Do you consider Juan Manuel Marquez to be an ATG

People bring that up, but then again didn't another judge award Pacquaio 7 rounds, which is equally as incompetant.

 

Yes, but I don't think Marquez has a good argument for winning that fight. I mention the judging error because it was the error that cost Pac a win he deserved, not simply because it was a moment of incompetence.

 

He fought valiantly and showed great heart. He also had the better of the action from about the third round on, which again, is quite praise worthy. But I think that was a close clear win for Pac to most guys that view it fairly.

 

Well Marquez did have a good case for winning 8 rounds, which means he'd have won, people were rightfully 50-50 on the outcome. At the end of the day it boils down to if you gave Marquez 7 or 8 rounds, anything else is just bad scoring

Anyone giving Pacquaio 7 rounds in that fight is a terrible judge. I'm not sure if its a judges discretion to stop taking points after a certain number of KDs anyway, I've heard it said it is but not sure if its after 2 or 3 KDs

 

115-112 Pacquiao all day :smoke

 

Thankyou Scientist, because you just lost all credibility when it relates to Marquez.

To say that you though Pacquiao won that first fight is one thing, but to say that Marquez did'nt have a case?:huh:nut

......there were scores or boxing beat writers who had Marquez winning that first Pacquiao fight.

A case can be made Marquez won every round past the 2nd.......

I personally scored that fight 9-3 in favor of Marquez.
......Marquez boxed an absolute masterclass past the 2nd round.....
......as John Garfield put it earlier, the man could go to a plan b, c, d.............

......and in both fights, once Marquez had a guage of what was it Pacquiao was doing and was going to do, Pacquiao just could not match witts with him and was getting thoroughly outboxed.


I'll reiterate Scientist......your fighter had no such thing as a plan b, c, d......once it went south for him, making an adjustment never entered his mind.

.....and no, it does'nt mean Pernell was'nt a great fighter.
His physical ability with his defensive manuevers was as fool proof as it gets to avoid getting beaten down, but it sure wa'snt fool proof enough to get him into position to win fights against the elites of the game at the time which was Chavez and DLH......
.......I can even add the Rivera and Vasquez fights there as well......the Rivera fight a robbery, and the Vaszquez fight a close enough fight where Pea did nothing as far as changing a gameplan to ensure victory but fight the way he's always fought (in defensive mode) no risks.

Thats what was probably your fighters mentality, "no risk" even if it means I might not get the decision here.

 

That was beautiful jg!:good

 

To be honest it's you whose credibility is in question when it comes to Marquez. There seems to be no convincing you that Marquez may not have been the greatest thing since sliced bread. Have some objectivity.

Whitaker by the way took the fight to Chavez a lot in that fight and was willing to trade punches in close. He won the fight, plain and simple, and there's no justifying a robbery. If you want to go that route then Marquez "didn't do enough" to take the wins from Pacquiao.

 

You're a joke......a 115 score for Pacquiao is giving him 7 rounds........

Most *******s only gave Pacquiao 5 rounds in that fight because they had to hide their audacity and 5 rounds is what was needed for the scores to tally up on Pacquiao's favor to total a victory.

You're coming here in the "Classic" seciton and telling us Pacquiao won 7 rounds in that fight????:rofl:roflnut:nut

 

I gave Pacquiao one of the later rounds.....I think it was the 9th.......

I scored it 9-3 in favor of Marquez.......which with the knockdowns goes from a 117-111 score to a 114-111


.......go argue with Popkins and ask him how the hell he comes up with a 115-112 score with those knockdowns?

 

I'm not saying he's the greatest thing since sliced bread, but I am saying that in one of the richest era's or featherweight boxing, Marquez was the best of that lot and imo that alone qualifies him consideration as an ATG.

 

A case can indeed be made for Marquez winning every round after the 2nd...






...if you're a complete ****ing tool with no concept whatsoever of how to score a boxing match, that is.


Here is the opening post from a thread I made on Pac-JMM 1:

The quote I refer to at the start was a typically ******ed comment from PowerPuncher who said that Marquez had "beat the stuffing" out of Pacquiao.

That's my 'two cents' on the issue.

 

Nah, he is one of those guys who just fall short. Like James Toney, Shane Mosley and those guys. Great fighters but no atgs.