out of 20 writers only one had Manny winning

[x3_bazooka_x3]

I didn't have Pac winning because he threw more punches at all, and I certainly don't use Compubox to support my argument in this fight. But many times I gave Pac a close round because I saw him landing more punches than Marquez, even if they weren't as visually pleasing as Marquez's.

I really do think this is a fight where people will watch it a month or so from now when all the hype has died down and score it far differently than the night they saw it.

He used Compubox... What a ****ing joke... then again it matches up with the quitter he has in his sig

[shadeyfizzle]

I had it 8-4 Marquez. Clear win in my book.

A clear win doesn't have to be 12-0, 120-108.

Marquez landed the better shots.

I think what needs to be challenged is people saying Pacquiao won because he threw and landed more punches. I would love to use compubox for my favorite fighters...

Dawson did not beat Pascal just because he outlanded and out-threw Pascal 134 to 114, 436-430. Pascal clearly won the fight by landing the better punches and being more effective. Dawson is one of my favorite active fighters...but even though compubox favored him for that fight...there's no way I will say he won just because he won on Compubox.

Marquez won because he landed the better shots. Not saying you're using Compubox as to why Manny won, but that is a lot of people's arguments as to why they had Manny winning. "He landed and threw more punches".

the problem here though is the consistency of judging criteria. So you you had marquez winning because he landed the cleaner, more meaningful shots. Cool. How did you have the 2nd fight where pacquiao clearly had the cleaner, harder more meaningful punches??? if you still had marquez winning the 2nd fight because of the complete opposite criteria then that's why you arr not a liscensed judge.

[cupocity303]

But I think if you add the twenty writers with the nearly 50 boxers who stated Marquez won thats pretty convincing

Not it isn't. Three "Official" guys scored it pretty close. 114-114, 115-113, 116-112. That's three people who's motives I'm not willing to question. They were up close and their job was to watch and score, not enjoy the fight like fans do.

I posted two articles of B0xintalk writers who scored it similarly in Pac's favor. Harold Letterman scored it for Pacquiao. The same guy who had Castillo beating Floyd in the first fight. Is Harold's scoring more credible than others? No, just an example of supportive evidence that this fight was close and could've gone either way. That's 4 people not giving it to JMM.

The fact that more people think that Marquez won this close fight doesn't make it so. It's still DISPUTABLE. And I'm supportive of that because I myself had Pac winning 7 rounds. I could've easily given one of the 7 to Marquez, which would've made it a draw. If I had given him another one, he would've won 115-113, but I didn't do that. All goes to show that some of the close rounds played a major factor and there is no clear way of saying who those swing rounds.

[Oxn]

Actually i had Marquez edging out Floyd

[Spoon23]

So how the hell can Manny or anybody with a straight face argue that this was a clear Pacquiao win? and the one writer who had Manny winning had him barely winning.
Yet we are supposed to believe that Manny clearly won?

Lem Satterfield, ******.com: 117-111, Juan Manuel Marquez

Ron Borges, Boston Herald: 117-112, Marquez

Chris Mannix, Sports Illustrated: 116-112, Marquez

Tim Smith, New York Daily News: 116-112, Marquez

Mike Coppinger, ******.com: 115-113, Marquez

Bill Dwyre, Los Angeles Times: 115-113, Marquez

Norm Frauenheim, www.15rounds.com: 115-113, Marquez

Ryan Maquinana, BoxingScene.com/CSNBAYAREA.com... 115-113, Marquez

Lance Pugmire, Los Angeles Times: 115-113, Marquez

Bob Velin, USA Today: 115-113, Marquez

George Willis, New York Post: 115-113, Marquez

Jerry Izenberg, Philadelphia Inquirer: 115-114, Marquez

Sean Sullivan, Boxing Digest: 115-114, Manny Pacquiao

Steve Carp, Las Vegas Review-Journal: 114-114

Tim Dahlberg, Associated Press: 114-114

Bryan Graham, Sports Illustrated: 114-114

Kevin Iole, Yahoo!Sports: 114-114

Kieran Mulvaney, ESPN.com/Reuters: 114-114

Dan Rafael, ESPN.com: 114-114

Rick Reeno, BoxingScene.com: 114-114

clearly a draw is the most realistic one but to give marquez a win is a fluke in my eyes. he didn't deserve a win he didn't do enough in the championship round. A draw more likely.

[cupocity303]

the problem here though is the consistency of judging criteria. So you you had marquez winning because he landed the cleaner, more meaningful shots. Cool. How did you have the 2nd fight where pacquiao clearly had the cleaner, harder more meaningful punches??? if you still had marquez winning the 2nd fight because of the complete opposite criteria then that's why you arr not a liscensed judge.

Good effin' post. It's called confirmation bias.

[-Kev-]

the problem here though is the consistency of judging criteria. So you you had marquez winning because he landed the cleaner, more meaningful shots. Cool. How did you have the 2nd fight where pacquiao clearly had the cleaner, harder more meaningful punches??? if you still had marquez winning the 2nd fight because of the complete opposite criteria then that's why you arr not a liscensed judge.

What if I don't think Manny landed the cleaner punches in the second fight? Then where is the bias?

The KD was the clean punch that you are talking about in the second fight? Lol.

Marquez landed the cleaner punches in the rematch and trilogy.

[Oxn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66Gx4...&feature=feedu add another to the list

[shadeyfizzle]

Good effin' post. It's called confirmation bias.

Im just sick of the knuckleheads on both sides saying marquez or pac won the 1st 2 fights because of a certain criteria and then all of a sudden the roles are flipped and completely sell out their criteria to favor their fighter. Thats why judges are paid to do what they do. Harold lederman has a specific criteria he looks for when scorinv and it doesnt change no matter whos fighting. Unlike these ******s.

[shadeyfizzle]

What if I don't think Manny landed the cleaner punches in the second fight? Then where is the bias?

The KD was the clean punch that you are talking about in the second fight? Lol.

Marquez landed the cleaner punches in the rematch and trilogy.

there we have it folks. 3fights and the only clean, meaningful punches pac landed on marquez have been the 4knockdowns. Marquez definitely got screwed.