See the official scorecards for Pacquiao v Marquez

[exittored]

taken from the current scene

Various boxing writer's scorecards:

Harold Lederman, HBO: 115-114 Pacquio
Dan Rafael, ESPN: 114-114
Michael Rosenthal, The Ring: 115-113 Pacquiao
Eric Raskin, HBO: 116-112 Marquez
Doug Fisher, The Ring: 114-114
Kevin Iole, Yahoo! Sports: 114-114
Jake Donovan, Boxing Scene.com: 115-113 Pacquiao
Steve Kim, Maxboxing.com: 115-113 Marquez

This is wrong Lederman had it 116-112

So 6 very respected Journos had it to Pac or a draw, this conspiracy runs very deep :)

[greenyox3]

I can't comment on the fight or scoring because I didn't see it (a la Wenger).

But there seems to be a knee-jerk common wisdom that Pacquiao is suddenly over the hill and Mayweather will beat him easily or knock him out. This is the same kind of common wisdom that 24 hours ago said Pacquiao would be far too big/fast/good for Marquez, and would put him away inside 8 or so rounds.

It's all about styles, and sometimes a fighter will come up against someone who simply has his number. Marquez knows how to fight Pac better than anyone, and has a style suited to it. Does this mean Mayweather would destroy Pac, given the job he did on Marquez? Personally I doubt it. Mayweather's had trouble in the past with southpaws, and fighters who bring relentless pressure. And Pac is a southpaw who brings relentless pressure.

It also saddens me that people seem to be turning on Pacquiao. Apparently his interview with Kellerman was drowned out by boos. Why is he suddenly a villain? It's not his fault the scoring was shite.

Having said all that, I've always leaned toward a Mayweather win, but to say it would be easy or one-sided is ridiculous.

[Glyn Leach]

Why do people WANT a conspiracy here? That's for the muppets who don't know boxing, surely, not people who know their stuff. That only helps the perception of boxing being corrupt.

Hey Glyn, as you know boxing so well, who was responsible for appointing the judges for Saturday nights fight?

NSAC, they do everything in Vegas, their town

[ALI]

Why do people WANT a conspiracy here? That's for the muppets who don't know boxing, surely, not people who know their stuff. That only helps the perception of boxing being corrupt.

Hey Glyn, as you know boxing so well, who was responsible for appointing the judges for Saturday nights fight?

NSAC, they do everything in Vegas, their town

And who pays the judges wages and travel expenses etc?

[T.M.K]

Well played son, was just wondering what they looked like. Interesting, Trowbridge wasn't 'wrong' on a single round, by which I mean he wasn't out on a limb in any of them, there was always one judge in agreement with him. Scores for the first three rounds surprise me most, I only had Pac winning the first but the judges gave him all of them (Trowbridge) or two out of three (the others)

In actual fact mate, the 12th round Trowbridge gave to Marquez - while the others gave it to Pacman! If he'd agreed with them he could have feasably had it even wider! 117-111!

Colski/T.M.K

[MightyWarrior]

I watched it, didn't score it, but thought JMM deserved it - however, seeing someone I respect as much as Graham Houston gave it to Manny by a round - then fair enough - just one of those close fights that can be seen very differently from either side.

[Glyn Leach]

Hey Glyn, as you know boxing so well, who was responsible for appointing the judges for Saturday nights fight?

NSAC, they do everything in Vegas, their town

And who pays the judges wages and travel expenses etc?

Promoter, just like in EVERY fight. So all fights are bent, yes?

[Glyn Leach]

I watched it, didn't score it, but thought JMM deserved it - however, seeing someone I respect as much as Graham Houston gave it to Manny by a round - then fair enough - just one of those close fights that can be seen very differently from either side.

Graham had it 115-113 Pacman but could have lived with a draw

[mrbassie]

After a second watch, with the sound down low and scoring it properly, I had it 6-4-2 for Marquez. A little closer than I initially thought but I feel it was still clear enough.

[Glyn Leach]

After a second watch, with the sound down low and scoring it properly, I had it 6-4-2 for Marquez. A little closer than I initially thought but I feel it was still clear enough.

Two even rounds there, would you have accepted a draw?

[mrbassie]

After a second watch, with the sound down low and scoring it properly, I had it 6-4-2 for Marquez. A little closer than I initially thought but I feel it was still clear enough.

Two even rounds there, would you have accepted a draw?

TBH no. I was consciously paying more attention to Pacquiao second time around and I was perhaps a little kind to him here and there.

[ALI]

NSAC, they do everything in Vegas, their town

And who pays the judges wages and travel expenses etc?

Promoter, just like in EVERY fight. So all fights are bent, yes?

Not at all Glyn, but sure'ly you see with a system like that there is obvious room for corruption to take place.

Listen, the bigger the fight, the bigger the judges payday, and they're going to want to be involved in as many big fights as possible to maximise their earnings, so it would pay not to piss off the paymaker, right? I'm not labelling any specific judge as being corrupt, or as being biased in favour of any specific promoter, i'm just pointing out that there is obvious room for things to get a bit crooked. Thats the only point i'm out to make, as you seem so sure there could not possibly be any wrongdoing on the part of the judges.

Jeez Glyn, did you never watch any of Sven Ottke's fights D

[kingmo]

Get a grip man, would someone please pick up Glyn's toys and put them back in his pram, thanks.

Believe me when i say i'm NOT calling last nights result a corrupt decision, my point is that you must be rather nieve to state with 100% certainty that there is no possibility of such a thing having happened.

No toys but I'm not going to bang my head against a brick wall all afternoon, not very productive. You lads get it out of your system, I understand. It was disappointing.

Yeah best leave them to it with their conspiracies, i'm not exactly a fan of punch stats but maybe they think there was a conspiracy with the punch stats too:

CompuBox statistics: total punches landed, Pacquiao 176 of 578 and Marquez 138 of 436
CompuBox statistics: power punches landed, Pacquiao 117 and Marquez 100

When you look at them it's very easy to see how the judges could have Manny winning the fight.

How CompuBox works: The system calls for two operators. Each operator watches one of the two fighters and has access to four keys, corresponding to jab connect, jab miss, power punch connect, and power punch miss. The operators key in the different punches as they happen, collecting punch counts and hit percentages along the way.

[crusader]

http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... 055&hilit=

According to Compubox, Alfredo Angulo threw only 73 punches in the first round of his fight with James Kirkland. Check out the thread above, and you'll see that every poster who counted the punches thrown by Angulo in the first round ended up with at least 129.

Punch stats can be very, very wrong---especially when it comes to punches landed.

[exittored]

http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... 055&hilit=

According to Compubox, Alfredo Angulo threw only 73 punches in the first round of his fight with James Kirkland. Check out the thread above, and you'll see that every poster who counted the punches thrown by Angulo in the first round ended up with at least 129.

Punch stats can be very, very wrong---especially when it comes to punches landed.

They arn't an exact science and may be off a few punches here or there but i'd rather go with the experts figure who have been doing that jobs for years then posters on a forum who don't have that skill. There no way Angulo threw 129 punches in the 1st rd so everyone of them is wrong.

I just had a watch and counted 79 actual punches thrown and what those posters were doing is count any movement Angulo was making, if he twitched they were counting that as a punch thrown so i'd rather go off the punch stats after looking myself and seeing they were actually counting real punches rather then half thrown ones or feints.

[crusader]

Adducing CompuBox stats is one of the worst ways to support an argument about who should have won a fight, just as is using Harold Lederman's 'respected' scorecard. Most people have eyes of their own and can figure out what landed just as well as any CompuBox employee can. Raw stats also fail to take into account how clean a punch landed, and how much force it landed with.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIwlh1XMXdU

12:10

Anyone else want to count how many punches Angulo threw in the first round? CompuBox has Kirkland throwing 29 more punches than Angulo, do you agree with them?

[exittored]

Adducing CompuBox stats is one of the worst ways to support an argument about who should have won a fight, just as is using Harold Lederman's 'respected' scorecard. Most people have eyes of their own and can figure out what landed just as well as any CompuBox employee can. Raw stats also fail to take into account how clean a punch landed, and how much force it landed with.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIwlh1XMXdU

12:10

Anyone else want to count how many punches Angulo threw in the first round? CompuBox has Kirkland throwing 29 more punches than Angulo, do you agree with them?

I don't personally take note of them, just added it as a sidenote.

It's just not my scorecard or Ledermans, it's pratically every boxing writer and journalist who has been covering the sport for years mostly had it a draw, pac 7-5 or Marquez 7-5

Harold Lederman, HBO: 115-114 Pacquio
Graham Houston 115-113 Pacquio
Gareth A Davies 114-114
Dan Rafael, ESPN: 114-114
Michael Rosenthal, The Ring: 115-113 Pacquiao
Doug Fisher, The Ring: 114-114
Kevin Iole, Yahoo! Sports: 114-114
Jake Donovan, Boxing Scene.com: 115-113 Pacquiao
Steve Kim, Maxboxing.com: 115-113 Marquez

so a very close fight that was hardly a robbery but guess thats how fans react sometimes and it's all good but i've moved on now.

[crusader]

Good, but in the future if you're going emphasize one or two particular cards avoid Lederman. He has produced some really bizare stuff.

[bugs]

Overall I thought JMM was better in the fight, but that is not how boxing is scored, on a round by round basis I had Pacman 1 round ahead, it is just the method, not who did the best work over 12 rounds, but over each round that matters.

[Glyn Leach]

Not at all Glyn, but sure'ly you see with a system like that there is obvious room for corruption to take place.

Listen, the bigger the fight, the bigger the judges payday, and they're going to want to be involved in as many big fights as possible to maximise their earnings, so it would pay not to piss off the paymaker, right? I'm not labelling any specific judge as being corrupt, or as being biased in favour of any specific promoter, i'm just pointing out that there is obvious room for things to get a bit crooked. Thats the only point i'm out to make, as you seem so sure there could not possibly be any wrongdoing on the part of the judges.

Jeez Glyn, did you never watch any of Sven Ottke's fights D

Ottke won every fight he ever had - and fairly!!

I do take your point Ali but I think it's wrong to apply it to every decision we don't aagree with. ANY fight has the potential to be dodgy, any sporting contest with officiation does.

If I give any fight two rounds one way, it's part and parcel in my mind that I accept, no quibbles, a draw. One step further than that and my winner loses by a point. I can live with that too, I accept some rounds can be interpreted differently.

I think the upset around this fight is caused by JMM winning the rounds he won clearly, but Pac's were tight and closer to interpretation, hence the impression that JMM didn't get abfair deal. But I don't agree with that, I think it got tight in the later rounds when JMM started to fade a bit and Manny started to get some success at last. I find it frustrating that some have JMM's big rounds as a characterisation of the whole fight, 'he controlled every round', because he didn't beyond round eight, when he started to tire a little and the figth became more even.

Anyway ...

Have you made use of that scorecard app Mensa posted on page 1? I think that's interesting, with fans around the world scoring on it as the fight goes on and then producing an aggregate score at the end (JMM won by one round). No system's perfect, like x factor a popular fighter's fans could warp the scoring, but for the time being it appears to be mainly real fans who could be bothered to buy (only a couple of quid) and use the app during a fight and so you get a pretty accurate picture, or as accurate as you can get. I can see this becoming a valued addition to scoring debates.

[Mensa07]

the final fightscore card had it a draw:

[stujones]

This fight was clearly open to interpretation - although I saw Marquez a clear winner and make him 3-0 in the series. However, it is clear (and it does surprise me) that many respected fight judge has had the fight razor tight, probably it seems more edging it to Pac Man than JMM.

Its strange cause I was posting on another forum when JMM vs Pac 1 took place and it seemed to be certainly a cultural thing with the scoring. Had many an intense discussion with people's whose view I respected saying I was barmy for scoring it to JMM. Lots of people had the fight razor tight, even if you discount the first round and score the next 11 rounds. It definately seemed to be a British vs US way of scoring things.

And here again, it seems to be the same. I scored the fight similar to how scored the first fight minus the KD's. In fight 1, I had JMM coming back from a 10-7 defacit to nick the fight by 1. This fight I have its 116-112 Marquez.... but again it seems the American's a more favouring of Pacquiao's work.

[Boxing Addict]

JMM won by a few rounds

Manny threw alot - maybe more but nothing landed!!!!!

JMM landed most of his clean - hard shots - you could here them but mannys never connected

Mayweather looks like a tit for not doing the fight yet

Manny isn't on form - hasn't been since Cotto fight

[ALI]

I do take your point Ali but I think it's wrong to apply it to every decision we don't aagree with.

I would like to agree, but....

ANY fight has the potential to be dodgy, any sporting contest with officiation does.

Very true, but given boxings history of corruption, and the obvious financial link between promoter and judge, there would appear to be plenty more room for error in this setup. It does not have to be as simple as Promoter A (or any other person with a vested interest in Pacquiao winning) paying off Judge A, B or C to get the result they want. People can be very easily influenced at the best of times, especially when money and status is involved. If any of those judges had scored THAT specific fight 117-111 for Marquez, what are the chances of them being accepted for Pacquiao v Mayweather for example? Think about it, thats all i'm saying.

These judges earn their living from scoring fights. The bigger the fight, the bigger the payday. Obviously they will have a financial desire to be choosen for as many big fights as possible to maximise their earnings, so they clearly have a vested interest.

Anytime there is a stinking decision, nobody can be said to be wrong for being suspicious. Its a sh*t setup, period.

Have you made use of that scorecard app Mensa posted on page 1? I think that's interesting, with fans around the world scoring on it as the fight goes on and then producing an aggregate score at the end (JMM won by one round). No system's perfect, like x factor a popular fighter's fans could warp the scoring, but for the time being it appears to be mainly real fans who could be bothered to buy (only a couple of quid) and use the app during a fight and so you get a pretty accurate picture, or as accurate as you can get. I can see this becoming a valued addition to scoring debates.

First i've heard of it, sounds interesting. It would need to be shown to be somewhat consistent over a period of time though to be taken seriously, is it there yet?

[Mensa07]

Glyn - thanks for the mention. At fight time it was 115-114 JMM, on Sunday morning replays more users came on and posted their cards and it averaged out at 115-115.



Ali - there's a link below mate to fightscore in the app store. It's 69p, but actually it's free for the next day or two. Let me know if you have any questions mate. I'm busy putting the Android version together as we speak!

http://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/fightsco ... 59228?mt=8