I been thinking a lot recently about how JMM will be looked at from an historical aspect. Where would you guys place JMM and group him? If the 3 fights with Pacquiao had they gone the other way, I feel as though people would not give JMM his credit. I think that if they had been in JMM's favor the world would just look at is as though Pacquiao was not that good. With that being said I think he really needs and deserves a rematch with Pacquiao, so either Pacquiao can beat JMM more decicively, or JMM can grab this important win. I just don't think history will look back on JMM as having close fights with Pacman, but he is 0-2-1 in those fights, with a potential third loss had one of the Judge's learned elementary mathematics.
He will always be remembered as a great champion and a nearly man that failed at the last hurdle to greatness.
JMM won't win a fourth fight because Arum will make sure of it. People will remember JMM losing to Pacquiao the same way they'll remember Sweet Pea drawing with JCC.
I believe Pacquiao would be the betting favorite in a fourth fight. I just think that even though the fights were close, I did not see JMM winning any of the three fights. I actually see Pacquiao winning the next one by KO. That is an interesting observation though, but many people get so wrapped up in rooting for the underdog that their opinions on the outcome of the fight gets construed.
Bang on the money Joe.:deal He is a late bloomer who probably won't get the plaudits he deserves till he retires and it'll be too late.He hasn't quite had the same level of admiration that Barrera and Morales got,but boxing will be a poorer sport without him. And the only people who really don't rate him at all are the more delusional Pacquaio fans.I like Pacquaio,but the nonsense his rabid fanclub spouts leaves a sour taste. He is a fabulously skilled,intelligent boxer and one of the best counterpunchers of the modern era. I'll miss him when he retires.Thanks for the wonderful memories Juan,even in defeat you are still a winner to anyone who can look at boxing through objective eyes.
He'll be remembered as a great fighter with counterpunching brilliance, excellent technique and technical skill, and as having the heart of a lion. I think when people look back on the Pacquiao trilogy, despite Pacquiao's two "wins" on paper, most will remember Marquez as getting the better of him (which by any reasonable objective scoring criteria, he most certainly did). At the very least, he's on an equal level with Barrera and Morales, even if he doesn't have the resume they do for various reasons.
PAC lost to a bloated 38 year old **** drinker. He didn't even knock him down and he struggled, papa roach even said he needed a k.o to win. Infact all he needed was paid off judges. Good job Julie cesr Chavez isn't about he would really tear that little mongoloid a new *******.
If I were him, I wouldn't fight Pacquiao a 4th time. His legacy is cemented with the close fights he's had with Pacquiao. People feel he won some of those fights and is on even keel with Pacquiao; the result of the third fight actually benefited him.