Why can't Pacquiao get the benefit of the doubt from the judges vs. Black opponents?

[Johnwoo8686]

actually that fight proves my point. lara landed the better punches but who won? canelo. why? because "he was fighting his fight" "he was dictating the pace" he was "controlling the fight" he was "fighting his fight" etc...

LOL if that's your point than Canelo was supposed to win because ring generalship aka "fighting your fight" or controlling the pace is a scoring criteria. If that's your point you should have NO issue with Mayweather winning a wide decision over Pacquiao.

[daggum]

People are starting to sounds down right ******. Pax threw just as many punchs, but an unsuccessful % in the teens while Mayweather connected in the 40% range. If you thing Pac won, you obviously don't know math and not just that you don't know sh** about boxing. 2 solid punchs in just 12 rounds doesn't win you a fight when the opposition is Dectacting the pace, defensively making you look foolish, and connecting at a much much much higher percentage. But the man who can't cut off the ring, can't connect, can't box effectively and can't do anything offensively effective. Pacquiao lost, get over it or watch a different sport.

compubox is not accurate and has been proven as such and in this very fight many people have proven it inaccurate yet you keep citing it. why?

why was floyd dictating the pace? because you came into the fight with preconceived notions of how each fighter fights=bad judge

remember clinching and bending below the waist are illegal so if you think that shows good defense=bad judging

assuming pac has to cut off the ring in order to win=bad judging

can't connect? compubox was completely inaccurate. judge who uses eyes>judge who uses compubox

can't box effectively? what does that even mean? he landed the cleaner and harder shots in 7 rounds while the total number of punches in those rounds was nearly dead even. oh wait compubox says different. compubox wins.

[daggum]

LOL if that's your point than Canelo was supposed to win because ring generalship aka "fighting your fight" or controlling the pace is a scoring criteria. If that's your point you should have NO issue with Mayweather winning a wide decision over Pacquiao.

no my point is that anyone can say a boxer was fighting his fight. its completely subjective. you could just as easily say lara was fighting his fight by making canelo come to him and landing the cleaner shots. what's not subjective is who is landing the cleaner punches and in the lara-canelo fight it was lara and in the pac-floyd fight it was pac. saying he was "fighting his fight" is just code for I like this guy better.

[daggum]

floyd gets tagged to face, then gets hit by several clear body punches.

floyd shakes his head.

lampley/roy - "MASTERFUL DEFENSE BY FLOYD."

yeah but pac didn't land every single punch so therefore it was great defense. floyd landed 100 percent of his punches of course.

[-Kev-]

You're not white skinned.

Not paper white, no.

[daggum]

I like how that dumb judge Duane Ford on fight game said the reason he gave Bradley the fight was because the PACQUIAO OF OLD! would have stomped him out, wtf? you are supposed to judge a fight in the present what you are viewing you cant say the pacquiao of old, wtf judge the fight at hand, that shows something strange, thats like saying Floyd lost because the Floyd who fought Gatti and Corrales would have threw more shots so I gave the other guy the win.

this is exactly how most people score boxing matches. they think well pac has to come forward and press the fight or he loses. when that doesn't happen they give the round to the other guy even if pac is landing the higher quality punches. he's not doing it the way they thought he would be doing it so the other guy must be winning.

[Ganondorf]

I didn't read your bs whining post! NUMBER 48 LOST!

[Johnwoo8686]

no my point is that anyone can say a boxer was fighting his fight. its completely subjective. you could just as easily say lara was fighting his fight by making canelo come to him and landing the cleaner shots. what's not subjective is who is landing the cleaner punches and in the lara-canelo fight it was lara and in the pac-floyd fight it was pac. saying he was "fighting his fight" is just code for I like this guy better.

That is b.s. Lara Canelo goes against the TS point. That black, slick fighters are always favored. Lara outboxed Canelo and was robbed. Lara looked better than Canelo, had Canelo missing wildly at times and STILL lost.

And outside of the fourth round Manny did not land the cleaner shots. Stop saying things that are clearly not true.

[hectari]

this is exactly how most people score boxing matches. they think well pac has to come forward and press the fight or he loses. when that doesn't happen they give the round to the other guy even if pac is landing the higher quality punches. he's not doing it the way they thought he would be doing it so the other guy must be winning.

Yeah its bias, you notice if Pacs fights dont end in brutal beat downs or ko they say they were not impressed, yet nobody puts that type of pressure on Floyd, Pac has high expectations so when he doesnt finish a guy off or beat him to a pulp they feel he lost, that Floyd vs Pac fight was no wash it was close as hell, floyd missed a lot and the only damage he done was yanking on Pacs right arm in the clinch and ripping his shoulder up as evidenced by the dark red pooling in the back of the right shoulder from an internal bleeding rip.

Floyd never has to ko someone, he barely lands shots too, most of the time he is fighting scared and pulling his head back to avoid a shot and run or clinch, its lame really. But if you say this you are called a hater who dont know boxing. James Toney is one of my favorite fighters, he was slicka nd he never RAN or over clinched, he had one of the sweetest slip shoulder roll inside games ever. Floyd literally runs an clinches now he is purposely fighting safe to his health doesnt get damaged and he knows NSAC is in his pocket because he brings in big bucks.

[meme_man]

PAC lost deal with it!