Pacquiao-Marquez 3: Who Really Won?

According to Manny Pacquiao, he clearly won.

According to Marquez, he was robbed, meaning he should have won.

According to the three Judges, err, two of the three judges, Manny Won. The third judge said nobody won, it was a draw!

So who really won?

Officially, in the record books, Manny Pacquiao did.

In Juan Manuel Marquez's book (and mind), he's won over Pacquiao three times already! Of course his fans, and many others including other boxers, scribes, and pundits read the same book.

On the other hand, it was so surprising to see many Manny Pacquiao fans expressing their own judgements that it was Marquez who won!

I think it's testament to the fact that the fight was so close. Analyzing how the judges scored the bout adds to this observation or contention: it was easy to fix the scoring in Manny's favor because Marquez didn't win very clearly! It's like, Marquez could have been declared the winner and Manny (and his camp, and diehard fans) will complain to high heavens he was robbed!

Looking at how professional boxing matches are scored, I can definitely say that Manny Pacquiao won. Just look at the four areas used in scoring fights:

1. Aggression. Manny was the aggressor almost all throughout the fight. By that I mean he was the stalker, he was aggressive (one can argue Marquez was aggressively defending himself :) while landing counter punches). Both Marquez and Pacquiao landed shots. According to stats, Pacquiao landed more. So even if Marquez felt that he landed the cleaner shots, it doesn't matter. Manny was the aggressive fighter who was able to land jabs and power shots too.

2. Defense. Both of them got hit cleanly, so both fighters' defense was not able to give them any advantage. In this category, it's a draw.

3. Ring generalship. Who controlled the tempo? Again, I scored a draw in this category. Both fighters were able to use their styles but were not able to control the fight with it. Marquez was able to neutralize Pacquiao's attack with accurate counter punches but he was not able to land more punches than the opponent. Pacquiao on the other hand was not able to land more telling blows while attacking. So it’s a draw in this category.

4. Clean and Hard Punching. Both fighters had their moments. In Marquez's mind, this is where he won the fight. But was it enough to win the fight? In my mind, no, he didn’t do enough.  I still scored it a draw in this category.

On this line of argument, I agree with the judges' verdict that Manny Pacquiao won. Yes he did win, but not in a very convincing manner. Which means this fight will continue to be discussed and argued for more years to come. Nuff said...

iPhone Fatigue

Steve Jobs is gone. What else can one say? He was a genius. He introduced exciting gadgets. He's rich. Well, I don't really know the guy...

In Hong Kong, almost every other guy carries an iPhone, some with bunny ears, in pink. I asked myself if I was going to be one them (not the pink bunny phone protector ;) too. My answer to myself was no. I just don't like the iPhone...

Permanent Residency, Closer for Helpers in Hong Kong?

The ruling against the immigration guideline that excludes domestic helpers from "applying" to become permanent residents is a welcome one! I might add that aside from being unconstitutional, it reeks of discrimination. Of course Hong Kong denies that, and there are many excuses already given why it is not so.

To make things clear though, what the domestic helpers won is not automatic residency after 7 years of stay in Hong Kong but the right to apply for permanent residency!

What's the difference, you may ask? Quite simple really, just like in countries like the US and Canada or the UK, you need to apply to become legally a permanent resident or citizen. In the US for example, after two years of having an H1 visa, you can apply for a green card and after a few more years you can apply for naturalization to become a US citizen.

In Hong Kong you don't become a citizen, you become a permanent resident. For professional workers (like engineers, architects, musicians, flight attendants, etc.), you can apply for residency after seven years (as the Basic Law or mini constitution of Hong Kong says). This right to "apply" was what the helpers won in the recent ruling.

Is there a chance that the ruling will be reversed? Yes. The Hong Kong administration with no less than the CEO Donald Tsang have expressed their disappointment over what the court of first instance has ruled. That makes it clear that the administration's stand is not to let helpers become permanent residents of the city. They're going to find a way not to let that happen. If they fail, there's another way they can deny domestic helpers permanent residency.

Once the application is handed in, scrutinized, vetted, and studied in detail, the immigration office can actually still not grant residency due to reasons like (1) health - if the applicant will put unnecessary burden to the healthcare system of Hong Kong, (2) financial - that the applicant has no means to support herself/himself, (3) Etc.

When I applied for permanent residency, the immigration office requested bank accounts statements, lease contracts, tax returns, and certificate of employment. From that alone you can see what they're trying to ensure before granting permanent residency. They don't want you to become a burden to their society, a valid concern.

Will the government approve application for permanent residency for helpers? That remains to be seen.

In the meantime, will there be negative side effects of the court ruling? Yes I think there will be some if I may guess:

(1) Helpers will not be allowed to work in Hong Kong for more than 6 years. This is not unique as Taiwan allows helpers to work there for 3 years only.

(2) In the long term, helpers will not be allowed to work in Hong Kong altogether. This may be difficult, but it can happen.

Hong Kong Home Prices Coming Down?

There's an indication that home prices are coming down. Big companies are slashing their prices albeit very slightly...The problem is, even if it does for 50% I may still not be able to afford one! How disappointing. But life is beautiful still!