Clip: Manny KO's Eric Morales

[E=MC2]

With what happened in the fight itself, Manny was robbed of a win by an error on a judges score card.

He was not robbed de jure.

[Bozo_no no]

You have to prove your points. Repeating your assertions without proof does not consitute a valid argument.

Plus, now you are trying to make it personal, which is always a weapon of last resort for a weak mind.

You have done nothing but repeat a weak view point.

I'll take you back to what I said in the 1st place:

It's really a shame a mistake on a score card is all that seperates Manny from having wins over Morales Barrera and Marquez.

what do you mean?

Manny was screwed in the Marquez fight by a judge who admittedly made an error he wouldn't have if he'd been smart enough to catch it at the time.

I'm saying his resume should show KO wins over Barrera and Morales and a W dec over Marquez.

I disagree. If Marquez was more careful in round 1, he would have beaten Pacman by a landslide. If you take round 1 away, the result is an easy win for Marques.

If they fight again, JMM will soundly defeat Pacman.

What you took issue with in the 1st place stemmed from a weak and biased agenda. You think Marquez was the better fighter in the 1st fight despite the fact he only escaped with a draw because a judge made an error on a score card he shouldn't have.

All you had was "Ifs".

You didn't have a point, and spammed my thread needlessly.

[E=MC2]

Your point is to try to replace a "D" with a "W" for Manny, and thus make him the conquerer of all the three great Mexican fighters. Your point is based on an "if" argument. A slight reversion of this argument, however, yields the opposite conclusion. Thus, your argument is not very robust.

The fight was a great win for Marquez in my mind; it was a trimuph of the mind, skill, and heart. You can not take that away from Marquez.

[E=MC2]

In any case, I now abandon your thread.

[Bozo_no no]

Your point is to try to replace a "D" with "W" for Manny, and thus make him the conquerer of all the three great Mexican fighters. Your point is based on an "if" argument. A slight reversion of this argument, however, yields the opposite conclusion. Thus, your argument is not very robust.

The fight was a great win for Marquez in my mind; it was a trimuph of the mind, skill, and heart. You can not take that away from Marquez.

That's not my point at all.

What I said is absolutly true.

If one judge hadn't made a mistake he admitted later was wrong, Manny has a W over Marquez on his record.

That's a fact.

All you came back with was:

I disagree. If Marquez was more careful in round 1, he would have beaten Pacman by a landslide. If you take round 1 away, the result is an easy win for Marques.

If they fight again, JMM will soundly defeat Pacman.

Which, again, is a hypothetical wisfull take about the fight happening differently than it actually did.


You disagreed with my statement which was correct, and asserted a bunch of 'ifs' about the fight happening differently.

I take nothing away from Marquez, he's a great fighter. But he escaped that fight with a draw because of an error one very ignorant judge made on his score card.

All you've done is tried to save face, and spammed my thread.

[VERSION1 (V1)]

what a shot

[E=MC2]

That's not my point at all.

What I said is absolutly true.

If one judge hadn't made a mistake he admitted later was wrong, Manny has a W over Marquez on his record.

That's a fact.

All you came back with was:



Which, again, is supposing the fight itself wouldn't have went the way it did.

You disagreed with my statement which was correct, and asserted a bunch of 'ifs' about the fight happening differently.

I take nothing away from Marquez, he's a great fighter. But he escaped that fight with a draw because of an error one very ignorant judge made on his score card.

All you've done is tried to save face, and spammed my thread.

P.S. "Saving face" is the last thing I care about in an anonymous forum; my only purpose here is to entertain myself. Don't believe me? See my "Tyson becoming a priest" thread.

[Bozo_no no]

P.S. "Saving face" is the last thing I care about in an anonymous forum; my only purpose here is to entertain myself. Don't believe me? See my "Tyson becoming a priest thread."

You should have abandoned my thread after I explained my statement to you the 1st time, yet you kept at it for 7 pages.

You just said you'd leave and stop the spamming, yet you come back to tell me you're not interested in saving face.

[packyeow]

E=MC2 contradicts himself

Pacman is the best overall, though I think there is a sound chance that he can loose the remath with JMM. He was thoroughly outclassed by JMM in terms of boxing skills the first time. I do not think it would be very different the second time.

It is indeed funny how you contradict yourself. Maybe you were also one of the people who said the same thing about MORALES-PACQUIAO 2, that it would be no different from the first. Dont you get it? Pacquiao makes adjustments to his game plan - or maybe you were blind to last night's fight. JMM doesnt deserve a rematch because he doesnt pull in the interest of fight fans. But he can go ahead and ride the coattails of Pacquiao anytime. But on Pacquiao's terms, capice?

[ariesr]

I'm saying his resume should show KO wins over Barrera and Morales and a W dec over Marquez.

There's plenty of that in boxing over the decades. Lots of "should have's" and "would have's".

Officially Manny drew. Get over it.

Marquez showed how to deal with Manny if you've got the staying power, which he demonstrated.


A genuine travesty was the scoring of Lewis vs Holyfield I