I am rewatching all of Marquez' losses....

[dynomyte1444]

I don't understand how people are so closed minded, refusing to consider that Pac-Marquez 3 was close and could go either way. The idea that Marquez clearly won 8 or 9 rounds has never made sense to me. It's not the fight I see.

Its not close mindedness to see that JMM clearly won that fight. the 2nd fight I see going either way not the 3rd. Clear win for JMM

[The Big Dunn]

I'm grouping them cause these are mutually exclusive. You claim A, B is what's true, B if true if and only if A is false. This is logic 101

The choice for media people wasn't A(JMM winning) or B(Manny winning) it was A or B or C(draw).we agree a, b and c are mutually exclusive.

you are making the choices A (JMM winning) or B(JMM not winning). when you combine b and c in one group you make c a function of B-which you stated it is not, you said c is mutually exclusive. thats why I question your equation and logic.

do you understand that?

[TOBYLEE1]

Marquez lost to Bradley (by a close margin) and to Mayweather.

The first Marquez-Pacquiao fight could have gone either way.

Second Pacquiao fight I felt that Marquez edged it out, but the knock down hurt him, so I could see some feeling that Pacquiao fight.

He was definitely robbed in Pacquiao 3, v. Chris John, and v. Norwood.

I dis-agree. I thought Marquez was only robbed in Pac3, John was very active and those low blows cost him and on top of that it was close(I had Marquez winning regardless).

Norwood fight was such a stinker, Marquez was pitty patting his punches and not landing. He ate the few hard lefts Norwood was throwing. Marquez missed a lot in that fight, that fight was very close but Marquez was fighting Norwood's fight.

[HeroBando]

Its not close mindedness to see that JMM clearly won that fight. the 2nd fight I see going either way not the 3rd. Clear win for JMM

"Among the unofficial scorers above, 57 scored the bout for Marquez, 51 scored the bout for Pacquiao, and the remaining 36 scored the bout a draw."

There needs to be a Flo FAQ here, with this up top

[.:: JSFD26 ::.]

Quote:

Originally Posted by .:: JSFD26 ::.

I don't think these people know what a robbery is... Or maybe just play dumb to suit their agendas.

Lara-Williams
Abril-Rios

Those were robberies!



Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

Exactly, it's a robbery when everybody saw it the same way, at least before revisionism kicks in (eg Pac Bradley), crystal clear. There's a lot of these "soft" robberies these days, that are really hometown decisions at worst, like IMO Chavez Vera, (you won't like this) Broner PDL, (you'll like this) Barthelemy Usmanee, Macklin Sturm (bad decision, not all out robbery), Murray Sturm (Sturm shoulda won), tons more.

Lol nah I don't like Chavez. But regardless I agree with you not just cause I don't like Chavez. You can throw Chavez vs Zbik in there too IMO.


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

[bojangles1987]

Its not close mindedness to see that JMM clearly won that fight. the 2nd fight I see going either way not the 3rd. Clear win for JMM

It's not clear though. Not when opinions on who won are pretty much 50-50. Saying that Marquez clearly won 8 or 9 rounds is just not the fight I have watched. I don't see that at all. You could say I'm biased, many have, but I've never seen that, and I've tried. It's unfair to Pac to give Marquez so many rounds in that fight.

[.:: JSFD26 ::.]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeroBando

Quote:

Originally Posted by .:: JSFD26 ::.

I don't think these people know what a robbery is... Or maybe just play dumb to suit their agendas.

Lara-Williams
Abril-Rios

Those were robberies!



Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

Exactly, it's a robbery when everybody saw it the same way, at least before revisionism kicks in (eg Pac Bradley), crystal clear. There's a lot of these "soft" robberies these days, that are really hometown decisions at worst, like IMO Chavez Vera, (you won't like this) Broner PDL, (you'll like this) Barthelemy Usmanee, Macklin Sturm (bad decision, not all out robbery), Murray Sturm (Sturm shoulda won), tons more.

Lol nah I don't like Chavez. But regardless I agree with you not just cause I don't like Chavez. You can throw Chavez vs Zbik in there too IMO.


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

^ Misread your post but I got it now. Lol


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

[.:: JSFD26 ::.]

Quote:

Originally Posted by .:: JSFD26 ::.

I was actually scoring the 3rd fight for JMM but like I said, once Nacho started telling him he was winning he stopped doing his thing. I don't think anything annoys me more than people saying Marquez was robbed in that fight.


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

Dude be careful if you school a flowmo like Big Dunn or Dynomite they might rat you out, they will track every single one of your posts and look at what they can report you for to get you in trouble with their multiple alts.

I know about Big Dunn. I don't usually participate in these Pacquiao/Mayweather/Marquez threads cause they get old but I ran into him before. Never really noticed dynomite tho.


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

[HeroBando]

The choice for writters wasn't A(JMM winning) or B(Manny winning) it was A or B or C(draw).we agree a, b and c are mutually exclusive.

you are making the choices A (JMM winning) or B(JMM not winning). when you combine b and c in one group you are making you make c a function of B-which you stated it is not, c is mutually exclusive.

do you understand that?

b and c both belong in the same category of JMM not winning, right? in fact (b and c) = not a, in a strict logical sense, right? So we're back to 87 > 57

You're boring me again with your backtracking on your imprecision. OK, you would have been right if you'd said, "most had it for JMM or draw", but that wouldn't be so hard hitting, and a shill always goes for effect over the facts

[The Big Dunn]

b and c both belong in the same category of JMM not winning, right? in fact (b and c) = not a, in a strict logical sense, right? So we're back to 87 > 57

You're boring me again with your backtracking on your imprecision. OK, you would have been right if you'd said, "most had it for JMM or draw", but that wouldn't be so hard hitting, and a shill always goes for effect over the facts

NO-you already agreed a, b, and c are mutually exclsuive. Now you are saying b and c are part of the same group. they are not. They never will be because in a professional fight there are not 2 outcomes there are 3 outcomes.

A draw does not equal JMM didn't win. A draw does not equal Manny didn't win. A draw is a unique outcome all its own and therefore can't be combined with, nor is it a subset of, the other outcomes.

JMM winning was the choice of 57 of the 144 writers polled. Manny winning was the choice of 51. Draw was the choice of 36.

Most media had JMM winning the fight.