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

[travestyny]

you gave a copy of NSAC final score card form. the one with red corner won.

there's a printed info on the left side of the document that shows DATE, TIME and from WHERE.

what do you make of it?

I don't make anything of it. What did you think of the article that quotes the judge as saying he and the other two judges got it right by scoring the fight for Mayweather?

Or what did you think of the judges unanimously giving rounds 4 and 6 to Mayweather if your conspiracy theory is true?

Makes any sense to you?

[Spoon23]

it was also the biggest fight of floyd's life and how did he fight? certainly more like a "b1tch" than pac with all the holding and bending below the waist in order to stop the action. But since we expected floyd to be boring and cheat he goes unpunished. We put more pressure on pac to make it "exciting" and when it wasn't we punished him by scoring the fight for floyd since he's always boring. last i checked fights weren't scored on whether they were exciting or not. they are scored on who is landing the cleaner punches, has the better defense, etc... who did that in pac-floyd? well pac pretty clearly when you watch it closely.

also did you even watch pacs fights before floyd? i wouldn't say he was very ferocious against rios, algieiri, or bradley. in spots he would explode with a combo but he was very cautious and tactical for the most part. the only difference in the floyd fight is when he went to explode floyd would grab him or bend below the waist(illegal tactics) so he wasn't able to be as effective yet you still blame pac for making it boring. very very strange.

Well said, it seems Pac is placed in a higher standard than Floyd.

Still at the end of the day. Pac did win as video evidence shows he did enough to win it. It wasn't the trademark Pacquiao, but he still outsmarted and out-punched a roided up Floyd with only one good arm.

Legendary

[daggum]

Now, now. A lot of non-Floyd fans had Pac losing this fight, too.

Mike Tyson: "It's him, who he is. It's his era. It's his time. When a man's time has come, nothing can stop him. He's in invincible mode now."

Larry Merchant: Pacquaio “let everyone down in this fight”

Robert Garcia: "Mayweather did what he had to do, but I was a little disappointed more in Pacquiao,…I thought he was going to give him a better fight…They didn’t have a gameplan”

Sugar Ray Leonard: “Floyd Mayweather did what he had to do to stay undefeated…and that’s boxing smart.”

Carl Froch: 118 - 110 Mayweather

Harold Lederman: 117 - 111 Mayweather

Many others too, but most importantly, the three judges. Will you try to spin each of them as Floyd fans? Impossible.

most of those quotes reinforce what i said earlier. pac lost because he didn't do what they expected him to do. that's not a very sound way of scoring a boxing match. of course if you expect someone to go in there guns blazing and he doesn't you are going to be dissappointed, let down, etc...

when you take the emotions out of the fight and score it as fighter A vs fighter B who landed the cleaner punches? Fighter A. who had the better defense? Fighter A. who was using illegal tactics constantly? Fighter B. seems like Fighter A should be the winner wouldn't you agree? but when you add in emotions, preconcieved notions, and years upon years of thinking about how this fight would go it's pretty hard to withdraw yourself and see it as just a boxing match which it was.

in the boxing match pac got the better of floyd. i don't see how anyone could say otherwise. reasons why it was a bad decision: when you analyze actual landed punches they landed almost the same amount, but the majority of floyd's were jabs and the majority of pac's were power punches. pac's punches were crisper and cleaner, while floyd's fell short or barely grazed pac for the most part. pac's defense was better as he was rarely hit clean while floyd was hit flush over and over. Add in pac forcing floyd to hold and bend below the waist constantly in order to stop the action and there's enough there to say pac won pretty cleanly.

obviously fights are scored round by round and in rounds 3,4,6-10 he landed at least as many punches as floyd and landed the much better punches so if we take emotions out of it why wouldn't he win those rounds? because he wasn't as ferocious as some people expected is not a legit answer that i can take seriously. he fought like a b1tch is not a reason i can take seriously. give me some boxing evidence that floyd deserved to win and pac deserved to lose and i will always come back to the same thing: clean punching. not the perception of landing clean punches but actually landing cleanly. if you want to argue floyd landed cleaner that's fine but i have reviewed the fight in detail and i don't see that at all.

whether you fight ferociously or like a b1tch as one poster said, you still deserve to win a boxing match if you land the cleaner punches, but in this case the fighter landing the cleaner punches did not get the decision.

[Rath]

I don't make anything of it. What did you think of the article that quotes the judge as saying he and the other two judges got it right by scoring the fight for Mayweather?

Or what did you think of the judges unanimously giving rounds 4 and 6 to Mayweather if your conspiracy theory is true?

Makes any sense to you?

2 judges scores all 12 rounds identically the same what do you make of that?

if judge no. 3 did not missed rounds 9 and 10 all 3 judges would have score the entire fight all 12 rounds of them identically the same.

what do you make of that?

there are 3 individual score cards per rounds, 36 toatl for 12 rounds

the person who tallied the score for red corner instead of blue made 36 times mistakes without ever noticing it?

what do you make of that?


the info on the left side of that final score cards say " May 2, 2015 9:25 PM from: Garden Green

the final bell rung at 9:48 PM

what do you make of that

[tangalog2200]

Sorry, I don't see anything worthy there. The point is everyone scored the fight for Mayweather whether they were fans of his or not, except Holyfield and Skip Bayless. Oh, and Pacroaches, but I thought we would leave this in the realm of people that we know "know **** about boxing." That eliminates Skip Bayless, don't you think?

Do you disagree? If so, please tell me more.

if you can't see the gold nuggets in post 3017, why should i bother?

you see only what you want to see....

score the rounds yourself per the videos presented...

303 pages and counting...hmmmm

why does it take so long to dispute spoon's tread? a lot of truth in it? yes? no?

[travestyny]

most of those quotes reinforce what i said earlier. pac lost because he didn't do what they expected him to do. that's not a very sound way of scoring a boxing match. of course if you expect someone to go in there guns blazing and he doesn't you are going to be dissappointed, let down, etc...

when you take the emotions out of the fight and score it as fighter A vs fighter B who landed the cleaner punches? Fighter A. who had the better defense? Fighter A. who was using illegal tactics constantly? Fighter B. seems like Fighter A should be the winner wouldn't you agree? but when you add in emotions, preconcieved notions, and years upon years of thinking about how this fight would go it's pretty hard to withdraw yourself and see it as just a boxing match which it was.

in the boxing match pac got the better of floyd. i don't see how anyone could say otherwise. reasons why it was a bad decision: when you analyze actual landed punches they landed almost the same amount, but the majority of floyd's were jabs and the majority of pac's were power punches. pac's punches were crisper and cleaner, while floyd's fell short or barely grazed pac for the most part. pac's defense was better as he was rarely hit clean while floyd was hit flush over and over. Add in pac forcing floyd to hold and bend below the waist constantly in order to stop the action and there's enough there to say pac won pretty cleanly.

obviously fights are scored round by round and in rounds 3,4,6-10 he landed at least as many punches as floyd and landed the much better punches so if we take emotions out of it why wouldn't he win those rounds? because he wasn't as ferocious as some people expected is not a legit answer that i can take seriously. he fought like a b1tch is not a reason i can take seriously. give me some boxing evidence that floyd deserved to win and pac deserved to lose and i will always come back to the same thing: clean punching. not the perception of landing clean punches but actually landing cleanly. if you want to argue floyd landed cleaner that's fine but i have reviewed the fight in detail and i don't see that at all.

whether you fight ferociously or like a b1tch as one poster said, you still deserve to win a boxing match if you land the cleaner punches, but in this case the fighter landing the cleaner punches did not get the decision.

Are you trying to say that professional boxing judges went into this fight biased, and you know exactly what they were thinking? That seems to be a big assumption.

Like I mentioned, only one person of boxing trainers, judges, and boxers retired and active thought Pacquaio won the fight. Are you trying to say that you know what exactly all of them were thinking, and all of them went into the fight with biases and that is the reason Pacquaio lost?

Just trying to clarify.

[Spoon23]

most of those quotes reinforce what i said earlier. pac lost because he didn't do what they expected him to do. that's not a very sound way of scoring a boxing match. of course if you expect someone to go in there guns blazing and he doesn't you are going to be dissappointed, let down, etc...

when you take the emotions out of the fight and score it as fighter A vs fighter B who landed the cleaner punches? Fighter A. who had the better defense? Fighter A. who was using illegal tactics constantly? Fighter B. seems like Fighter A should be the winner wouldn't you agree? but when you add in emotions, preconcieved notions, and years upon years of thinking about how this fight would go it's pretty hard to withdraw yourself and see it as just a boxing match which it was.

in the boxing match pac got the better of floyd. i don't see how anyone could say otherwise. reasons why it was a bad decision: when you analyze actual landed punches they landed almost the same amount, but the majority of floyd's were jabs and the majority of pac's were power punches. pac's punches were crisper and cleaner, while floyd's fell short or barely grazed pac for the most part. pac's defense was better as he was rarely hit clean while floyd was hit flush over and over. Add in pac forcing floyd to hold and bend below the waist constantly in order to stop the action and there's enough there to say pac won pretty cleanly.

obviously fights are scored round by round and in rounds 3,4,6-10 he landed at least as many punches as floyd and landed the much better punches so if we take emotions out of it why wouldn't he win those rounds? because he wasn't as ferocious as some people expected is not a legit answer that i can take seriously. he fought like a b1tch is not a reason i can take seriously. give me some boxing evidence that floyd deserved to win and pac deserved to lose and i will always come back to the same thing: clean punching. not the perception of landing clean punches but actually landing cleanly. if you want to argue floyd landed cleaner that's fine but i have reviewed the fight in detail and i don't see that at all.

whether you fight ferociously or like a b1tch as one poster said, you still deserve to win a boxing match if you land the cleaner punches, but in this case the fighter landing the cleaner punches did not get the decision.

This post by Sterilizer reinforces and explains the Pacquiao predicament on what you just said.

Originally Posted by sterilizer
Slow motion doesn't lie.

Pacquiao was so fast in both attack and defense, that probably half or more of his connected punches (WHICH DID SOUND LIKE A PUNCH BTW) were never credited by either Compubox or the American judges, being on American soil, and in Las Vegas no less.

Likewise, half or more of Floyd's punches were credited as landed, but they never ever made any sound like Manny's, and in slow motion it is clearly evident that Manny dodged most of them with excellent head or body movement, and/or caught them with his gloves.

Pacquiao proved to be faster and more accurate than Mayweather both in offense and defense, but his problem is that he is not such a good "poser" when he lands his punches, most of the time they are so awkward that the only way to appreciate and acknowledge them is with the use of slow motion and a very good angle. Conversely, most of Floyd's pot-shot punches LOOK way more aesthetic, almost like theatrically rehearsed for maximum effect, and even if they don't actually land, IDK how he does it but in real time it LOOKS like they do land, but there's no sound to them and in slo-mo you can see that he missed, sometimes even by a few inches...

I am pretty sure that a similar story went down in both of his Maidana fights. Even in regular motion, I clearly saw Maidana dodge or catch most of those supposedly "landed" punches, and frankly Mayweather looked clumsy and old at times. In the De la Hoya fight, similar story, and even in his fight vs. Marquez as well, Marquez did actually land a lot of great combinations of three or more punches on Floyd, which were never credited to him. It doesn't matter that he was punching like a weakling because he was at least two weight divisions smaller than Floyd and in his poorest shape ever, his combinations did still land and he got no credit for them. BTW Floyd did not land a single combination of punches vs. Marquez throughout the whole fight. Just one pot-shot after the other, --many of them caught or dodged as usual-- but his theatrics were great as always, to impress the very-biased American judges.

I insist, a 2nd meeting should have no advantages for Floyd, it should not be on American soil, no American judges, no American referee, no sold-out "punch stats" by Compubox. Instead, this time let the fight take place in Asia, China for example. Use several independent, non-biased stats providers that really do take the necessary time to analyze the punch stats in slow motion and in several angles AFTER the fight ends, and also use the referee, judges, gloves, commentators, drug-testing agencies, betting houses, etc. etc. that Manny chooses, not Floyd, and then, let's see what happens... Oh and I forgot, let's see a Maanny fighting with BOTH hands as well...

But that of course is just a fantasy, the American fighter with all the financial power and clout does always dictate the terms, so if a 2nd fight would be to take place in Las Vegas again, IMO only stupid people would pay to see such a fiasco again, because I don't think Manny has the capability to knock Floyd out, with all the clinching and running involved, if he hasn't been able to knock out smaller and less super-defensive opponents for the last few years

[travestyny]

2 judges scores all 12 rounds identically the same what do you make of that?

if judge no. 3 did not missed rounds 9 and 10 all 3 judges would have score the entire fight all 12 rounds of them identically the same.

what do you make of that?

there are 3 individual score cards per rounds, 36 toatl for 12 rounds

the person who tallied the score for red corner instead of blue made 36 times mistakes without ever noticing it?

what do you make of that?


the info on the left side of that final score cards say " May 2, 2015 9:25 PM from: Garden Green

the final bell rung at 9:48 PM

what do you make of that

For the judges part, I make of it that they were in agreement.

As for your whole thing about the corners, it's ridiculous and you know it. It doesn't even need to be addressed anymore because it makes no sense and I've explained to you in a number of ways why it makes no sense. If you are too slow to understand why that makes no sense, I can't help you.

[travestyny]

if you can't see the gold nuggets in post 3017, why should i bother?

you see only what you want to see....

score the rounds yourself per the videos presented...

303 pages and counting...hmmmm

why does it take so long to dispute spoon's tread? a lot of truth in it? yes? no?

I've disputed Spoons videos in a number of ways. I've discussed the contents of the videos, I've discussed it being entirely useless since boxing matches aren't scored that way, I've discussed how it is subjective, and I've proven that the subjective judge is biased, to say the least.

That's 4 different ways I've disputed the videos. Do you know what Spoon's response was each time?

It can be summarized as "you have red boxes under your name."

Anything else I can do for you?

[Spoon23]

2 judges scores all 12 rounds identically the same what do you make of that?

if judge no. 3 did not missed rounds 9 and 10 all 3 judges would have score the entire fight all 12 rounds of them identically the same.

what do you make of that?

there are 3 individual score cards per rounds, 36 toatl for 12 rounds

the person who tallied the score for red corner instead of blue made 36 times mistakes without ever noticing it?

what do you make of that?


the info on the left side of that final score cards say " May 2, 2015 9:25 PM from: Garden Green

the final bell rung at 9:48 PM

what do you make of that

You mean @ 9:25 pm they already finished tallying the score card even if the final bell was @ 9:48pm?

You have evidence on this Rath? That's another smoking gun if it is true!