Reply With Quote
In what world did Marquez give up round 12?
I don't see Marquez beign specially cautious there.
I just saw the fight, I have 116-112 for Marquez.
In what world did Marquez give up round 12?
I don't see Marquez beign specially cautious there.
It wasnt specific,he slowed down since the 10th round... marquez brought it in the middle rounds...even "Sense" stated in the last few pages that Marquez coasted.
Neither was Pac then. The only round that Pacquiao clearly dominated was the 11th, besides that they were either in favour of Marquez or pretty even.
Or did you mean that what you say wasn't specific?
clearly you don't stop embarrassing yourself.
Don't know
You must be new to boxing.Look at Marquez intentionally stepping on Pac's foot to prevent him from using his vaunted footwork:
The Judge that scored it 116-112 for Pac, gave marquez the 12th round..
he shouldn't have slowed down
I rewatched the fight last night have 7 rounds to 5. it was a close fight but there wasn't any rounds that Manny clearly dominated except for maybe 1 like you said. Marquez had 4 rounds where he clearly dominated.
And
Can someone explain how Floyd is still Undefeated yet he's never the "aggressor"?
Thanks.
Because he hasn't fought Pacman yet.Can someone explain how Floyd is still Undefeated yet he's never the "aggressor"?
Thanks.
neither was more aggresive than the other. Pacman was better in the beginning and end rounds. Marquez was better in the middle rounds.
agree with what stated above, the challenger has to go for a knockdown vs. the champ or risk losing in a decision. Gayweather gets the same treatment. Why can't pacman?
How many fights has Floyd has where his opponent lands 40+ more punches than he does? Thanks.Can someone explain how Floyd is still Undefeated yet he's never the "aggressor"?
Thanks.
that being said. this was the worst pacman performance I have ever seen. And I have seen his past 20 bouts.
Morales I?
Pacman showed his heart and left it all on the floor vs. Morales. He was not only cut, but he was exhausted and still was this close from knocking Morales out in round 12.
Last saturday on the other hand, he looked old, clumsy and with a pathetic defense. His footwork was terrible and he showed no heart. He was lucky to come out with the decision.
Perhaps, but I thought Manny was much more technically sound and smarter against Marquez. I don't know. Close call. You could also argue that Manny just wasn't ready for Morales when they fought the first time.
I also have to hand it to Marquez. At 38, he was very close to if not in the best shape of his career.
Damn it really is sad how some of you are completely clueless when it comes to boxing. Again pulling compubox numbers? really? Fights aren't scored on punches landed. and the judges don't have access to these numbers either while judging the fight.. I thought we went over this already. and 40+ punches? Power punces landed manny only landed 17 more. nice try.
But to answer your question.
Jose Luis Castillo vs Mayweather 1
You're welcome dumbass.
Even Pacquiao fans know this isn't true.
Seriously you are probably the only person who thinks Manny was technically sound and smarter on saturday.
Watch the fight again i'll even give you a link. Manny was sloppy and couldn't put any combinations together all night. He was reaching, lunging, and offbalance.
no one wants to see that again. Look at bob's eyes light up. It will break all Monetary records
we're going in circles....
Pacquiao fans in here admit it was a close fight and that it could have easily gone either way just like the first 2 fights.
Marquez fans think it was "CLEAR" that Marquez won.
And just like the past 3 fights its always gonna be controversial...in addition to the technical points that marquez lost in the knockdowns, judges take agression as ring control. Compunumbers dont say it all, but they do sway the outlook of the fight.
So wait, it's wrong to use compubox as a basis for an argument, right? I remember that fight, it wasn't even close. Mayweather dominated the first 5-6 rounds before Castillo even started landing anything of significance. It was NOTHING like this fight. Castillo was also penalized for a headbutt if memory serves, although I'm not sure, I remember a point deduction.Damn it really is sad how some of you are completely clueless when it comes to boxing. Again pulling compubox numbers? really? Fights aren't scored on punches landed. and the judges don't have access to these numbers either while judging the fight.. I thought we went over this already. and 40+ punches? Power punces landed manny only landed 17 more. nice try.
But to answer your question.
Jose Luis Castillo vs Mayweather 1
You're welcome dumbass.
Wasn't that the fight that also counted Castillo's punching during clinches?
Well, what more can we say then? None of us except Dinamita here know anything about boxing.Damn it really is sad how some of you are completely clueless when it comes to boxing. Again pulling compubox numbers? really? Fights aren't scored on punches landed. and the judges don't have access to these numbers either while judging the fight.. I thought we went over this already. and 40+ punches? Power punces landed manny only landed 17 more. nice try.
You're welcome dumbass.
Wonder why he's home posting in Spurstalk instead of working for the WBC.
Anyway, Im done here. We all are just saying the same things over and over again.
Wat. I admit it was a close fight 7-5 isn't close? . I said there were rounds that Marquez Clearly won. Which there are. Compubox dont sway the outlook of anything. breh they aren't even accurate numbers. What rounds did Manny CLEARLY Win? I found it hard to find many even DAF had trouble. I watched it again last night.
The fact that you even think you even have a shadow of objectivity is amusing.
http://michaeldsellers.com/blog/2011...anuel-marquez/
Dear Juan Manuel Marquez,
First, congratulations on an excellent performance against Manny Pacquiao on November 12. You demonstrated that more than any other fighter, you have figured out the Pacquiao puzzle. You deserve great credit for that. [Desplácese hacia abajo de la letra en español]
In your post fight interview you said you were robbed, and that you might retire. That’s understandable in the heat of the moment right after the fight, but after you’ve had a chance to reflect on it, I hope you will elect to continue. It is clear you have the skills and physical ability, and Bernard Hopkins has certainly taught us that 38 is not as old as we thought it was. Your performance against Manny reinforces that.
If you elect to continue fighting, and in particular if you elect to challenge Manny Pacquiao to a fourth fight, I would respectfully suggest that you need to be aware of some realities about judges scoring. Had you been more fully concious and accepting of them this time, you might have won the fight by pushing yourself harder in the later rounds when the fight still hung in the balance. True, by pushing yourself you would be exposing yourself to more risk — even to a possible knockout, but that is always the way of it when you are the challenger attempting to take the belt away from the champion.
The judges in Nevada are charged to look for a) clean, effective punching, b) effective aggression, c) ring generalship, and d) defense. A study of how US (and most other) judges score over the last 10 years shows that in a close fight, the judges almost always favor the fighter who presses the action and is perceived as the aggressor in the fight. Being the aggressor almost always generates a higher punch output, and even if the punches aren’t completely clean, the judges reward the attacking style which, even if it doesn’t result in clean punches, does expose the aggressor to greater risk than his opponent–something that the judges evidently feel should be rewarded. Your reliance on counterpunching, while it may produce cleaner landed shots, will always put you at a disadvantage with judges in a close fight if you rely heavily on the counterpunching style and do not act as the aggressor.
To state the equation very clearly: The very act of launching an attack against a composed, skillful opponent whose guard is up is a risky manuever which exposes the attacker. By taking that risk and launching that attack, the attacker gains favor in the eyes of the judges, and even if his punches don’t land as cleanly as your counterpunches, he gets credit for a) forcing the action and being the aggressor, b) taking the risk associated with attacking a skilled, waiting opponent.
In your first two fights with Manny Pacquiao, while you were oriented toward counterpunching, you also launched offensive attacks and in both of those fights you had a higher volume of punches that Pacquiao; a higher landed punch total; and a higher number of solid, compelling punches. But in those fights — he knocked you down four times. There is no doubt that if you had not been knocked down, you would have won both those fights because all of the other statistics were in your favor.
But this is not true of your most recent fight. In that fight Pacquiao had a higher volume of attacks; higher volume of punches; higher number of landed punches; higher number of landed powershots. Your counters were effective and in some cases dramatic — but by its very nature, your counterpunch oriented approach will impress the fans (and your trainer, evidently), but unless you create knockdowns it will not impress the judges — at least it won’ t impress them enough to offset the advantages that Pacquiao is gaining from his constantly being the aggressor; constantly exposing himself to risk by launching attacks against a waiting opponent; and in doing so generating an overall impression that he’s moving forward while you’re moving backwards; he’s getting off more punches (hence taking more risk); he’s landing more punches even if they’re not as clean (after all he’s punching a waiting opponent, not an exposed one).
Also, if I may offer one other piece of advice. In each of these fights, your Hall of Fame trainer Mr. Berestain has repeatedly told you in the corner between rounds that you are winning the fight. By now, given your highly intelligent nature, you must realize that no matter what Mr. Berestain says, you must keep fighting as if you are not ahead. You are the challenger; the underdog; and you are using a counterpunching style that puts you at a disadvantage with judges. You must never assume you are ahead. In the fight on November 12, if you had gone into the “championship rounds” with the at ude that you must win these rounds, the outcome of the fight might have been different.
Sincerely,,
A Fight Fan who appreciates what you bring to the sport
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
