. But if Cotto shocked the world and did somehow win it would be Floyd who would get the call not Cotto...

Gayle Van hoyle is the worst

Could go either way op. Lettuce be real, the real paycheck is in pac-mayweather. Do you think they would try and intenionally score against this megafight/megapaycheck? On the same token, maybe bob doesnt even want that fight to ever go down. But lets just get the excuses out of our system early.

Generally, robberies favour the cash cow in the fight... with that in mind, I'd say it's very unlikely that Mayweather will be on the end of a bad decision. It's more likely that Cotto is ripped off (Assuming he does a lot better than everyone expects, you get what I mean). Floyd was almost robbed against Oscar though, but Oscar was seen as the main guymoney wise in that fight.

Generally, robberies favour the cash cow in the fight... with that in mind, I'd say it's very unlikely that Mayweather will be on the end of a bad decision. It's more likely that Cotto is ripped off (Assuming he does a lot better than everyone expects, you get what I mean).

I'll never agree on that, HBO team were always so biased on Barrera. He got a gift against Juarez in the first fight and they were like nothing happend. Then the rematch with Rocky was also very close fight that I thought he lost as well and they were just talking this bull**** that Barrera is one of the greatest that ever lived and he fought like Ali. Laugh My ****ing Ass Out. Barrera landed plenty of Marquez, but Marquez was putting his punches together and landed more. He won it clearly and I'm glad judges had more senses than Lampley, Merchant and LAdderman that night. I agree on Marquez-Barrera. That was a clear Marquez win to me. Lampley is full of s**t, just listen to his annoncing when he's breaking down the action, he gets s**t wrong all the time. A recent example was Mayweather-Ortiz. In the opening seconds of round 3 when Ortiz was backing Mayweather into the ropes, he got hit by 2 solid left hooks from Floyd, and all Lampley said was "Another left hand lead from Ortiz", and then Steward set his straight for a second and said "That's what I'd like to see Floyd o more of, jabbing and hooking", and then Lampley said "Good counter punch". And at the end of the round, Ortiz rushed in and got popped with a right hand from Floyd, and he said "A good elft cross from Victor Ortiz". Than right after that Ortiz got popped with an uppercut from Floyd to end the round, and lampley said "He's quick enough to fight with Floyd Mayweather". Lampley is a f**king moron.

I'll never agree on that, HBO team were always so biased on Barrera. He got a gift against Juarez in the first fight and they were like nothing happend. Then the rematch with Rocky was also very close fight that I thought he lost as well and they were just talking this bull**** that Barrera is one of the greatest that ever lived and he fought like Ali. Laugh My ****ing Ass Out. Barrera landed plenty of Marquez, but Marquez was putting his punches together and landed more. He won it clearly and I'm glad judges had more senses than Lampley, Merchant and LAdderman that night. lol. I don't remember them comparing him to Ali, but i'll give you the benefit of the doubt about the commentators. Maybe if I watched that fight again but without the commentary, I might have Marquez winning, I can't remember if I watched it with the commentary or not, but the HBO team really can and do sway people a lot with their cheerleading and bias. The first Juarez fight couldve gone either way, but I didn't think the rematch was close at all. Different people, different opinions I guess. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks that Shumenov beat Campillo or that De La Hoya beat Sturm though. Those were clear robberies and there's no reason why the judges for those fights shouldn't have been suspended. I guess it has a lot to do with the promoters. If you have a big promoter and you get robbed, you can and probably will get the judges suspended like Golden Boy did with Lara-Williams, but if you get robbed and don't have a big promoter (Like Sturm against De La Hoya), nothing will happen.

The bias always spills over to the more popular fighter. Yeah, pbf should worry soo much.