Floyd: where was Pacquiao?

I dissagree.

It does matter wether it was convincing or not. That does come into play. I see your POV, but none the less he has not beat Marquez convincingly, in 3 tries.

 

Mayweather is the only fighter to beat Marquez convincingly. An undefeated Freddie Norwood could not beat Marquez convincingly.

When you say cheating are you referencing the contracted weight or the weight made by the commission? Limit is 147.

As for the 2 pounds, we saw that they meant little to nothing. I hate to tell it to you but your boy Manny is yet to beat JMM convincingly. It is what it is bro.

 

Come into play for what though? Guess that's my question. Nothing wring with two guys that have danced three times to pretty much equal bouts. Does Marco Antonio Barrera and Erik Morales suffer because their three fights were all extremely close? I think not, and it's not any kind of knock on either.

 

Wait I thought Floyd had these offer because his fights were huge. So these offer were only given because Floyd can't sell atsch.

 

atschatschatschatsch

 

You can't seriously think Floyd vs. Marquez means that much. Very few take that fight to mean anything.

They agreed to meet at 144. That was the contracted weight. The WW limit meant nothing in that sense. Hence Floyd amending the contract that morning to include the over weight fee.

Not the point at all. JMM and Pac are much closer in size then Floyd is against either. You understand the reason for weight classes right? If so, then you should know better then to post this stuff. Makes it sound like your trolling.

 

I dissagree with you. If Manny had beaten Marquez convincingly, as he was supposed to do in the last fight, he would not be getting knocked by boxing and casual fans. I think the 3rd fight with Marquez hurt his legacy, because he was not able to show any change from the 2nd fight.

Each fight with Marquez shows Pacquiao being a limited one dimensional fighter. He was supposed to KO JMM inside of 6 rounds and he couldn't hurt marquez. The 2 punches that stand out to me in this fight, are the end of the 4th and the end of the 5th where Manny gets knocked back on his feet.

 

If JMM cannot beat a 1 dimensional fighter, what does that say about him and his legacy? Or if after three fights, he can't even get one clean win?

What he was 'supposed to do' is actually irreverent. What this actually does is downplay JMM's greatness and heart.

 

This has nothing to do with it.

I'm not referencing Marquez legacy.

I never said being one dimensional is a bad thing as many top fighters are or were one dimensional. I'm simply putting it out there that Manny has never beaten Marquez convincingly.

 

Your opponent, and how good he is, has everything to do with it. It's not like Pac struggled to defeat some mere contender. Like I posted about MAB and Morales, what about Ali and Frazier? Close fights. Is Ali's legacy hurt because they were close (despite the KO), and he lost one? Nope. Or ali's troubles w/ Ken Norton?

Guess we'll just have to disagree on that. Close fights do not hurt a legacy IMHO.

 

Like I said, I dissagree with you. Pacquiao showed he was the exact same fighter as he was in the 2nd fight. He didn't develop his right hand anymore than before.

You can make the case about any fighter that your trying to make. Having close fights is always part of the boxing game; but Pacquiao was expected to dominate Marquez in the 3rd fight. He did not dominate and he is not what he is made out to be towards the public.

The Marquez 3 fight shows this.

 

People's expectations can be flawed, and based on unrealistic expectations. Legacy is based on results, not "What SHOULDA happened."

Besides, Pac is still fighting. Nothing it etched yet.

Like I said, history will not look back at Pac & JMM's three fights and hold it against Pac because he didn't win convincingly. That is incredibly short sighted.

 

So Marquez won because in your opinion you think Marquez did so and so much more. But to you Pac is in no position to win even though a judge mistakenly made a mistake in the scoring which would give PAC the win . Whether you and I like it or not, that's a win for PAC had the judge not made the mistake. You're opinion of Marquez winning is just an opinion like mine. Marquez escaping with a draw because of an scoring error if a fact. That's a win for PAC.

 

I'm not saying his victory means a lot. It clearly means more post Pac-Marquez 3. Floyd was able to dominate a guy who Pacquiao could not. Hatton was past it when fighting Manny. De La Hoya was a skeleton. Mayweather beat a much better version of Shane more convincingly than Pacquiao did; Pacquiao claimed he had some leg cramp with Shane and then said the same thing about Marquez 3.

I'm not trolling anything. I was responding to another poster. You keep putting words in my mouth.

You can this all you want but my original point in this thread was that Pacquiao has never beaten Marquez convincingly and he hasn't.

 

It is not a win. Officially it is a draw.

I'm not telling myself anything. I'm putting a fact out there and you don't seem to be able to deal with it.

The scene of boxing has a much better forum. They aren't filled with these fan lovers.

We can go back and forth all day but it isn't going to change that Pacquiao has never beaten Marquez convincingly.

Nobody said Marquez won in the first fight. You don't know how to interprete what posters say correctly. Everything you said in your post has nothing to do with my post.