By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sports Discussion - Pacman(the boxer not the game) got stopped we need to talk about it!!!!

keroncoward on 14 December 2012
Kasz216 said:
keroncoward said:
Kasz216 said:
keroncoward said:
Kasz216 said:
Adinnieken said:
Where is your God now Pacquiao? If only the rumors about Marquez were true, than one could extrapolate a headline "Homosexuality beats Bible". But no, this Marquez has to be the straight one.

Ironically, a lot of people specifically attribute Pacquiao's downfall due to his "conversion" into full blown Protestant... having previously been somewhat of a lapsed Catholic.

Pacquiao just doesn't like hurting people anymore.     Where old Pacman would go for the kill.  Current Pacman tries to drag things out to decision confident he's won in scoring. (which is what led to his last loss before this... which itself was controversial.)


His win against Marquez in the third fight was also contraversial but people seem to be only focusing on the Bradley robbery. If you ask me he clearly lost against Marquez in the third fight and won against Bradley.

My point wasn't that the outcome was controversial, so much as if Pacqiao were his usual nonreligious self, there wouldn't of been a decision... as he noticeably let up after he thought he'd scored the victory overwhelmingly on points.

 

As for the two robberies, at least Pacqiao outlaned Marquez in total punches.


Total punches thrown or landed?

Both.


I dont remember that in the third fight. From what i have seen Marquez beat him because of superior footwork. He knew where to place his feet and exactly when to step to the left to keep manny off balance. Manny missed most of his shots that night from what i remember. He even knew he lost as he went to his corner and prayed.....he didnt for the Bradley fight though.



Around the Network
Soma on 15 December 2012
Kasz216 said:
keroncoward said:
Kasz216 said:
Adinnieken said:
Where is your God now Pacquiao? If only the rumors about Marquez were true, than one could extrapolate a headline "Homosexuality beats Bible". But no, this Marquez has to be the straight one.

Ironically, a lot of people specifically attribute Pacquiao's downfall due to his "conversion" into full blown Protestant... having previously been somewhat of a lapsed Catholic.

Pacquiao just doesn't like hurting people anymore.     Where old Pacman would go for the kill.  Current Pacman tries to drag things out to decision confident he's won in scoring. (which is what led to his last loss before this... which itself was controversial.)


His win against Marquez in the third fight was also contraversial but people seem to be only focusing on the Bradley robbery. If you ask me he clearly lost against Marquez in the third fight and won against Bradley.

My point wasn't that the outcome was controversial, so much as if Pacqiao were his usual nonreligious self, there wouldn't of been a decision... as he noticeably let up after he thought he'd scored the victory overwhelmingly on points.

 

As for the two robberies, at least Pacqiao outlaned Marquez in total punches.


Number of punches landed is just half of the picture, it's more important who did more damage. Pacquiao connected more punches in the third fight, but Marquez the harder punches and that's why almost all people consider it was a robbery. In the first two fights Marquez outlanded Pacquiao, does that mean he deserved to win those fights? (Although I think he did, but not because of that but because he looked better imo)



Castlevania Judgment FC:     1161 - 3389 - 1512

3DS Friend Code:   3480-2746-6289


Wii Friend Code: 4268-9719-1932-3069

Kasz216 on 15 December 2012
Soma said:
Kasz216 said:
keroncoward said:
Kasz216 said:
Adinnieken said:
Where is your God now Pacquiao? If only the rumors about Marquez were true, than one could extrapolate a headline "Homosexuality beats Bible". But no, this Marquez has to be the straight one.

Ironically, a lot of people specifically attribute Pacquiao's downfall due to his "conversion" into full blown Protestant... having previously been somewhat of a lapsed Catholic.

Pacquiao just doesn't like hurting people anymore.     Where old Pacman would go for the kill.  Current Pacman tries to drag things out to decision confident he's won in scoring. (which is what led to his last loss before this... which itself was controversial.)


His win against Marquez in the third fight was also contraversial but people seem to be only focusing on the Bradley robbery. If you ask me he clearly lost against Marquez in the third fight and won against Bradley.

My point wasn't that the outcome was controversial, so much as if Pacqiao were his usual nonreligious self, there wouldn't of been a decision... as he noticeably let up after he thought he'd scored the victory overwhelmingly on points.

 

As for the two robberies, at least Pacqiao outlaned Marquez in total punches.


Number of punches landed is just half of the picture, it's more important who did more damage. Pacquiao connected more punches in the third fight, but Marquez the harder punches and that's why almost all people consider it was a robbery. In the first two fights Marquez outlanded Pacquiao, does that mean he deserved to win those fights? (Although I think he did, but not because of that but because he looked better imo)

I didn't say that's why he should of won the fight.

I'm saying why that was less of a robbery then Bradly.

 

Pac vs Marquez, you could find an arguement for Pac.

The bradly fight though... that one just defies explination.



keroncoward on 15 December 2012
Soma said:
Kasz216 said:
keroncoward said:
Kasz216 said:
Adinnieken said:
Where is your God now Pacquiao? If only the rumors about Marquez were true, than one could extrapolate a headline "Homosexuality beats Bible". But no, this Marquez has to be the straight one.

Ironically, a lot of people specifically attribute Pacquiao's downfall due to his "conversion" into full blown Protestant... having previously been somewhat of a lapsed Catholic.

Pacquiao just doesn't like hurting people anymore.     Where old Pacman would go for the kill.  Current Pacman tries to drag things out to decision confident he's won in scoring. (which is what led to his last loss before this... which itself was controversial.)


His win against Marquez in the third fight was also contraversial but people seem to be only focusing on the Bradley robbery. If you ask me he clearly lost against Marquez in the third fight and won against Bradley.

My point wasn't that the outcome was controversial, so much as if Pacqiao were his usual nonreligious self, there wouldn't of been a decision... as he noticeably let up after he thought he'd scored the victory overwhelmingly on points.

 

As for the two robberies, at least Pacqiao outlaned Marquez in total punches.


Number of punches landed is just half of the picture, it's more important who did more damage. Pacquiao connected more punches in the third fight, but Marquez the harder punches and that's why almost all people consider it was a robbery. In the first two fights Marquez outlanded Pacquiao, does that mean he deserved to win those fights? (Although I think he did, but not because of that but because he looked better imo)


My god you guys are crazy lol The third fight was a clear robbery. If you dont consider it a robbery then Bardley won his fight. Be real and be fair Pacquiao was not connecting most of his shots in the third fight he was getting countered and isolated with footwork all night. As a matter of fact Marquez did a lot better than when they fought and had a draw so how the hell did he lose? It was clearly a robbery just as much as the Bradley win.



BluGamer23 on 15 December 2012
keroncoward said:
Soma said:


Number of punches landed is just half of the picture, it's more important who did more damage. Pacquiao connected more punches in the third fight, but Marquez the harder punches and that's why almost all people consider it was a robbery. In the first two fights Marquez outlanded Pacquiao, does that mean he deserved to win those fights? (Although I think he did, but not because of that but because he looked better imo)


My god you guys are crazy lol The third fight was a clear robbery. If you dont consider it a robbery then Bardley won his fight. Be real and be fair Pacquiao was not connecting most of his shots in the third fight he was getting countered and isolated with footwork all night. As a matter of fact Marquez did a lot better than when they fought and had a draw so how the hell did he lose? It was clearly a robbery just as much as the Bradley win.


LOL! this guy again and his full of shit analysis.. HAHAHA .. lol

I take back what I said about shuting up... dont stop posting in this thread here.. and continue to enlighten us with your superior boxing knowledge pro! =D



 

 

Around the Network
keroncoward on 16 December 2012
BluGamer23 said:
keroncoward said:
Soma said:


Number of punches landed is just half of the picture, it's more important who did more damage. Pacquiao connected more punches in the third fight, but Marquez the harder punches and that's why almost all people consider it was a robbery. In the first two fights Marquez outlanded Pacquiao, does that mean he deserved to win those fights? (Although I think he did, but not because of that but because he looked better imo)


My god you guys are crazy lol The third fight was a clear robbery. If you dont consider it a robbery then Bardley won his fight. Be real and be fair Pacquiao was not connecting most of his shots in the third fight he was getting countered and isolated with footwork all night. As a matter of fact Marquez did a lot better than when they fought and had a draw so how the hell did he lose? It was clearly a robbery just as much as the Bradley win.


LOL! this guy again and his full of shit analysis.. HAHAHA .. lol

I take back what I said about shuting up... dont stop posting in this thread here.. and continue to enlighten us with your superior boxing knowledge pro! =D


Stay butthurt forever. You have feelings for Pacquiao?



BluGamer23 on 17 December 2012
keroncoward said:
BluGamer23 said:

LOL! this guy again and his full of shit analysis.. HAHAHA .. lol

I take back what I said about shuting up... dont stop posting in this thread here.. and continue to enlighten us with your superior boxing knowledge pro! =D


Stay butthurt forever. You have feelings for Pacquiao?

lol nah I used to be a fan.. too many disappointments coming from him.. from boxing to religion... etc... so I dont really care .. but I can still see the straight out bias in your pro-analysis .. lol .. anyway I think pacman is done.. and should retire before he kills himself in the ring.



 

 

Soma on 17 December 2012
Kasz216 said:
Soma said:
Kasz216 said:
keroncoward said:
Kasz216 said:
Adinnieken said:
Where is your God now Pacquiao? If only the rumors about Marquez were true, than one could extrapolate a headline "Homosexuality beats Bible". But no, this Marquez has to be the straight one.

Ironically, a lot of people specifically attribute Pacquiao's downfall due to his "conversion" into full blown Protestant... having previously been somewhat of a lapsed Catholic.

Pacquiao just doesn't like hurting people anymore.     Where old Pacman would go for the kill.  Current Pacman tries to drag things out to decision confident he's won in scoring. (which is what led to his last loss before this... which itself was controversial.)


His win against Marquez in the third fight was also contraversial but people seem to be only focusing on the Bradley robbery. If you ask me he clearly lost against Marquez in the third fight and won against Bradley.

My point wasn't that the outcome was controversial, so much as if Pacqiao were his usual nonreligious self, there wouldn't of been a decision... as he noticeably let up after he thought he'd scored the victory overwhelmingly on points.

 

As for the two robberies, at least Pacqiao outlaned Marquez in total punches.


Number of punches landed is just half of the picture, it's more important who did more damage. Pacquiao connected more punches in the third fight, but Marquez the harder punches and that's why almost all people consider it was a robbery. In the first two fights Marquez outlanded Pacquiao, does that mean he deserved to win those fights? (Although I think he did, but not because of that but because he looked better imo)

I didn't say that's why he should of won the fight.

I'm saying why that was less of a robbery then Bradly.

 

Pac vs Marquez, you could find an arguement for Pac.

The bradly fight though... that one just defies explination.


Ok then, I agree with that



Castlevania Judgment FC:     1161 - 3389 - 1512

3DS Friend Code:   3480-2746-6289


Wii Friend Code: 4268-9719-1932-3069

Soma on 17 December 2012
keroncoward said:
Soma said:
Kasz216 said:
keroncoward said:
Kasz216 said:
Adinnieken said:
Where is your God now Pacquiao? If only the rumors about Marquez were true, than one could extrapolate a headline "Homosexuality beats Bible". But no, this Marquez has to be the straight one.

Ironically, a lot of people specifically attribute Pacquiao's downfall due to his "conversion" into full blown Protestant... having previously been somewhat of a lapsed Catholic.

Pacquiao just doesn't like hurting people anymore.     Where old Pacman would go for the kill.  Current Pacman tries to drag things out to decision confident he's won in scoring. (which is what led to his last loss before this... which itself was controversial.)


His win against Marquez in the third fight was also contraversial but people seem to be only focusing on the Bradley robbery. If you ask me he clearly lost against Marquez in the third fight and won against Bradley.

My point wasn't that the outcome was controversial, so much as if Pacqiao were his usual nonreligious self, there wouldn't of been a decision... as he noticeably let up after he thought he'd scored the victory overwhelmingly on points.

 

As for the two robberies, at least Pacqiao outlaned Marquez in total punches.


Number of punches landed is just half of the picture, it's more important who did more damage. Pacquiao connected more punches in the third fight, but Marquez the harder punches and that's why almost all people consider it was a robbery. In the first two fights Marquez outlanded Pacquiao, does that mean he deserved to win those fights? (Although I think he did, but not because of that but because he looked better imo)


My god you guys are crazy lol The third fight was a clear robbery. If you dont consider it a robbery then Bardley won his fight. Be real and be fair Pacquiao was not connecting most of his shots in the third fight he was getting countered and isolated with footwork all night. As a matter of fact Marquez did a lot better than when they fought and had a draw so how the hell did he lose? It was clearly a robbery just as much as the Bradley win.


It was a robbery, yes, but not as big as the one from Bradley, in that fight Pacquiao won at least 10 rounds. Against Marquez it was a closer fight although Marquez deserved to win, but the difference was just of 3-4 points at most.



Castlevania Judgment FC:     1161 - 3389 - 1512

3DS Friend Code:   3480-2746-6289


Wii Friend Code: 4268-9719-1932-3069

keroncoward on 17 December 2012
Soma said:
keroncoward said:
Soma said:
Kasz216 said:
keroncoward said:
Kasz216 said:
Adinnieken said:
Where is your God now Pacquiao? If only the rumors about Marquez were true, than one could extrapolate a headline "Homosexuality beats Bible". But no, this Marquez has to be the straight one.

Ironically, a lot of people specifically attribute Pacquiao's downfall due to his "conversion" into full blown Protestant... having previously been somewhat of a lapsed Catholic.

Pacquiao just doesn't like hurting people anymore.     Where old Pacman would go for the kill.  Current Pacman tries to drag things out to decision confident he's won in scoring. (which is what led to his last loss before this... which itself was controversial.)


His win against Marquez in the third fight was also contraversial but people seem to be only focusing on the Bradley robbery. If you ask me he clearly lost against Marquez in the third fight and won against Bradley.

My point wasn't that the outcome was controversial, so much as if Pacqiao were his usual nonreligious self, there wouldn't of been a decision... as he noticeably let up after he thought he'd scored the victory overwhelmingly on points.

 

As for the two robberies, at least Pacqiao outlaned Marquez in total punches.


Number of punches landed is just half of the picture, it's more important who did more damage. Pacquiao connected more punches in the third fight, but Marquez the harder punches and that's why almost all people consider it was a robbery. In the first two fights Marquez outlanded Pacquiao, does that mean he deserved to win those fights? (Although I think he did, but not because of that but because he looked better imo)


My god you guys are crazy lol The third fight was a clear robbery. If you dont consider it a robbery then Bardley won his fight. Be real and be fair Pacquiao was not connecting most of his shots in the third fight he was getting countered and isolated with footwork all night. As a matter of fact Marquez did a lot better than when they fought and had a draw so how the hell did he lose? It was clearly a robbery just as much as the Bradley win.


It was a robbery, yes, but not as big as the one from Bradley, in that fight Pacquiao won at least 10 rounds. Against Marquez it was a closer fight although Marquez deserved to win, but the difference was just of 3-4 points at most.


I understand what he is saying now and yes i agree Bradley's loss was more clear compared to Martquez loss.