Pacquiao for sure. He still fought tougher competition and did better against his stylistic nightmare ( counterpunchers) than marquez would do against his own ( pure boxers). he managed to be competitive with marquez for 42 rounds while marquez lost every single round to mayweather, had a close but clear loss against bradley, and was in controversial decisions against C level fighters like chris john and freddie norwood
Overwhelmingly in favor of Pacquiao, 21-3 as of this writing. In honesty, I also voted for Pac but am at least a little surprised at how lopsided the voting is.
It’s really not that difficult to see Pacquiao has the more formidable résumé. Head-to-head it’s a lot closer. I think Pacquiao edged their first two meetings, but Marquez decisively won the latter two.
I will be watching the third very soon. After the first two I have it split 1-1, Pac winning the first. I scored both 114-113. That said, I could easily see either fight going either way. No robberies yet.
That's about how I had it, I remember. In a way though, despite not thinking it was a huge robbery, scoring it for JMM, and being proven correct that they were still essentially the same boxers, except that one clearly has the gifts to beat seven shades out of bigger men, and might find the same problems with a master his own size who knows him, still probably the most frustrating of the matches, to me. Not as fan friendly, and dramatic, and for Marquez to be so undervalued in the match-up, and just almost take it, with an again controversial decision, was immensely frustrating.