Pacquiao vs Marquez - Who won the rivalry? (Video)

He was always a good hurtful puncher because of how good his timing was... He tended to hurt people...the sound of that bodyshot he finished off peden with still makes me wince

 

he knocked the stuffing (peds) out of that roider. Obviously JMM!!!

 

That was the fight where he made Peden puke out blood, if I remember correctly. JMM was indeed a solid puncher with great precision and punch selection. It drives me mad when people say that JMM all of a sudden got KO power in the fourth Pac fight when it has more to do with JMM finally getting his timing down with the right hand.

 

Tells you everything about the Pacquiao fan base that how delusional they are if this is a question.

Marquez got robbed a few times, and in the final fight he knocked the **** out of Pacquiao, and people are still arguing. Hahaha

Floyd-Pac same story. Floyd won 10 rounds out of 12, and “knowledgeable boxing fans” still saying that Pacquiao is better.

 

Well compared to guys like Hagler and Pacquiao he took far less punishment through his career. Obviously he slowed down with age like everybody does. But he was able to maintain himself closer to prime form than either of those two fighters due to his lack of punishment absorbed.

 

This is absolute bull, rodney.
Have you ever studied how JMM knocked Pac down so easily?
Pac was expecting the punch like countless times before (that whole fake to the body that JMM extends to the head), that is why his guard was on his side. And Pac did take those same punches countless times before and banged his gloves and asked for more.
But that time when it hit, damn! Pac's eyes rolled back for a tiny bit there.
Did you ever see JMM knocked someone down that easily? Let alone a certified granite chin in Pac who recently took Thurman's punches at age 40 like it was nothing? When was JMM ever a single punch KD artist?

Forget the KO, that was a perfectly timed punch (although you have to agree it is also suspect), but that KD?
I'd buy the whole "they're both juicers" argument, but saying Pac looked more jacked up is either fanaticism or hatred.

 

Marquez 3-0-1.

 

Pacquiao has a career 55% KO percentage, Marquez' KO % is 63%.

*******s are still on spin control grasping onto anything they can to discredit anything about Marquez.

What Pac nut swingers refuse to aknowleadge is that Marquez always had comparable power before and after Angel Heredia became his conditioning coach.
Example, Marquez was the first fighter ever to stop Joel Casamayor, that came before Angel Heredia arrived on the scene.

This is the thing about Marquez, he's always been a fighter with a significant punch output, a fighter who punched in combination.
Combination punchers don't load up to land a finishing blow unless the opponent is ready to be stopped.
The only reason why Marquez dropping Pacquiao with single blows manifested itself in fight 4 is simply because that how team Marquez gameplaned for that fight.
Team Marquez knew going in that outboxing Pacquiao wouldn't get them a decision, they already had tried that 3 times, so in fight 4 (and there is footage on the HBO 24/7's) where Marquez is practicing loading up to throw a single right hand shot at a fighter coming toward him.

All you have to do is study that 4th fight and compare them to the other 3.
Take notice of Marquez hammering right hands hard into the pit of Pacquiao's stomach.
I mean really, a knockout like the one Marquez propinated on Pacquiao doesn't just come because you timed him coming in.
That knockout came from all those heavy body shots Marquez landed on Pacquiao from the very first round.
I mean really study the film and take note of how Pacquiao after taking several heavy shots to the body, take note of Pacquiao's reaction when Marquez would bluff going downstairs. Pacquiao always dropped his guard not wanting to get hit there again.
Marquez' heavy work to the body of Pacquiao is what set up the shots that put Pacquiao down both times in that fight.

Take note people, in fight 4 Marquez threw less combinations and loaded up to throw more one two's with extra umph behind the punch.

The point being is that with or without Heredia, Marquez was fully capable of loading up and landing with enough power to put a fighter to sleep with a single shot.
Paqcuiao has faced better punchers, but none of those fighters had the capability to work and set up the scenario like Marquez did where Pacquiao was leary of getting hit to his stomach like Marquez did that 4th fight.
To put a great chinned fighter like Pacquiao to sleep the way Marquez did, you have to have him thinking and leary of getting hit to another part of the body. Pacquiao didn't want to get hit to the body again and that set up the shot upstairs that put him to sleep.

Fighters who hurt opponent with single shots lull a fighter and then explode with power with their shot and that's what Marquez did against Pacquiao that 4th fight where he didn't attempt to do in the other three fights.

 

The fact that Pacquao continued as a accomplished fighter long after 2012 is a testament to his greatness more than a testament to how close he was to prime. He lost to Bradley, although it was controversial, and that says all you can say about how far down the road Pacquiao had fallen. Then he got knocked out by an aging Marquez, who couldn't even knock him down in their previous 3 meetings, when JMM was younger and more prime.

You nitpick who's shot, who's not, but always in Pacquiao's disfavor. Morales lost a close fight to Raheem, so he was shot when Pacquiao knocked him out. Pacquiao lost a close fight to Bradley, but he was not shot... Hopkins is older than RJJ and was 41 when he beat RJJ, but that doesn't matter. However it matters than JMM is older than Pacquiao and was 39 when they fought the 4th fight.

People forget Pacquiao went nearly 10 years without a knockout win after 2009.

At the end of the day they fought 3 times in their primes and Pacquiao is 2-0-1 over Marquez. Like someone said in a recent discussion "most people" don't decide the facts that go in the record books. I'll give Marquez the moral victory of knocking out Pacquiao when he was shot, but that's no different than the 2nd Hopkins-RJJ fight or the 3rd Pacquiao-Morales fight. To say it is just shows bias. And to say it's different cause Pacquiao has had accomplishments after being shot just further shows the double-standard. Pacquiao overcomes disadvantages, and people use it against him.

 

The first 3 fights they were in their primes. You're the one who said

So what does it matter if alot of people had JMM beating Pac in 2 and 3.

 

While officially: 1,2,1 in four fights. Marquez arguably won all four fights. At the end of the day IMO, Marquez won the rivalry, Marquez also ended the rivalry decisively.

 

Your argument is going round in circles, and you're making stuff up about what I've said. I've already acknowledged that Pacquiao was no longer in his peak years in 2012. My point was simply that Marquez wasn't, either. Both men were a little aged, a little less sharp than yesteryear, but nobody had a big enough advantage in that regard to make the result of that fourth fight meaningless, which is what you're trying to claim. It matters just as much as their first three fights, I'm sorry to say. You know perfectly well that the comparisons with Marquez-Pacquiao IV and Hopkins-Jones II were disingenuous and clutching at straws.

I never said Morales was shot when Manny beat him. I simply pointed out that he'd lost to a gatekeeper in Raheem before their second fight, looked faded when they fought it and achieved nothing afterwards. He wasn't shot, but he wasn't at his best. Can you really dispute that? I don't think it's unreasonable to look at what a fighter accomplishes after a loss at an advanced (or relatively advanced) age to help assess how much they had left when they took that loss. On the basis of Pacquiao still turning out quality performances against Welterweight titlists nearly 7 years after being knocked out by Marquez I think it's fair to say that Marquez didn't knock out a shell or a washed up Manny that night.

You state that I'm 'always' using an angle to discredit Pacquiao, which is nonsense. I'm willing to bet you've never seen me comment on Pacquiao aside from this thread, but because I've simply stated that he was second-best in the Marquez rivalry, and you don't like it, you're trying to pain me as some kind of Pacquiao hater, as if that's the only possible reason I could hold that opinion. Couldn't be further from the truth. I'm a great fan of Pacquiao and I consider his wins and performances against Barrera (I) and Cotto to be as great and significant as anything any pound for pounder has produced in the last twenty years or so. His wins against Marquez (second fight, which I'm happy to give him) and Hatton were also out of the top drawer.

Just seems that for some people, anything less than unremitting praise for their favourite fighter just isn't enough. Two great fighters, Pacquiao the greater of the pair, but the other guy had his own talents and style to exploit his opponent's shortcomings a little better and outperform the greater guy in their series, even if he couldn't match him over a career. It happens. All four fights were on a level playing field and none of them significantly favoured either over the other. Pacquiao came off second best. That's it.

 

The first fights are more representative and important as it showcases them facing each other at their best. You say yourself that in the 4th fight Pacquiao is off his peak, and Marquez is off his peak. So all it says is that an aging Marquez knocked out an aging Pacquiao. It gives Marquez the moral victory over Pacquiao, but it doesn't say anything about how they fare against each other in their primes. You can't attach the same significance to that 4th fight, it's disingenuous. It's two past prime fighters facing off and therefore not as significant as the same two fighters facing off in their primes. Period.

 

Marquez was just all wrong for Pac. I don't understand people discounting fight 4 because Marquez was on the good stuff either, like Pac's not been on the juice for years.

 

refer to post #38