If Pavlik doesn't get cut in the 9th does he win?

[Calilloyd]

You obviously only semi-literate, or u just flap without thinking. I wrote that the reason he got cut was legit, and that this is purely just asking a WHAT IF. As in if he didn't open up a cut, and just bruised him instead, WHAT IF. It's a comlex concept I know. It's ok, if it's too much for you there's always picture books.

You can use any type of semantics you want. But the bottom line is you are trying to make an excuse for Pavlik losing. You try to mask it by claiming "whats done is done" but you obviously felt a need to make this thread. Yes, what you are doing is that transparent and obviously it's not "done" for you. Cuts are a part of boxing. Especially if the opponent is slicing you up with his punches. The fact that you think that Pavlik would have "won by late stoppage" when he never even came close to hurting Martinez clearly shows your fan boy logic. As well as the fact that you can't get over him losing. Pavlik looked like he wanted to quit at times. But he was going to win this fight? Yeah Ok. Is that literate enough for you?

[Calilloyd]

Don't be a clown, Martinez wasn't hurt at any point. The knockdown in the 8th was because Pavlik stepped on his foot. The punch itself was like a weak jab.

blown up welterweight Martinez just made Hopkins best win look ****e.

How is Martinez a "blown up welterweight?" Do you know how long it's been since he fought there? And 43 year old Hopkins beating Pavlik will never look like "****e".

[dc6112]

You can use any type of semantics you want. But the bottom line is you are trying to make an excuse for Pavlik losing. You try to mask it by claiming "whats done is done" but you obviously felt a need to make this thread. Yes, what you are doing is that transparent and obviously it's not "done" for you. Cuts are a part of boxing. Especially if the opponent is slicing you up with his punches. The fact that you think that Pavlik would have "won by late stoppage" when he never even came close to hurting Martinez clearly shows your fan boy logic. As well as the fact that you can't get over him losing. Pavlik looked like he wanted to quit at times. But he was going to win this fight? Yeah Ok. Is that literate enough for you?

First of all, how am I making excuses by asking a hypothetical? I'm a Pavlik fan asking a hypothetical question, and somehow you turn that into me making excuses for why he lost? Second of all, I already said what's done is done.

If he doesn't get cut, and it is possible, as much as you might think it's not, that if that second cut doesn't happen then Martinez doesn't open up on Pavlik like he did. Or was it just some big coincidence that not seeing and getting punched in the face happened to occur at the same time? And as far as him quitting, if he looked like he wanted to quit it's probably because he couldn't see and he felt he was losing, which he was. That's how people look when they're gettin phucked up. No one argued otherwise. I'm still not sure what your point is.

There is no "fan boy logic". No one's making excuses. Your just trying to call me out on some argument that I never even made. I don't know what that makes you. I guess it's not illiterate. It's just dumb.

And your sayin I can't get over him losing.... for no reason. I never said he shoulda won. Come to think of it everything your callin me out on I never said. You're dancing without a partner. Go pick a fight in someone's thread who's actually arguing a point. I just asked a question, you came in throwing accusations around like a spazz.

[Iceta Lives]

I think the cuts played a factor with Pavlik looking as bad as he did at the end. But not having a good cut man is something that is his fault and nobody else's.

[FloydTBE]

In order for pavlik to win the fight, he had to let his hands go more often, not just jab, jab, right. Martinez let his hands go and caused problems for pavlik

[Bhopreign]

Martinez won this fight fair and square, and I know this is a huge IF. I am just wondering what other people think. Cuts can happen to anyone, at any time. Kelly got caught and his ability to block and counter diminished huge after the cut. The most telling stat all fight is comparing the power punch stats for Martinez before and after the cut. Prior to the cut the most PP's he landed was round 2, when he landed 15. After the cut, in round 9, he landed 34.

So, I know Kelly lost and what's done is done. But for the purpose of finding out what your opinion is on what might have been, do you think the outcome woulda been different if that cut doesn't happen? I believe Pavlik wins by UD or late KO. More likely UD.

poll coming

What would Kelly have needed to happen for him to beat Hopkins, no cuts in that fight.

[DiegoFuego]

Let me put it this way, and maybe this is what a lot of you guys were thinking.

When I was watching the fight, I honestly thought things had turned in Pavlik's favor for good in round 8. He seemed to have Martinez figured out, had evened the fight up on points and won round 8. Martinez slugged it out with him a lot more in that round, and I kept saying Pavlik is either going to win on points or by KO as Martinez gets more desperate.

That was my thinking right then.

However, as soon as round 9 started and Sergio was letting the leather fly, I said wait a minute, this fight is not over. Martinez lands about 6 unanswered left hands and is just lighting Pavlik up. There is no cut at that point. After more left hands, a cut appears, but it's another minute before Pavlik is covered in blood. Then, I was almost sure Martinez was going to win.

My question is why didn't Pavlik return fire when Martinez was lighting him up to start round 9? I think he was tiring, got cut, and then it was over. The cut certainly helped to secure the loss, but I can't say for certain it was the cause.

Thus my initial post: I don't know.