Pacquiao/Marquez Post Fight Discussion- Please re-vote in the poll. .

[neoz]

I too mostly remember Marquez clean shots but it score round by round not clean shots in couple rounds and back tracking the whole fight.

Im going to watch the fight replay tonite in slow mo and score the rounds.

[pvenditto88]

who landed the more effective punches(or just punches) in rd's 1,3,4(there was the only punch from marquez worth anything right at the end),9,10,11,12?

marquez has the advantage of being in form and the lack of flowing hair to not show the force transferred, his face told a difference story though, and it was even his right eye(the eye that pacquiao's left would more than likely hit) that was nearly shut

people just see marquez's head barely budge in that hardened stance of his and think pacquiao is throwing pitty pat punches or somethin

Pacquiao really did not land a lot at all he just is a very strong puncher. When pacquiao did land clean (rare) he obviously did damage to marquez's face which would win him the minority of the rounds in which it happened.

People forget that marquez is a blown up 135 pounder. Pacquiao has been fighting at 140 or higher since 2009

[boxer2k5]

when you couch experts get ya fat asses in the ring then you can say who and whats cheating till then stfu.

2 things
1 southpaw vs orthodox **** happens
2 theres alot of tactics taught in boxing besides throwing a punch.
we are taught to use a whole array or tactics some inside the rules some outside
but thats what happens when you comepete. go cry to jordan when he uses his elbow
to push off or get his defender jumping away before he pulls up for a jump shot that hes a dirty player lol. floyd steps on feet uses elbows, bhop uses his head and shoulders and step on feet, ali holds you and pushes you down behind your head, tyson throws elbows behind his hook. the list goes on and on. its part of the sport. every sport has other tactics besides whats just writing in the book. and only people who never participated in a high level would never know that. and when seen just cry cheating or dirty.

say what you want to say the job is to go in there do what you have to do and win. if your caught then your warned and have to do something else. you do it as long as your not caught and if your opponent doesnt make any adjustments and allow you to continue doing it when then its his fault to blame noone elses and his corner.

if marquez was cheating then maybe manny should start taken ginkgo biloba instead of peds to get his mind right and boxing iq
up so that he can make adjustments. maybe he need a new trainer and new hype man besides the fat asian with him to say hey manny hes stepping on your toes he he steps in. everytme he steps in half step back and fire off. no you can do the same thing over and over to him. whos fault is that?

I really hate you couch fat ass experts.

[Canelo Phresh]

damn they unbanned spoon

[abdul-jakul]

If The Judges And Computer Erred, Who Could Have Scored It Right?

http://philboxing.com/news/columns.php?aid=609&id=62889

By Manny Piñol

Determining the winner in a boxing bout is not like selecting the new American Idol or choosing the New Seven Wonders of the World where the volume of votes texted in from all over the world is used as the basis in declaring the winner.

Modern boxing employs three people who are given the best seats at ringside and an unhampered view of the action inside the ring. They are tasked to score the fight on a round by round basis using the 10-Point Must Scoring System accepted by all boxing sanctioning bodies.

It cannot be denied that since the three judges are only human, their scoring could be subjective and they could be swayed by the noise of the crowd, especially if the fight is held in the hometown of one of the boxers.

Boxing is replete with stories of corrupt judges who were influenced by the promoters or bribed and came up with decisions contrary to the general public perception of the outcome of the fight.

But not all boxing judges are corrupt. Many of these judges are professionals whose involvement with the sport is all because of their love for boxing.

There are safety measures to ensure that boxing judges do not abuse their authority to choose the winner of the bouts. There is the fight supervisor representing the boxing commission. Erring judges are sanctioned with either suspension or complete banishment from the sport by the commission on the recommendation of the fight supervisor.

Lately, boxing has employed the computer to document the action, keeping track of the punches thrown and punches connected.

While the statistics generated by the computer, conveniently called Compubox, do not have any bearing on the judging and outcome of the fight, the system has proven to be very effective in affirming or contradicting the scoring of the three judges.

When there is a discrepancy between the statistics provided by the Compubox and the scoring of the three judges, it is easy to conclude that the judging is irregular and controversial.

With this premise, is there enough reason to label Manny Pacquiao's win over Mexico's Juan Manuel Marquez as controversial and questionable?

The three judges at ringside scored the 12-round epic third battle between Pacquiao and Marquez slightly differently.

Robert Hoyle scored it 114-114, Dave Moretti scored it 115-113 while Glenn Trowbridge had it heavily in Pacquiao's favor 116-112.

The discrepancy in the scoring of the three judges could be attributed to the fact that they were all seated in three different areas at ringside. What Hoyle saw may not have been seen by Moretti and what Trowbridge witnessed may not have been noticed by the two other judges because of the different vantage points.

If there is anything that the scores of the three judges indicated, it was that the fight was close.

Was the decision to award the fight to Manny Pacquiao after 12 gruelling rounds justified or questionable? Were the judges bought, influenced or coerced?

This is the time when the statistics generated by Compubox could be put to good use.

American sportswriter Gareth A. Davies reported in his column these figures generated by the Compubox which documented the Pacquiao-Marquez III:

1. Punches thrown: Pacquiao - 578; Marquez - 436; Punches connected: Pacquiao - 176; Marquez-138. Pacquiao edged Marquez in this department by 36 punches.
2. Jabs: Pacquiao - 304; Marquez - 182; Jabs connected: Pacquiao - 58; Marquez - 38; Pacquiao edged Marquez in this department by 20 jabs.
3. Power punches thrown: Pacquiao - 274; Marquez - 254; Power punches connected: Pacquiao - 117; Marquez - 100. Again, Pacquiao edged Marquez in this area by 17 power punches.

Looking at these Compubox figures, it is again easy to conclude that the fight was very tight.

But two of the judges saw it as a fight won by Manny Pacquiao and the Compubox statistics do not refute this. In fact, Compubox statistics confirmed that Pacquiao edged Marquez in the entirety of the fight.

It is funny and amusing, however, that some of our fellow sports analysts and sportswriter friends, insist that the judges were wrong and the Compubox is unreliable.

Holy Jesus!

If the judges erred and the Computer is unreliable, who else could give us the correct scores and the right decision?

Unlike basketball where if at the end of the game the scores are 112-111, nobody is expected to complain, scoring in judging involves the subjective perception of three human beings who are designated as judges.

Decisions will always be questioned but that is the way it is in boxing. That is unless the rules are changed by the world boxing sanctioning bodies and boxing adopts the scoring system of the "American Idol" where everybody's subjective vote will be counted, tallied and thereafter used to declare the winner.

The problem with that though is that it will take sometime before we will know who the winner is. Manny Pacquiao's deep cut in his right eyebrow would have already healed before his hands are raised in victory.

This is how boxing is scored, this is the rule and this is how the game is played and decided.

If some people think this is wrong and are not comfortable with this, they could always play basketball.

[SplitSecond]

this fight wasn't even close as compared to the 2nd match that they had, in marquez favor, jmm was clearly outboxing pacquiao in this fight, so much so, not only did the boxing world and professionals see it and say the same thing, manny lost, but a house full of pacquiao fans and filipino's where i was at admitted the same thing, at least they were honest and said they were glad for the won but that it was the wrong decision.

my point is this, marquez did way better this fight, wasn't knocked down, clearly executed his game plan by baiting and trapping pacquiao ALL FIGHT LONG, countering manny with ease, and the scores were more in pacquiao's favor than the previous two fights which pacquiao's was more effective in!?!?! that doesn't make any kind of sense......

the scoring criteria for boxing sucks a hard scabbing schlong, seriously, they give too many fighters rounds by scoring the fight on aggression and aggression only, they love to pay lip service to saying " effective " aggression, but they over look " effective " counter punching or " effective " strategy because pacquiao might have been aggressive but he was not effective in any sense of the word in that 3rd fight.......

the same goes with other fights with judges, they too often use the scoring criteria of aggression and over look skill. just because a guy is backing up in a shuffle, an 1/8-1/4 inch at a time dipping in and out of your opponents range to get them to lead so you can counter them is not backing up in retreat!! it's not like a fighter on the run! there is a HUGE difference, these judges and any educated boxing fan should know this, and if not!?!? then they shouldn't be allowed to score fights and shouldn't try and debate using that angle of attack or defense, because it doesn't hold water.

coming forward doesn't translate in " winning " the fight....... floyd is one of the only fighters that doesn't get penalized for moving backwards, not from judges or from,well, not that many critics, which is fine, but when it's admonished for certain fighters or used for certain situations then it's total crap and ruins the integrity of the sport as well as the profession of being a judge and or a competent person........

it needs to change, one of the worst cases of this was shumenov vs campillo II, HOLY SMOKES was that bad, campillo was just slicking his way around shuminov, tagging him, punching with him and getting out without getting hit cleanly, clearly a hot contested fight but campillo was out boxing shumenov, it was a no brainer, so everyone thought, and they gave it to shumenov because he's strong and didn't stop coming forward......... **** that.

i also said pacquiao lost at first, then i rewatched it

[hugh grant]

Marquez has shown he is an elite boxer. Hats off to him. He is a master boxer. He has shown he is better than Morales and Barrera. Marquez is serious boxer who takes his craft seriously. A true Professional of the sport.

Pac was the aggressor and had more rounds. It's just that the rounds marquez won he made pac look real bad. That's what we boxing fans clearly remember after the fight. The clear crisp counters executed to perfection. But the truth is pac landed more punches and power shots from the 7rounds that I think he won. Marquez had 5 rounds (full of nice highlight shots from him).

Some people think marquez won coz the shots we would likely remember are the marquez beautiful counters but as a whole pac was the busier fighter and the one who won more rounds.

12-16 was bull crap by the judge. It was either a 6-6 or a 7-5 for pac. Jmm didn't perform in the final stretch. You have to want it be the aggressor and take it from the champ. He just back pedaled. What he should have done was not coast in the final rounds. He should have fought fearlessly in the championship rounds but JMM didn't that’s why he lost.

Pacman outlanded Dinamita so what is the deal? Clean and crisp combinations by Dinamita were good for cameras and public to see, however, the number of punches landed is better for Pacman. (just have to replay the fight to get a clearer perspective on things.

If pac didn’t attack this would have been a boring fight. Clearly JMM just wanted to wait and wait to counter. That’s not how to get a belt from a champion. You have to be aggressive aswell to impress the judges.

Marquez clearly playing the waiting game. It's like a sniper guy just waiting for the kill. Easier than being aggressive. That's why judges see that Pac's effective aggression. Pac was moving forward attacking and making it a fight.

That said.. Marquez and pac are equalls in the ring.. Even if they fight again it will always be a close fight. They are yin and yang. Positive and negative. They cancel each other out. Even if they fight at 50 years of age it will still be close. Style makes fights. There style of fighting just mesh well together. If they fight 100x over and over it will always be the same. They are equals in my book. Both legends of the game.

Thats why no point in them fighting again as it will be close and controversial unless Pac knocks him out, and we cant count on that.

But Pac won but its just JMM did much better than expected and thats why people think JMM did better than he actually did, ie win. He didnt. But his success is he did better than people thought he would. So should just leave it at that. JMM is the winner and Pac is the loser, but only hypothetically.

[uoykcuf]

I haven't seen or met any pro boxer that felt Manny won that fight. Is there a reason they would have it out for Manny? No, its just what our eyes tell us what our hearts don't want to believe.

[tesla_power]

Nobody would really argue that. Technical wise, Jmm is miles ahead of Pac. Nothing really here except that Jmm is better technical wise than Floyd. That is a bit odd in my opinion. Calderon prime, imo, is better than Jmm.

A better fighter than Pac? Nah. I would stick with Pac overall is a better fighter than Jmm. Jmm just have Pac's number. Just like Jmm always performed badly with fellow counterpunchers. Jmm doing that to Pac is not a guarantee he would win over Ortiz/Berto. Whereas, we can pretty assume that Pac would be a good bet over those 2.

I would also stick with predicting that Pac-Pbf would actually be good rather than a blowout predicted by most here after Pac-Jmm 3.

[pvenditto88]

Another biased article.

Translation =
"If you don't like it that we are using an unofficial punch stat system to justify that pacquiao won than go *** yourself"

What a joke.