PBF-Castillo I & Pac-JMM II were NOT robberies!!!

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • jaestix1
    Banned
    • Aug 2009
    • 1735
    • 92
    • 2
    • 1,882

    #1

    PBF-Castillo I & Pac-JMM II were NOT robberies!!!

    It's impossible that fights this close can classified as a robbery......chavez-whitiker was a robbery. hell, dlh-mayweather was almost a robbery and pac was more robbed in pac-jmm 1 than jmm was robbed in pac-jmm 2. no way can you say that pbf-castillo and pac-jmm 2 were robberies.
  • Thread Stealer
    Undisputed Champion
    Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
    • Sep 2007
    • 9657
    • 439
    • 102
    • 17,804

    #2
    People always call close fights robberies.

    The worst is when they use Compubox as "evidence".

    Comment

    • jaestix1
      Banned
      • Aug 2009
      • 1735
      • 92
      • 2
      • 1,882

      #3
      Originally posted by PED User
      People always call close fights robberies.

      The worst is when they use Compubox as "evidence".
      they have no idea what a robbery is...

      Comment

      • mrgreenfingers
        Interim Champion
        Gold Champion - 500-1,000 posts
        • Jul 2009
        • 658
        • 18
        • 51
        • 13,390

        #4
        Originally posted by jaestix1
        It's impossible that fights this close can classified as a robbery......chavez-whitiker was a robbery. hell, dlh-mayweather was almost a robbery and pac was more robbed in pac-jmm 1 than jmm was robbed in pac-jmm 2. no way can you say that pbf-castillo and pac-jmm 2 were robberies.
        yea that it was a SD not a UD

        Comment

        • jaestix1
          Banned
          • Aug 2009
          • 1735
          • 92
          • 2
          • 1,882

          #5
          Originally posted by mrgreenfingers
          yea that it was a SD not a UD
          dlh won 4 rounds at best.....and im being generous

          Comment

          • lfc19titles
            Undisputed Champion
            • Mar 2010
            • 8732
            • 725
            • 628
            • 94,838

            #6
            what I dont get is why people ignore pac vs marq 1, the judge admitted he made a mistake not scoring the first round 10-6 to pac for the 3 knockdowns, he made a mistake scoring it 10-7 while the other judges got it right with 10-6

            if it wasnt for the judging era we would have had pac winning th first fight instead of a draw

            Comment

            • jaestix1
              Banned
              • Aug 2009
              • 1735
              • 92
              • 2
              • 1,882

              #7
              Originally posted by lfc19titles
              what I dont get is why people ignore pac vs marq 1, the judge admitted he made a mistake not scoring the first round 10-6 to pac for the 3 knockdowns, he made a mistake scoring it 10-7 while the other judges got it right with 10-6

              if it wasnt for the judging era we would have had pac winning th first fight instead of a draw
              paquiao should have won the first fight.....

              Comment

              • r.burgundy
                Undisputed Champion
                Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
                • Feb 2008
                • 1636
                • 177
                • 61
                • 8,290

                #8
                Originally posted by jaestix1
                It's impossible that fights this close can classified as a robbery......chavez-whitiker was a robbery. hell, dlh-mayweather was almost a robbery and pac was more robbed in pac-jmm 1 than jmm was robbed in pac-jmm 2. no way can you say that pbf-castillo and pac-jmm 2 were robberies.
                people look for any possible ***** in an armor.pac was absolutely robbed in the 1st jmm fight due to incorrect scoring.thats a true shame.2nd fight was a close tough fight.if anybody can say they knew who won pac/jmm 2 before the decision then they would make nostradamus proud

                as far as floyd castillo,i say floyd by at least 2 rnd.this is really a 10 rnd fight to score being that both of them lost a rnd for fouls.with that said,floyd easily won the 1st 4 rounds,but castillo damn sure didnt sweep the rest

                Comment

                • Seleção No. 13
                  Noblesse oblige
                  Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                  • Dec 2009
                  • 5934
                  • 280
                  • 265
                  • 12,426

                  #9
                  Originally posted by lfc19titles
                  what I dont get is why people ignore pac vs marq 1, the judge admitted he made a mistake not scoring the first round 10-6 to pac for the 3 knockdowns, he made a mistake scoring it 10-7 while the other judges got it right with 10-6

                  if it wasnt for the judging era we would have had pac winning th first fight instead of a draw
                  lol. And since so many claimed the second fight to be an error, we can now say that the first fight was technically a Pac win while the second was a draw.

                  Comment

                  • jaestix1
                    Banned
                    • Aug 2009
                    • 1735
                    • 92
                    • 2
                    • 1,882

                    #10
                    Originally posted by r.burgundy
                    people look for any possible ***** in an armor.pac was absolutely robbed in the 1st jmm fight due to incorrect scoring.thats a true shame.2nd fight was a close tough fight.if anybody can say they knew who won pac/jmm 2 before the decision then they would make nostradamus proud

                    as far as floyd castillo,i say floyd by at least 2 rnd.this is really a 10 rnd fight to score being that both of them lost a rnd for fouls.with that said,floyd easily won the 1st 4 rounds,but castillo damn sure didnt sweep the rest
                    to say castillo swept anything against pbf is a complete joke.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    TOP