MARQUEZ ROBBED AGAIN YES OR NO?
- Thread starter bgrumpyp
- Start date
^^ I know! hey you can't argue with stupidity. However I gotta say I met this koo Fifthy year old Filipino/manny fan as I was paying a bill and the guy was straight class, no bs with that guy. He had no hard time telling me Marquez won the fight and how just about all of his people that he watched to fight With (in Reno) agreed and know Marquez won. So that being said it was nice to know there are manny fans that are also boxing fans.
SMH! there are 12 rounds and if you think someone won by "2" rounds yet you think it could've been a draw?! Now, Say it was a different sport of there was 20+rounds and you have some one up by 2 points and it was called a draw then I can see that, but 12 rounds...NAW!
You might sound smart a afew groupies, but your logic and explanation's isn't going to work on me!
You might sound smart a afew groupies, but your logic and explanation's isn't going to work on me!
I'm fine with any decision or opinion of the fight. You've never heard of swing rounds have you? cuz there were several of them in that fight, which is why I don't even argue who won or whatever, it was close as can be.
In fact, I think the entire pac vs jmm trilogy was the closest trilogy I've ever seen in my life. After 36 rounds there have only been a handful of rounds which were definitive - marquez dominated a few, pacquiao dominated a few. But at at least 15 or so were EXTREMELY close rounds and very hard to score. I don't recall watching another trilogy that was so evenly matched over 36 rounds.
The only two that come to mind are Ali vs Ken Norton and Barrera vs Morales.
Oh which reminds me. Ken Norton officially went 1-2 against Ali (two decision losses & a split decision victory) but many if not most people firmly believe Norton beat Ali all three times (or at least twice). Does that make Ali any less of a legend that he struggled so badly with Norton? Nope! It just means they were evenly matched, Norton had the style that frustrated Ali. That doesn't take away anything from what Ali accomplished in his career.
Same goes for Pacquiao-Jmm. It just goes to show how well Marquez' style does against Pacquiao. That doesn't mean Pacquiao hasn't suddenly not accomplished all that he accomplished in boxing, it doesn't take away his prior victories over other great fighters.
In fact, I think the entire pac vs jmm trilogy was the closest trilogy I've ever seen in my life. After 36 rounds there have only been a handful of rounds which were definitive - marquez dominated a few, pacquiao dominated a few. But at at least 15 or so were EXTREMELY close rounds and very hard to score. I don't recall watching another trilogy that was so evenly matched over 36 rounds.
The only two that come to mind are Ali vs Ken Norton and Barrera vs Morales.
Oh which reminds me. Ken Norton officially went 1-2 against Ali (two decision losses & a split decision victory) but many if not most people firmly believe Norton beat Ali all three times (or at least twice). Does that make Ali any less of a legend that he struggled so badly with Norton? Nope! It just means they were evenly matched, Norton had the style that frustrated Ali. That doesn't take away anything from what Ali accomplished in his career.
Same goes for Pacquiao-Jmm. It just goes to show how well Marquez' style does against Pacquiao. That doesn't mean Pacquiao hasn't suddenly not accomplished all that he accomplished in boxing, it doesn't take away his prior victories over other great fighters.
im half filipino and i think pacman won. He's not even my favorite fighter. i judged the fight by punches landed. real simple how that 1 judge had pac up by 2 rounds. i was surprised at the draw. jmm had good quality counters but how many of those did he land. just tally up the punches landed. and u will see that pac clearly won that fight. jmm waited way too much. especially in rounds 10-12