Which Draw was the biggest robbery?

[Willie Pep 229]

Are you one of those “I’m right and everyone else is wrong” kind of guys? Read the thread. I have neither the time or inclination to have a boxing conversation with someone whose opinion is that Whitaker/Chavez was a draw. Good day.

It seems you're that guy, not me.

This is twice you have dismissed me. Why repeat yourself?

A counter argument I suspose is beneath you.

[just the facts]

It seems you're that guy, not me.

This is twice you have dismissed me. Why repeat yourself?

A counter argument I suspose is beneath you.

Read the thread genius. Every poster in it agrees with me. Whitaker/Chavez a draw? Verrrrrrrrry low boxing IQ.

[IronDanHamza]

It's not the only answer. Pac/JMM was competitive but judge Clements failed to score Manny's third knockdown of Juan in round one which would have made it a win for Manny. Close, but he was still robbed. Hearns dropped Leonard twice and the judges rescued Leonard from a loss by giving him a 10-8 round in the fifth with no knockdown, and again a judge gave him the 12th with a 10-8 round with no knockdown. Hearns was in control for most of the fight and was robbed of a win.

Most people would argue that they thought Marquez was robbed let alone Pacquaio.

A draw was a fair result. Not even sure why it’s an option here to be honest.

[GhostofDempsey]

Most people would argue that they thought Marquez was robbed let alone Pacquaio.

A draw was a fair result. Not even sure why it’s an option here to be honest.

I explained why, and no, most people don't think Marquez won.

[IronDanHamza]

I explained why, and no, most people don't think Marquez won.

Your explanation is poor.

It’s about 50-50 who people think won but way more people think Marquez was “robbed” as opposed to thinking Pacquaio was robbed. Barely anyone thinks that.

Including it as a robbery for Pacquaio is just a very strange inclusion and doesn’t belong there at all.

Reality is the fight was close and either way, no where close to eligible for a robbery discussion.

[GhostofDempsey]

Your explanation is poor.

It’s about 50-50 who people think won but way more people think Marquez was “robbed” as opposed to thinking Pacquaio was robbed. Barely anyone thinks that.

Including it as a robbery for Pacquaio is just a very strange inclusion and doesn’t belong there at all.

Reality is the fight was close and either way, no where close to eligible for a robbery discussion.

He was robbed of a point, and landed more punches than Marquez over the course of the fight. Marquez' constant crying about being robbed is what plants the seed in some fans heads. The fight was a robbery for Pac and should have been a win. Your claims that "barely anyone thinks that" is unfounded and unproven.

[Willie Pep 229]

Read the thread genius. Every poster in it agrees with me. Whitaker/Chavez a draw? Verrrrrrrrry low boxing IQ.

Pray tell what is a "boxing IQ" ? Sounds made up.

Everyone agreeing is not necessarily a good thing, it's just everyone agreeing.

august_landmesser_2.jpg

[IronDanHamza]

He was robbed of a point, and landed more punches than Marquez over the course of the fight. Marquez' constant crying about being robbed is what plants the seed in some fans heads. The fight was a robbery for Pac and should have been a win. Your claims that "barely anyone thinks that" is unfounded and unproven.

It’s not it’s just the reality of the situation.

Your theory that people think the Marquez was robbed because his crying plants it in their heads is a perfect example of something that’s unfounded and unproven and nothing more than your baseless assertion.

KD’s being a point deduction is the judges discretion anyway, they’re not obliged to score the point dedication and regardless it’s irrelevant because even with that there’s still more than an argument that Marquez won the fight.

It’s just an asinine inclusion really, I thought that when I assumed it was a Marquez robbery but the idea is was a Pacquaio robbery is just laughable.

[GhostofDempsey]

It’s not it’s just the reality of the situation.

Your theory that people think the Marquez was robbed because his crying plants it in their heads is a perfect example of something that’s unfounded and unproven and nothing more than your baseless assertion.

KD’s being a point deduction is the judges discretion anyway, they’re not obliged to score the point dedication and regardless it’s irrelevant because even with that there’s still more than an argument that Marquez won the fight.

It’s just an asinine inclusion really, I thought that when I assumed it was a Marquez robbery but the idea is was a Pacquaio robbery is just laughable.

You live in your own reality. Prove otherwise, until you can, Pacquiao was cheated out of a knockdown on the official scorecards and landed more punches. Your bias doesn't change that.

[IronDanHamza]

You live in your own reality. Prove otherwise, until you can, Pacquiao was cheated out of a knockdown on the official scorecards and landed more punches. Your bias doesn't change that.

You literally just said that people think Marquez was robbed because his crying had planted that seed in their brain

That is literally a baseless assertion by you whilst having the audacity to talk about proving things and living in alternate realities It’s almost painfully ironic.

Knockdowns being a point deduction is a judges discretion, you know that right? The judge isn’t obliged to give a point deduction for a KD. So no he objectively wasn’t cheated out of anything.

The fight was close, a draw was fair. No where even close to a robbery despite your weird inclusion of it amongst genuine robberies.

The narrative for years was Marquez was robbed, not Pacquaio. Reality is neither of them were.