Do you consider Juan Manuel Marquez to be an ATG

[Addie]

Thats why you have to do your homework before making such outrageous statements. If you mentioned Jones you have to give consideration to the other guys(not that they were better,but they were still great).

...Homework? Outrageous statements?

Do you think ODLH was great?

I've always been unsure about De La Hoya. He scores well in nearly every area; resume is solid, very skilled fighter, was at the top level for a while, and was a champion in multiple divisions. It just urks me that he lost to the five best fighters he ever faced. Whitaker and Chavez were not at their peak or near it when they fought Oscar. Shane Mosley, Floyd Mayweather, Bernard Hopkins, Tito Trinidad, and Manny Pacquiao all defeated The Golden Boy.

As I say, I have some thinking to do and more footage to watch.

[anarci]

Addie you really have to stop your nonsense with Marquez. I read all your comebacks with PP and you got to put down the haterade. He made some very good points and you continue to twist it all around to try and make your weak points. If i used the same method u do to discredit Marquez. Well i think i can make a case for just about any fighter in history being overrated and not worthy of being labled an atg. Bottom line is this, whenever i see a pfp atg list wherever you see Barrera,Morales then Marquez should be in the same vicinity.

[PowerPuncher]

Originally Posted by Addie

...Homework? Outrageous statements?

I've always been unsure about De La Hoya. He scores well in nearly every area; resume is solid, very skilled fighter, was at the top level for a while, and was a champion in multiple divisions. It just urks me that he lost to the five best fighters he ever faced. Whitaker and Chavez were not at their peak or near it when they fought Oscar. Shane Mosley, Floyd Mayweather, Bernard Hopkins, Tito Trinidad, and Manny Pacquiao all defeated The Golden Boy.

As I say, I have some thinking to do and more footage to watch.

So Whitaker/Chavez dont count because they were 34, but when he was 34/35 those loses count big right. Oh yea and he's not great because he got robbed against Trinidad

[anarci]

Originally Posted by Addie

...Homework? Outrageous statements?

I've always been unsure about De La Hoya. He scores well in nearly every area; resume is solid, very skilled fighter, was at the top level for a while, and was a champion in multiple divisions. It just urks me that he lost to the five best fighters he ever faced. Whitaker and Chavez were not at their peak or near it when they fought Oscar. Shane Mosley, Floyd Mayweather, Bernard Hopkins, Tito Trinidad, and Manny Pacquiao all defeated The Golden Boy.

As I say, I have some thinking to do and more footage to watch.

WHittaker turned back the hands of time for that fight,he wouldnt have done any better a few years earlier. Tito,Mosley II Get fucking serious Thats where me and you are different you just believe anything the judges tell you and roll with it Maybe thats why you dont rate Marquez higher.

As for the ODLH arguments im tired of them just like i am with Finito. You know im a Marco fan but id rate ODLH about 20 spots higher than Barrera.
If you wanna argue about ODLh maybe ill give ULI a Pm he never gets tired of going back and forth about Oscar and even makes better points than i do on this subject.

[Addie]

Originally Posted by PowerPuncher

So Whitaker/Chavez dont count because they were 34, but when he was 34/35 those loses count big right. Oh yea and he's not great because he got robbed against Trinidad

Going into child mode now are we, PP?

I didn't say they didn't count, only that I don't consider Chavez and Whitaker to be among the five best opponents he faced on the night.

I take the Mayweather and Pacquiao losses with a pinch of salt for obvious reasons, but whereas Oscar was undeniably past his best, both Floyd and Pacquiao were also undersized going into fights with The Golden Boy.

As things stand, Oscar did indeed lose to the best five fighters he faced in my judgment, and that's a pretty big factor to consider when ranking him.

[Addie]

Originally Posted by anarci

WHittaker turned back the hands of time for that fight,he wouldnt have done any better a few years earlier. Tito,Mosley II Get fucking serious Thats where me and you are different you just believe anything the judges tell you and roll with it Maybe thats why you dont rate Marquez higher.

As for the ODLH arguments im tired of them just like i am with Finito. You know im a Marco fan but id rate ODLH about 20 spots higher than Barrera.
If you wanna argue about ODLh maybe ill give ULI a Pm he never gets tired of going back and forth about Oscar and even makes better points than i do on this subject.

I have better things to do than argue with a man child.

I was trying to be measured. I haven't decided on Oscar because I really don't think I know enough about his career to properly evaluate him.

[anarci]

Originally Posted by Addie

I was trying to be measured. I haven't decided on Oscar because I really dont think i know enough about his career to properly evalute him.

Most spot on post youve made on this thread

[Addie]

Originally Posted by anarci

Addie you really have to stop your nonsense with Marquez. I read all your comebacks with PP and you got to put down the haterade. He made some very good points and you continue to twist it all around to try and make your weak points. If i used the same method u do to discredit Marquez. Well i think i can make a case for just about any fighter in history being overrated and not worthy of being labled an atg. Bottom line is this, whenever i see a pfp atg list wherever you see Barrera,Morales then Marquez should be in the same vicinity.

I respectfully disagree.

[Addie]

Originally Posted by anarci

Most spot on post youve made on this thread

It comes as no surprise at all that you favor the Mexican in this argument.

[PowerPuncher]

Originally Posted by Addie

1. He drew the first fight and lost the second. Those are the facts.

2. Good job I wasn't writing those wins off as "so what". They are very good wins, not great ones, but unfortunately for Marquez, they probably stand as two of his most impressive victories next to the Juan Diaz fights.

3. I don't put a great deal of stock in the fighters Marquez was facing at 126lbs. Tricky customers? Manuel Medina? Robbie Peden? Derrick Gainer? Certainly fights Marquez would be expected to win and win well. Decent, but nothing particularly noteworthy in my estimation. I believe Marco to have a more impressive Featherweight resume even despite the Pacquiao defeat.

4. Cool. If it isn't speculation, it's irrelevant.

5. Exactly what I said, but it's a shame you had to imply the Barrera and Casa victories were more impressive than they are in reality.

1. Wait didn't you say you watched fights instead of looking at boxrec If were going by what judges say Whitaker didnt beat Chavez. Judges aren't the be and end all

2. And Gainer who's a tricky FW proporsition for most

3. Gainer was a very good win. The Norwood fight which was close was and another great avoided opponent, I wouldn't be suprised if Norwood beat MAB/Morales/Pac, not saying he would either, he was proven, fast, tricky, skilled southpaw who was also avoided. Chris John is an excellent technical boxer. Medina is a 6 time champ, and yes tricky. Peden went on to beat Campbell. Polo outboxed WBO champ Harrison and got jobbed, Salido a future titlist. The other Pinoy and Thai fighter I think were borderline top10. Not all those are great but lots of styles that Marquez is testing himself against and facing different styles even if they aren't elite can show lesser fighters up

4. I'm not sure what that means, but we do speculate in general about fighters

5. I'm not sure how stating the facts about the opponents is implying anything, may I repeat: Marquez was the same age as MAB and Casa and past his prime himself. MAB was lineal SFW champ when JMM beat him, Casa was LW lineal champ when JMM KO'd him. Diaz was a top3 LW when JMM ko'd him. Now he's fighting a young bull in Katsidis, he'll beat him too despite being 37

Impressive wins

[PowerPuncher]

Originally Posted by lora

Casamayor hasn't been a good fighter since he lost to castillo imo.Even then he was on the way down.

If fighters who aren't good can only take 50% of the rounds against Marquez, does that make Pacquaio shit

[anarci]

Originally Posted by Addie

It comes as no surprise at all that you favor the Mexican in this argument.

Power Puncher is Mexican?!?!!!!!!?

[lora]

It makes Marquez not that impressive at that weight.

[Addie]

1. Wait didn't you say you watched fights instead of looking at boxrec If were going by what judges say Whitaker didnt beat Chavez. Judges aren't the be and end all

Bring on the emoticons. Man-child.

The way I deal with close fights is simple. If I believe a fight is so close that it could go either way, even despite my own scoring, I will happily accept the verdict of the judges. Both Pacquiao/Marquez fights were razor close, and could have conceivably been scored either way. You never hear me harp on about how I credit Barrera for winning all three fights with Morales, even though I think he edged the first encounter in 2000.

3. Gainer was a very good win. The Norwood fight which was close was and another great avoided opponent, I wouldn't be suprised if Norwood beat MAB/Morales/Pac, not saying he would either, he was proven, fast, tricky, skilled southpaw who was also avoided. Chris John is an excellent technical boxer. Medina is a 6 time champ, and yes tricky. Peden went on to beat Campbell. Polo outboxed WBO champ Harrison and got jobbed, Salido a future titlist. The other Pinoy and Thai fighter I think were borderline top10. Not all those are great but lots of styles that Marquez is testing himself against and facing different styles even if they aren't elite can show lesser fighters up

Not all of these are great? None of them are great fighters. Top contenders and former world champions. Respectable competition, respectable victories.

5. I'm not sure how stating the facts about the opponents is implying anything, may I repeat: Marquez was the same age as MAB and Casa and past his prime himself. MAB was lineal SFW champ when JMM beat him, Casa was LW lineal champ when JMM KO'd him. Diaz was a top3 LW when JMM ko'd him. Now he's fighting a young bull in Katsidis, he'll beat him too despite being 37

You actually repeated it word for word.

[Tin_Ribs]

Marquez has generally faced opponents throughout his career more stylistically challenging than Morales ever did and perhaps even than Barrera did at times. It's always been stated by his detractors (and his admirers) that good movers and counterpunchers who don't take the lead stand a good chance of beating him. Even if you don't rank Marquez as a true ATG - a fair enough stance - it's negligent to forget the convincing jobs that he did on on the Polo's, Medina's and Salido's, the likes of whom should have been hard matchups on paper and were types who no-one else wanted to fight for one reason or another.
Barrera has his recovery from heavy defeats and the great win over Hamed to perhaps distinguish himself slightly, even though Hamed was made for him in many ways. Otherwise, the records of himself, Morales and Marquez are close to even as far I can tell. Doing as well as Marquez did against Pac (I thought he won both times) is arguably as good as beating Morales two out of three or taking one from a trilogy with Pacquiao himself before losing heavily in the subsequent rematches.

It might also be worth saying I reckon that a prime Barrera might have edged a prime Marquez whereas a prime Morales could well have been outboxed.