How hard do you find it to rank Pacquiao...

I have to hit the hay now my new little pinata, but you keep googling and boxrecing to see if you can dredge up one solitary other example of a fighter in his 3rd weight class jumping 2, being outpointed, and the win being viewed as anything other than meaningless.

Alternatively, you could just take your Floyd fanboy specs off and watch the fight, and consider that Marquez is clearly overweight, and a far cry from his 126-130 peak, and realize that a welterweight beating that version of him is meaningless.

Keep trying...

 

Well maybe you do heavy drugs or fell on your head this evening, because you keep changing the subject. The question your posing has no merit to this discussion or the point Im making. Can you see this???

Youve managed to convince yourself that Ive put some sort of legacy enhancing tag on Mayweathers win over JMM. Go back and reread

 

And you sleep on it, Im sure you'll come up with some other meangingless point that has nothing to do with this discussion to detract from the crap youve already written.:hi:

 

I haven't convinced myself of that at all. At no point have I accused you of that, so you are wrong.... again! I am saying Mayweather beating Marquez was pointless and meaningless. By so virulently disagreeing with that, you are of course attributing value and meaning to the win, which is wrong, because it was a size mismatch. Marquez is not equipped to fight at welterweight, he would be terrible there, he looked terrible there, and beating that version of him meant nothing. :good

 

Are you f'ing kidding? Thats exactly what your doing, and there is meaning to the win. Nighty nite

 

You've been owned and embarrassed. In future, try not to be so biased. Of course making a smaller man jump 2 divisions then outpointing him means nothing.

 

I'm definitely logging out now, because it's more clear than ever I'm dealing with a complete ****ing ****** here. If you can find one sentence of mine where I intimated that you thought Mayweather-Marquez was a legacy-defining fight, please, post it here!!! nut:nut

 

Youve convinced yourself of yet another lie. What next unicorns and leprachauns are going to jump out of your screen? Give me some of what your smoking.

 

Your words

Mayweather would have beaten Marquez at 130. If he had done, he would be due credit. He is not due credit for making a man jump a further 2 weight divisions, then outpointing a fat little diminshed version of Juan Manuel Marquez. No fighter is due credit for a size mismatch.

 

lol::nut

ARE YOU INSANE???? Are you even serious????

How the **** does that statement in any way prove that I think you rate Mayweather-Marquez as a legacy-defining fight for Floyd??????

Honestly mate, you are making a clown of yourself here. :-(

 

Hmm, credit would mean that it positively enhanced his legacy now wouldnt it? Love how you now change it to legacy defining. When did I use those words?

 

Legacy-enhancing, big difference.

No, credit does not mean it positively enhanced his legacy. What sort of stupid piddling semantic point is that?? Credit is synonymous with value or meaning in this instance. The win is pointless, meaningless, of no value, thus he gets no credit for it.

By disagreeing with me when I say that, then obviously you think the win was not pointless, that it had meaning and value, that he does deserve credit for it... otherwise you would be in agreement with me, wouldn't you? atsch

 

No its not pointless, and the very reason Floyd chose Marquez as his comeback opponent.
It would mean what Ive been saying all along for the 10,000th time, and that is, it would give us some insight into the way Floyd matched up with a guy who gave his next opponent fits. It would also give us some insight as to how a better version of JMM's style would match up against Pac.
Your over exxageration as to how depleted JMM was moving up seven pounds or "two weight divisions", is unfounded based on what he did at 135, and the fact hes never competed against anyone other than the worlds P4P best at welterweight.

 

The very reason Floyd chose Marquez as his comeback opponent was because Floyd knew Marquez would be a lame duck in a welterweight fight, but that beating him would still fool people like you into thinking it was a good win because Marquez is a name. Mission accomplished Floyd!

No it doesn't. The Marquez who fought Floyd was vastly inferior to the Marquez that Pac fought twice. The feather and superfeather Marquez was a far better fighter than the overweight, sluggish and undersized welterweight Marquez.

No it doesn't. This point doesn't even make sense.

He struggled manfully with the size and physicality of Juan Diaz at 135, his 3rd weight class as a champion. Jumping a further 2 divisions greatly diminished him, rendering a win over him meaningless. We can keep doing this tired dance all week if you want, but I'll still be right at the end of it :good

Making a naturally smaller man jump 2 divisions from a division he is not natural to then beating him on points is not an achievement, it's worthless.

 

I asked:

You either did not read or did not understand the question, and produced this characteristically ill-informed answer:

I then corrected you:

But I have thought of a decent enough example of this myself since you were unable to, Carlos Monzon vs Jose Napoles (even this was more than 30 years ago and Monzon did not win on points but by stoppage and Napoles was not already in his 3rd division as a world champion).

Napoles only jumped 1 division technically, but this was in the 70s so the jump was from welter to middle, which would have been a two-division jump nowadays.

Napoles weighed in at 153lbs, putting on only 6lbs from his last fight at welter, and so gave away weight and reach advantages on the night just like Marquez did. But the fact that Napoles "only put on 6lbs" is not the critical factor here, what is important is that he was not physically equipped for middleweight, he did not have the frame to comfortably make middleweight and perform effectively there. Same as JMM.

I think the key difference would be that Napoles had been at welterweight for a long time before moving up to fight Monzon, and had cleaned out the division, proving himself to be one of the greatest welters in history in the process. By contrast, Marquez had only 2 fights at light, and although he won them he looked a long way shy of being a great lightweight.

But just like Mayweather's wins over Corrales, Oscar and Hatton are far better than his win over Marquez (because it came at a weight that Marquez could not perform effectively at), I think Monzon's win over Napoles, while clearly better than Mayweather's win over Marquez, is similarly not rated as being one of Monzon's best, as Griffith, Valdes and Benvenuti had all proven to be far more capable at middle than Napoles.