Packy VS Marquez - It's all in the sums!!

10-1-1 = draw.........so let's get real..

7-4-1 = Paccy win.......quite simple really!!!

Told you he couldn't win on points..

But congratulations to Juan thought you were finished mate and considering for me you've beaten the so called p4p no 1...three times

I'll consider you great even if history doesn't!!

Kudos..

all boxing fans know who got the better of the trilogy and will remember JMM for it

Hope so Compelling but like I pointed out in my Ottke thread....some people go on the record and not how it was achieved..

TRUSS I think your thread about Manny being poor to draw in Mayweather may have been a good prediction.

Kudos to you for throwing that one out there BEFORE the fight.

It was horrible to watch tho. Although in saying that, Marquez left the ring to go to the dressing room with a nice smirk on his face. He knew fine well who was the real winner of the night was. It must be some kick in the nuts though to be treated like this 3 times though.

Not called MYSTIC TRUSSMAN for nothing.....

Think Mayweather would be crazy not to take this guy now...

However like the Al Capone trial may be better to swap the judges right before the fight starts..

not been on much recently so not read your ottke thread but dont know many people who rate otkke. perhaps when were all dead and nobody remembers his fights his record might start looking good but were lucky enough that a quick search on youtube for reid vs otkke will tell everything they need to know about him.

the jmm v pac trilogy will always be remembered by me as:

1- very close cant realy argue with draw or very tight decison either way
2- had jmm by close points victory
3-had jmm by wide points victory

I've said it before this guy has no plan B he's one dimensional..albeit a great DIMENSION...

If what he is doing isn't working he's got a problem...

Brilliant at what he does but If someone has an answer.....he's screwed.

I gave the first to Marquez, it was tighter than 10-1-1 but he won it.

Gave the second to manny, although could've had a draw, it was mannys best performance of the trilogy.

When coxy said manny will get JMM out of there early I was surprised and gave my two pennys that Marquez has those great counters, a fine chin and a warriors heart plus the experience of 2 close fights with pacquiao and that it would be closer than that - although I still thought manny would win this time.

Been saying for ages (to D4 in particular) that manny has been winning physical challenges and not had a stylistic one since Marquez II.

As a big JMM fan I was hoping he'd win, but am not surprised he got treated unfairly on the cards (again). How this man falls short of the credit he deserves in boxing is a travesty.

All I can say is the manny floyd fight better happen next to 'justify' this result, because that's clearly where everyone had one eye in this outcome.

Sweetie I've watched the first fight a few times and I couldn't give him a round after the 2nd....which I felt was a draw..

You're spot on about Marquez - he's an ugly duckling it seems..

Second fight can be argued...but not the other two..

Cheers..

Credit to Trussy he always said Marquez had Manny's number.

Manny looked a bit ring worn in there. He took some big shots from Cotto and Margo and it looks like it might have caught up with him.

Manny looked physically smaller and less muscular last night, especially compared to the Cotto and Hatton fights.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Hope so Compelling but like I pointed out in my Ottke thread....some people go on the record and not how it was achieved..

Ah yes I remember that thread.......those were the days!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I've said it before this guy has no plan B he's one dimensional..albeit a great DIMENSION...

If what he is doing isn't working he's got a problem...

Brilliant at what he does but If someone has an answer.....he's screwed.

id agree with that. Very good summary imo.

Still not sure I agree on the old 10-1-1 theory, Truss! Watched the first Pacquiao-Marquez fight again not long ago and scored it exactly the same as I did the first time; 113-112 to Marquez. Given that's how I saw it, I can't complain too much with a draw. I thought Marquez edged the second fight, too, this time by a score of 114-113. Neither were robberies, but Marquez was still pretty unlucky to end up without a win in either of them.

As I've said many times already, I had it 116-112 to Marquez the other night, and that was being consertive when it came to the Mexican. I personally saw a big, big gap between them in that fight. By my reckoning, Marquez has won twenty-three out of the thirty-six rounds they've boxed, and he has next to nothing to show for it. At the very, very least, he should be 1-1-1 with Pacquiao, and if I had it my way, he'd be 1-0-2 or 2-0-1, which would be a much more accurate reflection of the trilogy (3-0 would perhaps be harsh on Pacquiao).

Think there's a gremlin at work today...

That particular gremlin would be me. I'm busy at work, hence not going to the trouble of PM'ing each of you that insists on dragging this conversation back toward its title.

You are all intelligent enough to know that one little spark can cause a pretty big fire, so how about just letting it go? It is inoffensive, and things only become offensive because people insist on making them the subject for discussion, a lot of the time.

Let's stay on topic.

How many rounds did Ali lose to Norton?

I wouldn't call him one-dimensional - and unable to deal with anyone who could counterjab...

Sugar Boy Sweetie wrote:I gave the first to Marquez, it was tighter than 10-1-1 but he won it.

Gave the second to manny, although could've had a draw, it was mannys best performance of the trilogy.

When coxy said manny will get JMM out of there early I was surprised and gave my two pennys that Marquez has those great counters, a fine chin and a warriors heart plus the experience of 2 close fights with pacquiao and that it would be closer than that - although I still thought manny would win this time.

It was for this reason the victory was bittersweet for me as despite what I put in the UCPL, I put my money on Pac UD and made a tidy profit. Didn't see JMM ever getting the decision against the big star, especially given the record of I and II but having seen the weigh in (never bet before the weigh in) I thought people might be writing JMM off to easily and he could just be the perfect foil for Manny. Glad I was proved right(ish).

Fists of Fury wrote:That particular gremlin would be me. I'm busy at work, hence not going to the trouble of PM'ing each of you that insists on dragging this conversation back toward its title.

You are all intelligent enough to know that one little spark can cause a pretty big fire, so how about just letting it go? It is inoffensive, and things only become offensive because people insist on making them the subject for discussion, a lot of the time.

Let's stay on topic.

Yeah sorry Fists, just didn't want TRUSS to get an ear full.

I don't often agree with Steve Bunce but I think that he gets it absolutely correct in this article

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/general/others/steve-bunce-on-boxing-the-pacman-show-wasnt-a-fix-it-was-a-dreadful-verdict-6262321.html

It could happen. Khan called Marquez out during the fight.

Khan's been quoted as saying he thinks Mayweather would beat Pacquiao based on Pacquiao's recent performances. Mind, he had Marquez winning on Saturday night only to change his mind once he'd 'watched the fight again' (that is, once Roach had probably told him off).