BoxRec

KBB wrote:

JeanClaude Van Damme wrote:I personally deduct points for stalling.

I'm scoring it a draw.

WOW, LOL. You really have the most sour grapes and is the forum's winner as its' SOREST LOSER.

This fight wasn't even close to being close.

The fact that they let a serial spammer post on this forum just shows how deep Al Haymon's pockets are. He controls boxrec and most likely was behind the nWo taking over wrestling the 90's.

JeanClaude Van Damme wrote:The fact that they let a serial spammer post on this forum just shows how deep Al Haymon's pockets are. He controls boxrec and most likely was behind the nWo taking over wrestling the 90's.

Damn dude, you are really butthurt, I'm worrying that you are contemplating suicide over there. It's apparently obvious that Haymon has nothing to do with Boxrec but maybe all those suicidal tears are blinding you.

Please don't slit your wrist, Manny is not going to pay your medical costs.

KBB wrote:

JeanClaude Van Damme wrote:The fact that they let a serial spammer post on this forum just shows how deep Al Haymon's pockets are. He controls boxrec and most likely was behind the nWo taking over wrestling the 90's.

Damn dude, you are really butthurt, I'm worrying that you are contemplating suicide over there. It's apparently obvious that Haymon has nothing to do with Boxrec but maybe all those suicidal tears are blinding you.

Please don't slit your wrist, Manny is not going to pay your medical costs.

Woosh. Hear that giant sucking sound?

KBB wrote:

JeanClaude Van Damme wrote:The fact that they let a serial spammer post on this forum just shows how deep Al Haymon's pockets are. He controls boxrec and most likely was behind the nWo taking over wrestling the 90's.

Damn dude, you are really butthurt, I'm worrying that you are contemplating suicide over there. It's apparently obvious that Haymon has nothing to do with Boxrec but maybe all those suicidal tears are blinding you.

Please don't slit your wrist, Manny is not going to pay your medical costs.

You shouldn't joke around about suicide.

We get it brut, you're happy Floyd won.

Fight went pretty much as I expected for the past 5 years.

Pacquiao agressive but overall ineffective. Sports fans (but not seasoned boxing fans) were probably impressed by Pac coming forward most of the night and appearing busier with his quick flurries, but where was the substance?

Mayweather´s jab pretty much dominated the bout. I would have liked him to be a little more aggresive. I think he could have put some hurt on Manny if he took it to the Filipno and backed him up, especially during the second half of the fight. But that´s not Floyd´style. He´s a cautious guy.

I had it 116-112. Surprised that all 3 judges actually got it right for a change.

Had it 115-113 for Floyd.

Played out almost exactly like I thought it would. I expected Floyd to win about 7 rounds, but the judges to side against him.... why I picked PAC CLOSE in PTBF. I guess the only thing I didn't see was Pacquiao win a few of his rounds pretty dominantly, which I expected to happen. I thought there'd be 2-3 rounds where he'd completely overwhelm Floyd with activity.

JCS wrote:Had it 115-113 for Floyd.

Played out almost exactly like I thought it would. I expected Floyd to win about 7 rounds, but the judges to side against him.... why I picked PAC CLOSE in PTBF. I guess the only thing I didn't see was Pacquiao win a few of his rounds pretty dominantly, which I expected to happen. I thought there'd be 2-3 rounds where he'd completely overwhelm Floyd with activity.

115-113 Pac for me. I grudge giving Floyd anything outwith 11&12. His offence was as poor as I've ever seen it. He never sat down on a single shot, he's officially hopkins.

I had it 117-111 Floyd

Pacquiao was completely ineffective, I had hoped he was good enough to make Mayweather fight..at least this night, he wasn't.

Floyd did the minimum, I had hoped that he would be pressed in to doing something memorable, he wasn't.

Pretty disappointing.

Before the fight I thought it would be 116-112 for mayweather and last night scored it 118- 111 mayweather I think I gave manny rounds 4, 6 and a share of 8 I think. Mayweather a clear winner and anyone who had it close must be a pacquaio fan or mayweather hater.

When I told my brother I had the fight 114/114 a draw he's response was that he thought I knew something about boxing Pacman was allways behind he said to me He watched the fight with a prominent aussie boxing judge/referee[ who I won't name] he scored the the fight 116/112 for Mayweather AND I REPECT OUR FRIEND WHO DOES KNOW BOXING
and on Fox sport after the fight respected Aussie Boxing expert Paul Uphams score card was also 116/112 this translates to 8 round's to 4 I don't have a problem with 116/112 for Mayweather I can see how you could score this way, My eldest son who has fought himself had it 115/114 Mayweather no problem but 118/110 or 10 round's to 2 Mayweather run for most of the last round so you can't give him that round my point their's allway's one bad egg, So somewhere along the line he Pacquiao won a round beside's that last one

Back to our boxing expert Mr Paul Upham on Fox sports news last night and I'll quote him,
''Round's 4 and 6 were the only round's Pacquiao convincingly won round's 9 and 10 were pretty close[have a guess who upham gave round 9/10 to]
Apart from that it was all Mayweather...........Paul Uphams score 116/112 Mayweather, Remember the pretty close round's [in Uphams word's] 9/10
If Mr Paul Upham somehow found in his heart to give them pretty close round's 9/10 to Pacquiao then his score card would be identical to mine 114/114................so for some-one to make a quote that it was ALL MAYWEATHER IS PRETTY ODD.
I THOUGHT UPHAM WAS A EXPERT D

I had Floyd winning by close decision, 115-113.

I thought the scorecards were too wide, because there were several rounds where Floyd did little except run. The judges shouldn't reward boxers for running. Pacquaio was at least trying to make a fight of it.

Except for Lampley, the commentators were biased in favor of Floyd.

Max Kellerman was rude and disrespectful to Manny in the post-fight interview. Manny is an ATG boxer, and even though he didn't win, it should be kept in mind he's done a LOT for the sport of boxing during the past 15 years. Max is just a talentless buffoon who was lucky to be born with a silver spoon in his mouth (his connections not ability landed him the HBO job).

Freedom2013 wrote:I had Floyd winning by close decision, 115-113.

I thought the scorecards were too wide, because there were several rounds where Floyd did little except run. The judges shouldn't reward boxers for running. Pacquaio was at least trying to make a fight of it.

Judges seem to score defense over the other 3 criteria. Floyd did nothing offensively at all. Holyfield and Mosley both had Pac winning the fight, they understand the fight game better than some old dude ringside. It's fighting theyre watchin not swan lake. His attacks were hit and miss but at least he put some together. Floyd was rap and run for 36 minutes he scored virtually zero in the other 3 criteria.

JeanClaude Van Damme wrote:I personally deduct points for stalling.

I'm scoring it a draw.

You should get a job judging Canelo's fights. He needs people like you. Canelo vs Floyd, Canelo vs Trout, Canelo vs Lara - all had at least one really strange score...some more than one...in favor of Canelo.

I had Mayweather 118-110 however I wouldn't argue with it being closer. Floyd nullified Mannys very little offense. Either way it was a poor fight to watch after the long wait although I expected nothing less in a Floyd fight. Anyone got any idea where either go from here? I see it as Floyd vs Cotto and Manny vs Crawford.

LGilsenan wrote:I had Mayweather 118-110 however I wouldn't argue with it being closer. Floyd nullified Mannys very little offense. Either way it was a poor fight to watch after the long wait although I expected nothing less in a Floyd fight. Anyone got any idea where either go from here? I see it as Floyd vs Cotto and Manny vs Crawford.

Crawford would beat Manny

tiny_acres wrote:

LGilsenan wrote:I had Mayweather 118-110 however I wouldn't argue with it being closer. Floyd nullified Mannys very little offense. Either way it was a poor fight to watch after the long wait although I expected nothing less in a Floyd fight. Anyone got any idea where either go from here? I see it as Floyd vs Cotto and Manny vs Crawford.

Crawford would beat Manny

Completely agree, to me Crawford is the next big thing. Amazing talent and with a win over Manny on his record his stock would rise greatly.

LGilsenan wrote:

tiny_acres wrote:

LGilsenan wrote:I had Mayweather 118-110 however I wouldn't argue with it being closer. Floyd nullified Mannys very little offense. Either way it was a poor fight to watch after the long wait although I expected nothing less in a Floyd fight. Anyone got any idea where either go from here? I see it as Floyd vs Cotto and Manny vs Crawford.

Crawford would beat Manny

Completely agree, to me Crawford is the next big thing. Amazing talent and with a win over Manny on his record his stock would rise greatly.

It would turn Crawford into a ppv star.

I think (and hope) Arum will at least get him in with someone he can beat before taking on Crawford. You know, a bit of a pick me up. I'd hate to see an all time great like Manny take two losses in a row like that(probably to end his career). Crawford is the goods.

Bobbyptsd wrote:I think (and hope) Arum will at least get him in with someone he can beat before taking on Crawford. You know, a bit of a pick me up. I'd hate to see an all time great like Manny take two losses in a row like that(probably to end his career). Crawford is the goods.

It would be sad to see. Maybe Manny could go in a different direction and fight Marquez again and then take on Crawford.

LGilsenan wrote:

Bobbyptsd wrote:I think (and hope) Arum will at least get him in with someone he can beat before taking on Crawford. You know, a bit of a pick me up. I'd hate to see an all time great like Manny take two losses in a row like that(probably to end his career). Crawford is the goods.

It would be sad to see. Maybe Manny could go in a different direction and fight Marquez again and then take on Crawford.

If Marquez is to fight again, that could certainly be a way to go. It's probably still a (all things being relative) big money fight, even in it's fifth iteration.

Bobbyptsd wrote:

LGilsenan wrote:

Bobbyptsd wrote:I think (and hope) Arum will at least get him in with someone he can beat before taking on Crawford. You know, a bit of a pick me up. I'd hate to see an all time great like Manny take two losses in a row like that(probably to end his career). Crawford is the goods.

It would be sad to see. Maybe Manny could go in a different direction and fight Marquez again and then take on Crawford.

If Marquez is to fight again, that could certainly be a way to go. It's probably still a (all things being relative relative) big money fight, even in it's fifth iteration.

How do you see the fifth fight going if it happens? My heart says Manny but my mind tells me Marquez. Marquez will have the confidence of having knocked Manny out cold. And I personally don't believe Manny ever recovered from the ko.

I'd need to see Marquez again. He's really getting up there for a guy his size and tread on the tires,I thought I heard he's been having injury problems, and hasn't fought in a year now.

Hypothetically, if Marquez is like the guy we saw against Alvarado and Manny is the guy we saw last night, I'd figure a close decision either way, not sure. I don't think he lures him into another big shot like last time.

A more cautious fight all around, for the reasons mentioned above. split or majority decision one way or another, with little controversy as it will be tight and they can always fight seven more times anyway.

Ricky_ wrote:

Freedom2013 wrote:I had Floyd winning by close decision, 115-113.

I thought the scorecards were too wide, because there were several rounds where Floyd did little except run. The judges shouldn't reward boxers for running. Pacquaio was at least trying to make a fight of it.

Judges seem to score defense over the other 3 criteria. Floyd did nothing offensively at all. Holyfield and Mosley both had Pac winning the fight, they understand the fight game better than some old dude ringside. It's fighting theyre watchin not swan lake. His attacks were hit and miss but at least he put some together. Floyd was rap and run for 36 minutes he scored virtually zero in the other 3 criteria.

What's the other criteria you're talking about? Punches thrown, punches landed, ring generalship, the fighter controlling the pace, defense? Floyd won that fight in all those categories. You sound like you have terrible case of sour grapes and officially proved your lack of knowledge on boxing and how you clearly don't have the slightest clue what you watched.

Bobbyptsd wrote:I'd need to see Marquez again. He's really getting up there for a guy his size and tread on the tires,I thought I heard he's been having injury problems, and hasn't fought in a year now.

Hypothetically, if Marquez is like the guy we saw against Alvarado and Manny is the guy we saw last night, I'd figure a close decision either way, not sure. I don't think he lures him into another big shot like last time.

A more cautious fight all around, for the reasons mentioned above. split or majority decision one way or another, with little controversy as it will be tight and they can always fight seven more times anyway.

I've always enjoyed a good Marquez vs Manny showdown. I'd go with ,if Marquez is the same, Marquez by close decision.

Badhusker wrote:

JeanClaude Van Damme wrote:I personally deduct points for stalling.

I'm scoring it a draw.

You should get a job judging Canelo's fights. He needs people like you. Canelo vs Floyd, Canelo vs Trout, Canelo vs Lara - all had at least one really strange score...some more than one...in favor of Canelo.

Canelo has the charisma of a beached whale. If he wants me on his side, he better pay me Mayweather money.