JMM the legend

[Bigg Rigg]

bradley clearly won, and his fights against pac were very close that could have gone either way (not robberies).

bradley vs marquez

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1808410-bradley-vs-marquez-live-round-by-round-results-and-highlights

pac vs marquez 3

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Fight:1595865


pac vs marquez 2

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Fight:1239916



and pac should have won the first fight but one of the judges messed up the scoring.

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Fight:737130




marquez is an ATG cry baby.

First fight was suppose to be a win for PAC. Second fight PAC won it cuz of the kd. Third fight is he only one that JMM could have had a legit argument. And not even cuz it wasn't a Robbery. He just didn't get the nod. A 7-5 fight either way is not a robbery.

[ElMeroChingon]

JMM is just a great fighter to watch. Atg beat another ATG in Pacquiao.

[El Gitano]

First fight was suppose to be a win for PAC. Second fight PAC won it cuz of the kd. Third fight is he only one that JMM could have had a legit argument. And not even cuz it wasn't a Robbery. He just didn't get the nod. A 7-5 fight either way is not a robbery.

The first was supposed to be a win for Pac? Just because that judge admitted he made a scoring error in the first round, does not mean he scored the remaining rounds correctly.

Regarding the second fight, I KD does not automatically give Pac the win. I had JMM winning by 1 point because of that knockdown (114-113), but in rounds I had JMM ahead 7 to 5.

The third fight, I had Marquez 7-5, I could totally see it 6-6 though.

[Divine Hammer]

First fight was suppose to be a win for PAC. Second fight PAC won it cuz of the kd. Third fight is he only one that JMM could have had a legit argument. And not even cuz it wasn't a Robbery. He just didn't get the nod. A 7-5 fight either way is not a robbery.

yes i had pac winning the first two as well. very close fights and not robberies.

[flipbjefrox]

Where his acne in his chest and back?

[Bigg Rigg]

The first was supposed to be a win for Pac? Just because that judge admitted he made a scoring error in the first round, does not mean he scored the remaining rounds correctly.

Regarding the second fight, I KD does not automatically give Pac the win. I had JMM winning by 1 point because of that knockdown (114-113), but in rounds I had JMM ahead 7 to 5.

The third fight, I had Marquez 7-5, I could totally see it 6-6 though.

Rd was suppose to be a 10-6 rd instead of 10-7. If it would have been scored right, he wouldn't have had a draw.

Second fight I had it 6-6 with the kd giving him the win.

[ElMeroChingon]

What was the scores for the fourth fight?

[Divine Hammer]

The first was supposed to be a win for Pac? Just because that judge admitted he made a scoring error in the first round, does not mean he scored the remaining rounds correctly.

Regarding the second fight, I KD does not automatically give Pac the win. I had JMM winning by 1 point because of that knockdown (114-113), but in rounds I had JMM ahead 7 to 5.

The third fight, I had Marquez 7-5, I could totally see it 6-6 though.

yes pac should have officially won the first fight but one of the judges messed up. how can you score a 10-7 round when 3 KDs were scored?

he had it a draw but if he scored the first round 10-6 like he should have then pac would have won the fight.

[Bigg Rigg]

yes i had pac winning the first two as well. very close fights and not robberies.

7-5 fights or a draw can't be called a robbery. Idk why ppl say they was.

[Divine Hammer]

What was the scores for the fourth fight?

pac was ahead on all scorecards.