"The most widely used scoring system since the mid-twentieth century is the "10-point must system", so named because a judge "must" award ten points to at least one fighter each round (before deductions for fouls). Most rounds are scored 10-9, with 10 points for the fighter who won the round, and 9 points for the fighter the judge believes lost the round. If a round is judged to be even, it is scored 10-10. For each knockdown in a round, the judge deducts an additional point from the fighter knocked down, resulting in a 10-8 score if there is one knockdown or a 10-7 score if there are two knockdowns. If the referee instructs the judges to deduct a point for a foul, this deduction is applied after the preliminary computation. So, if a fighter wins a round, but is penalized for a foul, the score changes from 10-9 to 9-9. If that same fighter scored a knockdown in the round, the score would change from 10-8 in his favor to 9-8."[wiki]
As what the quote implies, it's not based on stats but on the judge's judgment with the exception of deductions from fouls and knockdowns. So to compare boxing to basketball is clearly wrong as their point mechanics is entirely different.
The point in criticizing his performance isn't about trying to put him down because that would contradict to the purpose of criticism itself. The criticisms are directed to the boxer/performance, not the person. Pacquiao and everyone who agrees with his sentiments are taking things personally and to consider it as a case of crab mentality is just downright retarded.
If you or anyone agree and be happy with it merely on having the same nationality as his, then you're being blind and extremely biased.
Majority of judges' decision were consequently aligned with the stats, proving it was valid. It would have been a more controversial decision if Marquez won seeing the greater number of punches Manny landed.
and i agree with majority of the judges, not because of my nationality.
Common sense: Analogy. without being too technical, basketball shots are like punches. more punches landed than the opponent, better. more shots made than the opponent, better. regardless if it was a strong haymaker or a just a straight jab. dunks or freethrows - whatever, you don't have to explain the nitty gritty, may deductions ba? may knock outs ba?
We're talking about this fight not the whole technical sport of boxing versus basketball.
Your point is - manuel marquez was flashier. was a stronger puncher (but not implying a greater volume of punches) until the 9th-ish round when he wore-off. should he be the winner just because the TV angle caters that flashiness, just because he allegedly destroyed pacman's rhythm...
My point is - manny was connecting more shots. not as ridiculously strong as before. our expectations failed us, but hey. boxing doesn't have any rule for rhythm, style or whatever you're complaining of. backread your comments.
Spell: "nasira ni Marquez yung rhythm ni Pacquiao... hindi naman dapat na i-base lang sa stats... Naging effective yung style ni Marquez at nagawan ba ng paraan ni Pacquiao yun?"
Rhythm off or whatever. Filipino or not. more punches for MP. no knockouts. he won. period.
TAMA LAHAT NG MGA NAGSABING TALO SI MANNY!!!
at mali ang mag JUDGE na nasa ringside na kitang kita nila from multiple points of view on how the fight went down, mas naniniwala ako sa lahat ng mga tao na nasa bahay nakikinood sa TV o sa Internet ng laban at nakikita nila ang mga angulong pinipili na ipalabas sa TV kesa sa mga judge na nadun mismo sa laban, na nakaharap sa ringside at may mutiple monitors na pinapanood ang laban from numerous angles
hahahaha winner!
