Pac: "I Underestimated Marquez"

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Boxing Fanatic, Feb 23, 2012.


  1. ryan_c

    ryan_c Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,507
    30
    Oct 6, 2007

    These is true actually. Prior to the JMM fight, there are many reports of Pacquiao and Ariza arguing over training issues.
     
  2. ryan_c

    ryan_c Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,507
    30
    Oct 6, 2007
    Not an excuse, as I told prior to JMM fight, there are many reports of Pacquaio and Ariza arguing because Pacquiao does not like to follow the Ariza way of training.
     
  3. james!

    james! CounterPuncher Full Member

    1,472
    0
    Jan 9, 2012
    Why even say those things if he thought he clearly won? sounds to me that he knows he lost.
     
  4. bballchump11

    bballchump11 2011 Poster of the Year Full Member

    63,174
    23
    Oct 27, 2010
  5. Emeritus

    Emeritus Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,109
    1
    Jan 22, 2010
    :deal
     
  6. Pimp C

    Pimp C Too Much Motion Full Member

    122,852
    34,830
    Jun 23, 2005
  7. ryan_c

    ryan_c Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,507
    30
    Oct 6, 2007
    Yup one of Pac's longest training camp, but Pacquiao did not follow what Ariza wants.
     
  8. SJS19

    SJS19 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,479
    14
    Jun 13, 2011
    That's his arrogance in regards to his athletic ability, not towards the skills of Marquez.
     
  9. Think

    Think The Sport Of Kings Full Member

    2,952
    0
    Apr 26, 2009
    Hmm. I don't believe it. You don't underestimate somebody that has clearly took you to the wire, twice before.
     
  10. Sunchild78

    Sunchild78 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,721
    50
    Sep 25, 2009
    Pac is full of ****. He fought the man twice before and did know better those two times. Now he wants us to believe his performance the third time around was because he underestimated him???? Pac has more game then Pac Man himself...lol. Wait he is Pac-Man. That explains it all.
     
  11. horst

    horst Guest

    For the 5,000,000th time - that is not what "having someones number" means.

    Vernon Forrest proved he had Shane Mosley's number because Forrest beat him easily twice, 2-0, when they were both prime and both at a great weight for them. Forrest hurt Mosley badly, outboxed him, outfought him, and left absolutely no doubt in either fight. This is the definition of "having someones number".

    It is utterly ridiculous to say Marquez has Pacquiao's number when Pacquiao has beat him twice and drew with him once in three fights. It is utterly ridiculous to say that anyone has anyones number, if they've had three highly controversial, extremely hard-fought fights.

    This stupid bull**** has to stop, that is not what the phrase means at all. Did Joe Frazier have Muhammad Ali's number because they had 3 close fights, and would have continued to have close fights forever? Obviously not. Having someones number means you know how to fight them to decisively beat them every time.
     
  12. Lance_Uppercut

    Lance_Uppercut ESKIMO Full Member

    51,943
    2
    Jul 19, 2004
    :patsch I'd say most posters did.
     
  13. SJS19

    SJS19 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,479
    14
    Jun 13, 2011
    You should stick to the MMA forum sir.

    To say that Marquez has Pacquaio's number style wise is not a crazy statement. Pacquaio is a far superior athlete to Marquez, and it's only the Mexican's brain; the way that he fights that keeps them so competitive.

    Style wise, Pacquaio is made for Marquez. Do you think that they'd be this evenly split if they'd been blessed with the same athletic qualities? No, no they would not.

    Stylistically Marquez has Pacquaio's number, if you want to use this metaphor then it is Pacquaio's athletic ability which prevents Marquez from dialing it.
     
  14. Hook!

    Hook! Proud member of team G. Full Member

    9,463
    1
    Jun 25, 2011
    Sir, that post was different gravy altogether, :deal
     
  15. horst

    horst Guest

    You don't know what the phrase means. I can't explain it any clearer than I already have, so I won't repeat myself. Keep thinking that's what the phrase means.

    :patsch