Is it worth reading back through the posts, or are they filled with nonsense like usual whenever Manny or Floyd fight?

I thought Marquez won, I had pacquiao winning the first fight and Marquez winning the next two. So Marquez is 2-1 up in my book. The second fight was very very close though. From what I can gather on twitter HBO commentary was favouring Pacquiao, in the UK the commentary was favouring Marquez. I bet the difference that would make on a scorecard of someone watching would be huge.

It's funny that Pacquiao comes into the "eye of the tiger", it doesn't look like he's had the eye of the tiger in his last two fights, he doesn't seem to care anymore.

I think it's clear that Pacquiao is on the decline and Floyd might suddenly grow a pair of balls and want the fight, he better hurry up though as I think a victory over Pacquiao will mean less and less as time goes on.

There is only one person who really deserves LOL for last night, and there's no question about it.

LOL NACHO

Seriously.

Yes, I think on this we can all agree.

I was more just trying to point how fallible the numbers can be. I watched the fight on a giant television, the CompuBox guys are ringside, there's a huge difference. I'm always watching the fight from the best possible angle, while the judges, CompuBox, announcers, etc. are constantly being blocked by the referee and trying to discern what's happening when the action's on the other side of the ring. While being ringside is undoubtedly the most exciting place to watch a fight, it's a terrible place to try to score one. In a perfect world all of these people would watch the fight from a television feed, but the boxing purists (read: the old guard) will never allow this to happen.

I might do this, if I have the time. But I would re-watch the fight twice, concentrating on an individual fighter, pause the action after each exchange and then come up with a tally. I have a feeling my numbers would be a little more accurate than a couple of guys running a tally in real time, often with an obstructed view.

I was just hoping to show skeptical one should be about "the stats" in a fight like this. After all JMM did out connect Pac in their first two fights, according to CompuBox.

Pacman was a 9-1 favorite to a guy who completely neutralized him for 23 rounds? That's the shaddy part to all this. I'm not suggesting that it was a fix (I'm not ruling that out by any stretch either) but the factors outside of the ring seemed to have dictated that a guy who owned him for 23 rounds didnt have a ****in shot in hell of winning.

I can't remember the last time there was a 9-1 favorite on a ppv main event. I'm curious if Pacman was ever a 9-1 favorite before this.

Mayweather was roughly a 9/1 favourite in his last fight. Pac was a huge favourite against Clottey, Margarito and Mosley. I can't remember the odds though. 9/1 wouldn't surprise me.

There's a non-zero chance his heart just isn't in boxing anymore. Even in the post-fight Manny was quick to talk about getting back to the Philippians and handling his congressional responsibilities. He may have moved on with his life.

Well the reason he was a 9-1 fav was both fighters recent fights and the fact that Manny actually had a size edge in this fight which he never has. 9-1 is a little extreme but the expectation was Manny in an easy one.

The conspiracy/bribe talk ITT is just hilarious. The personalities of the fighters and the backstory is going to cloud any reasonable score here.

Scoring it 116-112 Manny is as big a joke as the guys in the UK scoring it 118-111 JMM. It was a close fight.

I think there were about three rounds JMM clearly won.

Manny didn't really dominate any round, IIRC, but he won a bunch of them on aggression. Manny won the "up in the air" rounds based on aggression.

Again, I think Nacho made a terrible terrible mistake by telling JMM he was winning the fight big.

If JMM won the 12th round, he would have won by a point in the white scorecard and it would have been a draw on the blue scorecard. And the fight would have been a DRAW. However, he let Manny win that round, even though Manny did nothing himself except land one good left hand.

I may be completely off here but I didn't see JMM as dominating the fight as some others seem to. I saw him confuse and stifle Manny's offense though, and I think that, along with the fact he's 38 and fighting Manny, is a big part of the reason people are so up in arms.

I've acknowleged it was a close fight. I just think those odds are pretty damning of something. It's either of a fix or indicative of how people feel about how outside factors effect judges.

I watched the second fight yesterday. I thought Marquez won a close fight. You can laugh it off if you want but styles make fights and JMM style and performance in the first two fights make 9-1 a complete joke. What recent fights are you talking about? I mean JMM vs Maywether?

I think we can all agree this was the least exciting fight of the trilogy by far.

JMM didn't dominate the fight. However, in the rounds Pacquiao won, he barely won. Whereas, in the rounds JMM won, it was more clear who won.

If one fighter wins 5 rounds easily, and the second fighter wins 7 rounds by a slim margin, then the second fighter wins the fight. But the audience will be shocked at the decision claiming the first fighter did much better (which he did). I think, to some extent, that's what happened last night.

I had the fight a draw, even though I think JMM did slightly better overall.

A lot of people were going off of how JMM looks against Mayweather at this weight. I never looked to much into that fight because I think JMM looked terrible because of Mayweather, not necessarily the weight. Mayweather is a stylistic nightmare for JMM.

Also, Manny just basically pummeled the welterweight division, so everyone thought (including me) that he would be too much for JMM at this stage of their careers.

who is that? I tried Google and found nothing. I tried other spellings and found nothing as well. No one related to boxing.

Right, I'm saying it's the bolded. Manny is Manny. It's like Jordan or Kobe getting all the calls in the NBA. We all know it's dumb and wrong, but it's sort of the culture of the sport.

Well, Manny has been crushing everyone not named Floyd at WW and JMM was moving classes. 9/1 is a little much sure, but it's not insane (obv it is now).

If one fighter wins 5 rounds easily, and the second fighter wins 7 rounds by a slim margin, then the second fighter wins the fight. But the audience will be shocked at the decision claiming the first fighter did much better (which he did). I think, to some extent, that's what happened last night.

I had the fight a draw, even though I think JMM did slightly better overall.[/QUOTE]

Agree 100% with all this. I'd have been fine with 114-114 or 113-115 JMM

Out of curiosity, why?

I'm guessing that he thinks that Bob Arum thinks that Mayweather would beat Pacquiao.

It's a shame that Mayweather doesn't seem to share the confidence of his fans.

I watched the fight 3 times now and I keep getting to the same result imo 8-4 JMM. All this talk about aggression from Pac..what? This isn't UFC in which "effective aggression" is a huge part of scoring. Pac wasn't very effective with his so called aggression in my eyes. He barely landed anything of significance over 12 full rounds.

In boxing ring generalship is much more important than aggression. How do you think counter punchers win decisions so frequently? They back up the whole fight right? JMM controlled the pace of the fight, dominated range, had impeccable timing to nullify Pac's speed, had precise counter punching and landed the more telling blows. Bottom line is they fought JMM's fight and never ever in a million years will Pac be a more skilled technician than JMM. Robbery cries are justified imo but we all know the reason why the decision was what it was, now please let Mayweather humiliate this casual fan driven media hypejob.

I agree with you that Marquez won the fight but saying that "effective aggression" isn't a huge part of scoring is just nonsense. Effective aggresion is a huge part of any combat sport.

And "casual fan driven media hypejob" could just as easily be used to describe Mayweather.

Didn't watch but this sounds very similar to Ali-Norton III (which IIRC I scored 11-4 for Norton and I was an Ali fan), and of course JMM is Norton to Pac's Ali.

JMM's people HAD to go in thinking they can't win a decision, can never let off the gas. Leon Spinks stayed aggressive all the way thru his first fight with Ali and still squeaked by with a split decision, tho the two judges that voted for him did by 5 & 3 points.

The worst fail OAT in this area was Ali-Shavers. This was the night the judges card were revealed after each round on NBC. Shavers didn't have anyone in the locker room watching on TV, and his corner thought he had it wrapped up with a few rounds to go.

They told Earnie, "you got this, take it easy, don't punch yourself out or give Ali an opening". Amazingly, WBC President Jose Suliman was sitting by Shavers' corner and them the same thing.

LDO, Angelo Dundee had some kid running back n forth from the locker room with the score.

Jimmy Young also threw away an easy win over a morbidly obese Ali by continually sticking his head out of the ropes. One thing Bill Simmons was right about, after he came back in 1970 he pretty much fought to the level his competition, aside from Larry Holmes.

On another matter, how'd ya'll have liked to watch Rounds 13-15 last night?

You're making it sound like Marquez fought an impeccable fight. He didn't.

Palo's bang on: this was the worst fight of the 3, AINEC. I think it was an exceptionally tough fight to score.

It is if the aggressor uses that aggression to control the fight and clearly win rounds, do damage, land shots, etc. But what Pac did wasn't very effective. People are arguing Pac was the aggressor, I don't think anyone can make a case it was in any case effective. I might have said that part wrong in my post tho. Its just infuriating as a huge boxing fan that the sport is in the state that it is, and crap like last night is a big reason why.

Mayweather is no hype job tho, the guy is hated by casual fan and is disliked by the media. But any fan of boxing can see with their own eyes just how skillful he is in the ring.

But whatever this isn't about Pac-May, Marquez put on a great performance when he really has no business even fighting at 135. I hope he doesn't retire because he has a couple really good fights left. The majority of people know who really won last night and that will have to do since filipino gamblers fixed it? LOL

I rewatched the first two before Saturday night and I think the second one is by far the best and third easily the worst. I still really enjoyed it though, anytime you get to watch two legends in the ring I'm happy.

put these chumps in the ufc and watch em crumble after some ground n pound or have there arm broken by an armbar. Both of them are soft and hand pick there opponents instead of fighting eachother enough said