Who's better H2H: Juan Manuel Marquez or Ricardo Lopez

This is a statement so mind-blowingly idiotic that I don't even know where to start with it. So I won't bother. "Nuff said" :-(

 

wow that itsy bitsy statement blew your mind off?

why bother responding to it anyways? feeling a little bit of a genius i might say haha...go get a life man mr. genius :yep

 

You are a poor man's Pacfan84. Nuff said

 

yeah laugh at your won jokes if it makes you feel better

i suggest you go out sometime and meet some people, dont get too attached up on your keyboard :hi:

 

I would suggest you watch some of Ricardo Lopez's fights, watch some of JMM's, realize that they are nothing alike, come back on here and apologize to this forum for clogging it up with your idiotic and infantile posts. :hi:

 

They're somewhat similar. Both being Beristain stylists, their stance and punching techniques are comparable, as most of Nacho's fighters are. The differences are in the way they go about their business. Marquez is more of a counter-puncher by trade, but oddly enough, he's the first one to get sucked into a brawl. Lopez is more of a pure boxer/puncher, about as textbook as they get with his approach. His footwork makes him better capable of changing up the pace than Marquez, who isn't as skilled at pressing as he is playing the countering game(though he's probably better at forcing the fight than I originally gave him credit for). I'd give Lopez the edge skill-wise, but Marquez has proven his mettle more thoroughly.

 

Yup...speed, accuracy, technical skills, etc.

Lopez continues to be the most underrated fighter of this past generation. The man was PHENOMINAL, yet rarely gets mentioned.

Id say JMM keeps it competative, but loses clearly on the cards...something like 8-4.

 

You think JMM would lose to a straw-weight?!?!?! atsch

 

underrated by some and overrated by others,some never mention his name at all others have him in the top 50 of all time.

 

Isnt that what we were talking about...a hypothetical h2h?


OBVIOUSLY he is the bigger man, but we are talking a h2h comparison are we not?

 

How can we do this? Imagine a big Ricardo Lopez or a tiny JMM? The very idea is absurd and means nothing. It is impossible. H2H means a fight, you cannot have an H2H comparison between a straw-weight and a lightweight, because it could never happen. The question is who is better h2h at their own weight versus fighters they could actually fight - for instance, who could beat more great fighters than the other at their own weight, who was the superior boxer ability-wise. If you imagine a big Lopez or a tiny JMM, you completely change them as a boxer, so it is completely futile and inconceivable to do so.

 

Misunderstood the question.

Whatever...

 

When I say "*******" I'm speaking to the *******......if you're not one of them, dont take it as meaning to you.

Every ******* thinks that I'm a biased JMM nuthugger, thats why I was speaking to them when I said the "*******s jaws will drop", when I refer to Lopez being the better fighter.

Wherever there's a JMM thread, *******s are soon to follow.....so I know I have the audience to speak to the ******* whenever JMM is mentiioned.

I dont believe that its unproper etiquete or that I'm in the wrong to point out a "btw, or just a little play" when follow it up with a statement that can be construed as correlating with my opinion on the thread topic.
In this case, it correlates perfectly......the opinion being that Lopez would have done exactly what JMM did to Pac, plus because of his better punching power, disposed of him!

 

i think most *******s have now been banned.

 

When you take 18 out of 24 rounds with most of those 18 not even being close, then I say thats a schooling.

.....the fights were competitive because you always got a sense during those rounds that Pacquiao was a shot away from changing the tide of the fight.
....make no mistake however, without Pac connecting with a big shot in a round, JMM easily won the rounds.

Pac always was a straight left away from turning the tide and momentum of the fight.....I think thats why there are people who cant say that it was a schooling.
.....but when you count up the rounds and see how easily JMM won most of the rounds, there is no other conclusion but to come to the realization that a schooling is what occured in each of there fights.