Pac vs JMM should have been 10-7 in the third, not 10-8

i got this gif from a post in pacland:





if Marquez hadn't held the rope he would have been on the canvas a second time in round 3, which by rule should have been a second knockdown.

it really doesn't matter because pacquiao won the fight anyways, but thought i'd post this for all the people saying JMM was robbed... HE WASN'T! it was a close fight and a great fight and hopefully they do it again. pacman won this one fair and square.

 

Marquez knew the ropes were there and he grabbed them. I doubt he was going down. I think way too much is made of fighters falling into the ropes.

 

Certainly doesn't look like he's holding on for dear life to me.

His glove is on top of the rope not wrapped around it.

 

That's reading a bit much into it. If nothing else, calling that a knockdown would have caused more controversy, me thinks.

 

Marquez won that fight...

 

watching it live it definetly looked like he would have been down without the ropes, and even more certainly if there was 10 more secs on the clock.

 

Watching the fight on PPV it did look like he was on his way down. But I'll agree that ruling that a down would have stirred up even more shit. The more aggressive fighter that landed more damaging blows and had his opponent in danger more was Pacquiao.

I said this in the other thread but if you're going to be content taking pot shots and counter punching the entire fight then don't get knocked on your ass. That knock down that did count made the difference. It seemed like Marquez just wanted to show he was a "better boxer" than actually risk finishing the fight. When Pacquiao's cut was effecting his vision Marquez should have gone in for the kill but he didn't. That being said, it was a great fight.

This fight could have gone either way and anyone saying it was a robbery is retarded.

 

I thought that happened right when the bell rang. But whatever... It could have been ruled a knockdown though.

 

give us round 25 so this debate can finally end.

 

That Mexie is holding on for dear life

lol

 

I watched the fight live and I noted that if not for the ropes, JMM was going down again. Much like one of the fights from Peter-Toney, the hurt fighter grabbed the ropes, wasn't penalized and the action went on without losing a beat. The significance being that those who scored JMM winning the fight usually used the score of 115-113. But if that knockdown was counted, even if you had JMM winning, your card would change that into a 114-114 draw due to the extra point. Now if you had Pacman winning, an extra point would only further make that clear, it being a razor close fight won by an additional point on Pacman's end of things.

 

Marquez loses a point for going down, Pacquiao doesn't gain one. That means 114-113 Marquez, not 114-114.

 

Thanks for the correction. So the widest card I saw giving JMM the win was by 2 rounds, so now he can only win by 1 round now tops.

 

Thats a textbook case of what the knockdown rule is written for. It WAS a knockdown.

 

HAHA ALL YOU MARQUEZ NUTTHUGGERS SUCK HIS NUT REAL GOOD.

your guy got beat up. period. GO DIE HHAHAHAHA

 

He Clearly would have gone as a result of a punch had the ropes not been there.

 

If thats the rules then Yes he was on the way down as he was infact sitting on the ropes aswell as holding on.
I call it smart and using the ring and think it should be allowed but if the rules state that a fighter leaning on the ropes being held up is knocked down then yes he was.

Doesnt really matter as Pacquiao still won and the knockdown would not have affected the fight as it still would have been close!

 

he sure didn't lol

 

But he did win a round!

 

good find man. i was thinking the same thing when i was watching the fight live. he got beat anyways, but there should have been two knockdowns. good nonetheless