No Robbery

i think all the claims of robbery are from marquez doing far better than expected. it was a close fight with a few tight rounds, but manny's aggression won him the fight. it was a mistake on the corner of marquez to tell him he was winning the fight, he seemed to slow down. (watch the fight with HBO commentary).

i wanted marquez to win but had manny up 4-2 at the half way point.
my score was 6-6 but if anyone was going to squeeze a round, it would have been manny.

marquez had the more eye catching punches but manny threw more and just edged some of the rounds.

guess this leaves open the mayweather fight, which is the reason many people think the scoring was as it was. ive always thought mayweather would beat manny, now i think it would be easier than expected. well done marquez. but well done manny in beating a VERY good fighter. lets not forget that.

I thought Marquez did the better work...

we've just had a fight where Katsidis threw more punches than his opponent and rightfully lost...

Marquez was more effective..

I had Marquez one up but can see your point Oasis, certainly no robbery in my eyes, I feel Marquez let it slip in the last 4 rounds when Pacquiao seem to control the pace for the first time.

Pacquiao a tremendous fighter he is but seems to struggle with guys who circle away, Mayweather should drop all his silly demands and do his upmost to get Manny in the ring, seems Manny doesn't fight with the same energy and zip we saw in the last couple of years.

the scoring on lederman's card was a joke.

the full fight from HBO is on youtube (maybe not for long). he had manny about 4 rounds up at the end which i didnt agree with.

i really wanted marquez to win and was gutted reading about the robbery. i feel a better after watching the fight. maybe i should watch the fight again with on primetime with british commentary and see how i feel after that. hopefully im not swayed by what i hear.

Did he Love sacks - Marquez countered him all the way through. Controlled the ring, landed sweet counters and clearly won by 3 minimum. It was written all over Pacman + Roach's face.

Roach is now saying he thinks they won.

Interview after the fight:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0sy8j7dNWI&feature=youtube_gdata_player

I believe that the reason many are claiming ' robbery ' is that, in three very close fights, Pacquiao has enjoyed the rub of the green every single time.

The Norton v Ali trilogy featured three close fights - two of them coming down to the very last round - but Norton did get the rub in one of them, even if many believe that he also won the third fight.

No doubt whatsoever in my mind that Marquez has been short changed overall.

To a certain extent windy is right...I had it marquez by 3 last night and I've seen much worse in regards to decisions...(Brodie-Jorrin..Whittaker-Ramirez)

However I'd love someone to tell me which rounds Manny won after the contentious 2nd in the first fight...

Fact is at least two of the three were nailed on victories for the guy and the fact we all knew Marquez couldn't get a decision anyway adds fuel to the fire..

I agree that Marquez did slow down towards the end - but still did the more effective work. That was a Marquez decision all the way - how you can claim that he wasnt robbed is beyond me. Roach even said around the half way point that he was losing on points - and that wasnt to get Manny fired up. I have no idea how you can score 4-2 Manny at the half way point.

Dazstarr wrote:I agree that Marquez did slow down towards the end - but still did the more effective work. That was a Marquez decision all the way - how you can claim that he wasnt robbed is beyond me. Roach even said around the half way point that he was losing on points - and that wasnt to get Manny fired up. I have no idea how you can score 4-2 Manny at the half way point.

Marquez clearly won the fight imo anyone who claim's that decision was fair is either clueless or a Manny fan.

I am watching the re run on Primetime and it's going exactly the same way. I think Marquez should stay at light welter and wipe out morales then Khan. I think he would have khans number too. His countering takes away khans speed to an extent, plus Khan tires easy.

But he shouldn't retire. He looks good at the weight now he's put it on properly

So true Balti - I am actually quite upset about this. Just sat here like an old man shaking my head an hour after watching the fight.

Anyone that had Pacquiao winning that fight needs their heads checking. Even Khan had Marquez winning and he was very biased in his commentary. I hate Boxing sometimes.

I think it was Steve Collins who said something afterwards along the lines of "Pacquiao shouldn't be thanking god for the win because Yid had nothing to do with those score cards".

Yeah I laughed at that too. Buncey was furious after the fight. He so desperately wanted to say it was blatantly a fix but knew he couldnt due to legal action!

Buncey annoyed me beforehand. Forget why now, after the rage.

Haha! I can't seem to shake it off either! Very very disappointed. I didnt see him before the fight - i just downloaded it and it started with the ring walks.

even roach thought marquez was winning the fight,thats why he told manny he needs to knock marquez out.
khan also thought marquez won the fight and most of the ppl who saw it.and dont forget,manny is very popular,but he still got boo'd,that speaks for itself.
the classier work came from marquez.thats what should win you the fight,not aggression.

supremeskills wrote:the classier work came from marquez.thats what should win you the fight,not aggression.

I agree with that - I think agression should only come into play when there is nothing else to split them in the round. And in this fight - there was plenty to split them.

Dazstarr wrote:

supremeskills wrote:the classier work came from marquez.thats what should win you the fight,not aggression.

I agree with that - I think agression should only come into play when there is nothing else to split them in the round. And in this fight - there was plenty to split them.

Agreed.

if a fighter keeps throwing, missing and getting tagged...how does anyone reward the aggressive fighter? he isn't better. the fighter that avoids the attacks and counter attacks successfully is better. thats not too hard to grasp is it?

How a fighter can win 25/36 rounds and still not win a fight is shameless. This was a robbery, not the biggest we've seen, but a robbery all the same.

i consider this a robbery also, watched it with four mates they all thought the same. it may not be the biggest we have ever seen but there is no way paco got close to winning that fight, whether you had jmm by one round or ten he definately won the fight.

very suprised at this manny won points for agression, i thought he was very gun shy in this fight as everytime he came forward he was countered. not seen the stats but he seemed to throw very little compared to previous fights and barely landed any clean work at all

Thats the thing. Manny wins for agression, the judges obviously do not realise that it was worthless. He was countered all night.

The reason people are calling this a robbery is because that is what it was.
I know there are a lot of Manny apologists out there and unfortunately HBO and Vegas are full of them.

Technically Marquez was better, Marquez landed more clean shots, Marquez controlled the tempo of the fight, Pacquaio remained off balance the whole night and landed little of note.
The overwhelming reason people are giving it to Manny is that he was more aggressive??? So for walking forward and missing he gets the decision?

The appreciation of the skill in boxing has diminished to the point were flashy looking punches score higher than effective accurate punching.

I am honestly struggling to see how anyone scores that fight to Pacuqiao. I gave Marquez the second fight but accepted the judges could give it to Manny - this time I feel disgusted, Marquez would have to kill Pacquaio to get a decision.

i to have no complaints about the results in the first and second fight. in the second i had jmm by two but there were very close rounds in there so wouldnt complain either way. didnt see as many close rounds in this one though. first two fights manny was landing and hurting jmm, he didnt at all in this fight

Why do people think that Pacquiao was the aggressor when Marquez initiated more exchanges?

This is a simple case of people scoring rounds to the guy walking forwards.

Scottrf wrote:Why do people think that Pacquiao was the aggressor when Marquez initiated more exchanges?

This is a simple case of people scoring rounds to the guy walking forwards.

Exactly. But this is aggression, apparently.

Fighting off the back foot is not acceptable these days.

I didnt think that last fight close. I had Marquez winning 116-112. I simply cant see how Pacquiao could have won it, never mind by 116-112 card. The reaction of pretty much everyone spoke volumes. This was a robbery. Khan and Roach had Marquez winning for instance.

The first two were razor thin which could have one either way but that last one? I dont know how anyone could have scored it for Pacquaio. Even D4 scored it 115-113 to Marquez.

Agreed Manos......but I can see how Pacquiao won it...Manny is a big money earner for the alphabet types and Arum...

Said before the fight Marquez couldn't get a decision..

On the plus side we don't have to endure Coxy for a week, so every cloud and all that.

I literally felt sick when Buffer said "....and STILL!..." last night. As you said earlier, Rowley, I'm just gutted for Marquez. In the shadows of Barrera and Morales for so long, and his moment to possibly change all of that was taken away.

Truss, out of interest, how did you score it?

I don't think this was a robbery. Manny Steward got it right for me in saying it was a close fight and it had to go one way. Thanks to D4 I think most people arond here would love to see Pacquiao lose and we'd all love to see a warrior like Marquez be the one to do it, but this was a close fight.

I don't see why Marquez backing up and not throwing makes him the superior boxer as that he was doing in some rounds. I too think it was a case of a guy who'd looked less than incredible in his past few fights looking great, and a guy who'd looked invincible meeting his match. Pacquiao's footwork was very good and he made Marquez miss plenty too.

Here's my score card, call me a pactard if you will...

P M
R1 10| 9 |
R2 10| 9 |20/18
R3 10| 9 |30/27
R4 9 | 10 |39/37
R5 9 | 10 |48/47
R6 10| 10 |58/57
R7 9 | 10 |67/67
R8 9 | 10 |76/77
R9 10| 9 |86/86
R10 9 | 10 |95/96
R11 10| 9 |105/105
R12 10| 9 |115/114 to Manny Pacquiao

The word robbed is vastly overused in my opinion.

Think the problem with this guy Rowley is that he tends to try to win the fight before the first punch is thrown ( in the negotiating room )..

so it kind of irks even more when his opponent is shafted after as well..

7-4-1 for me...

88Chris05 wrote:I literally felt sick when Buffer said "....and STILL!..." last night.

Same here Chris, when the first card was called a draw said to the missus they are going to screw him, just seemed inevitable. The worst of it is fans have become almost immune to this because our default position is "I've seen worse" is a specious argument, is akin to saying Ian Huntley is not that bad, Dennis Neilsen was worse. A carve up is a carve up, and am yet to be convinced last night was anything other than that.

John Bloody Wayne wrote:I don't think this was a robbery. Manny Steward got it right for me in saying it was a close fight and it had to go one way. Thanks to D4 I think most people arond here would love to see Pacquiao lose and we'd all love to see a warrior like Marquez be the one to do it, but this was a close fight.

The word robbed is vastly overused in my opinion.

I defend Pacquiao as much as anyone and didn't really have a strong opinion on who I wanted to win.

I, and a few others on here that have since used similar terminology, am hesitant to call a robbery.

rowley wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:I literally felt sick when Buffer said "....and STILL!..." last night.

Same here Chris, when the first card was called a draw said to the missus they are going to screw him, just seemed inevitable. The worst of it is fans have become almost immune to this because our default position is "I've seen worse" is a specious argument, is akin to saying Ian Huntley is not that bad, Dennis Neilsen was worse. A carve up is a carve up, and am yet to be convinced last night was anything other than that.

Fans are also too used to hearing a hue and cry in the immediate aftermath only for ABSOLUTELY nothing to be done. That result should rightfully be overturned but money talks and Bob 'city Jew lawyer' Arum would MUCH rather shaft everyone out of another fight. Well, screw him, 'cause I will never, EVER send a penny his way.

rowley wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:I literally felt sick when Buffer said "....and STILL!..." last night.

Same here Chris, when the first card was called a draw said to the missus they are going to screw him, just seemed inevitable. The worst of it is fans have become almost immune to this because our default position is "I've seen worse" is a specious argument, is akin to saying Ian Huntley is not that bad, Dennis Neilsen was worse. A carve up is a carve up, and am yet to be convinced last night was anything other than that.

Yeah I heard 114-114 and though uh oh, here we go again. But then when I heard the 116-112 card I thought ok justice at last, nobody could score that 116-112 to Pacquaio (I had it 116-112 to Marquez). Was absolutely gobsmacked when they called out STILL WBO champion.

Balti if you're Marquez why bother with another rematch, at 38 what can he do beyond what he has done in their three fights thus far and he has not one of them, can hardly blame him if he chooses to call it a day because you have to think if he knocks Manny out he will only get a draw.

Turn down 10 or so million for a guy who's number you have...

You are naive Rowley..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Turn down 10 or so million for a guy who's number you have...

You are naive Rowley..

And keep picking up losses you don't deserve and let the history books show some guy you had in your pocket had your number.

rowley wrote:Balti if you're Marquez why bother with another rematch, at 38 what can he do beyond what he has done in their three fights thus far and he has not one of them, can hardly blame him if he chooses to call it a day because you have to think if he knocks Manny out he will only get a draw.

Yeah that's pretty much exactly my thoughts too. Personally I think he should think about retiring on a moral victory of sorts. There are no other fights as big as this, and I'd hate to see him lose to someone like Khan.

Money talks mate..

Ive defended Pacquaio plenty in the past. Especially regarding this fights worthiness in particular and the ridiculously high standards that he seems to have to be judged against. But I honestly could not see how he won that fight and I watched it as about as neutral as one could be.

The 114-114 card could perhaps be explainable but how on earth could it be scored 116-112 to Pacquiao. In order to score it that way I think you have to be conciously going into the fight already with a favourite in mind and basically cant be impartial. This is the problem. A 116-112 card for Pacquaio makes it look like the winner was already predecided.

I had it 116-112 to Marquez. I would be willing to accept the fight may have been closer than that but still cant see how Pacquiao wins it. But I dont think anyone other than that judge (Moretti?) could justify 116-112 to PAcquiao. It screams to me that any vaguely close rounds were automatically Pacquiaos and Marquez was up against it from the get go.

Think the history books will already show that though Rowley regardless of 1 more loss to the list, measured against boosting his imminent retirement fund you couldn't blame him for just taking the payday.

I did suggest that after the schooling he gave him in the first fight...he'd have to knock him out to win!!!

Marquez stock has risen over this and as for the three defeats in the book..you were all explaining to me on my ottke thread that records alone aren't worth the paper they are printed on.....

Maybe Marquez was up againt it from the start but at no stage was he making Pacquiao look foolish, such was his superiority as a boxer, at no stage did he look comfortable and in control and at no stage was he physically hurting Pacquiao repeatedly, so I don't see how it's some totally decisive victory. Personally I find 116-112 to Marquez rather odd, but it's a subjective thing.

I dont think Marquez could realistically afford to turn down the money for a rematch out of principle. Especially at his age with his career winding down. But the danger is he takes it purely for the money and cant motivate himself for a fourth time and eventually Manny stops him or beats a demotivated, old Marquez decisively.

Look at the score cards for Marquez v Barrera and tell me MAB wasn't up against it from the tart in that contest, what goes around comes around.