Manny needs to fight Marquez again

First topic message reminder :

In my eyes in the next few years if Manny doesn't fight Mayweather then he has to fight Marquez I say this as how easily Floyd beat Marquez and how much Mannys struggled against him they drew the first fight and Marquez clearly won the second in a close fight but they gave it to Pacquaio.If he doesn't fight Marquez Manny's ATG rank will likely be less than Floyd because of that fight I for one would love to see the 3rd fight but think that Mannys just the more improved fighter and can see him winning by UD.Although if one of them opt to fight Sergio Martinez and LOSE then its a whole different story and we'll still be looking for the world current p4p number 1 a simple plan would be for just Sergio to fight Manny and then the winner to fight Floyd and then we would find out the best fighter in the world at this moment but however sadly my plan is very very unlikely to happen..

There must have been some clamour for a Hatton-Pac fight, considering it sold over twice as many PPV buys compared to Marquez-Pac 2!

Well say that he wasn't at his best then. But nor would Marquez be now, the time has passed for this fight.

wow_junky wrote:Many fighters have been beaten badly before losing again, not everyone can go into a fight unbeaten you know!

Hatton was coming off a win against the number 2 or 3 ranked light welter and was the consensus number 1 at the weight, and had re-entered the rings top 10 p4p. It was a good scalp anyway, but when you consider the manner of victory it makes it all the more impressive.

I'm in full agreement that it was nothing short of a devastating win, and very impressive, but I tire of hearing people talk about how Hatton was the bigger guy, because the difference was very, very minimal. If you're talking about Malignaggi, then there we have a guy who was not intended to cause Hatton too many problems. He's slick, and fast, but has no power at all.

It's not about being unbeaten, it's about the nature of the loss.

Put it this way I wouldn't have given Marquez a hope in hell of beating Hatton back in 2009, that in itself tells the whole story

It was a knockout win rather than a one sided demolition. Not like it was Margarito-Cotto style in the punishment Hatton took. He wasn't prime but a lot of people still picked Hatton so to run it down too much is revisionism.

Scottrf wrote:Well say that he wasn't at his best then. But nor would Marquez be now, the time has passed for this fight.

Exactly. That's what I've been saying. The opportunity WAS there, but for whatever reason it was missed.

Also, comparing Marquez-Pacquiao 2 to the Hatton fight for PPV figures is misrepresentative.

You could spend your whole career giving rematches. He chose to move up and has had a number of tough fights. I don't think Lewis owed Vitali a rematch, the same here.

Scottrf wrote:It was a knockout win rather than a one sided demolition. Not like it was Margarito-Cotto style in the punishment Hatton took. He wasn't prime but a lot of people still picked Hatton so to run it down too much is revisionism.

A lot of people still put money on Audley to beat Haye, or Margarito to beat Pacquiao, and some maybe even put 'MONSTER' bets on Mosley to beat Mayweather, but that doesn't mean those fights were going to be all they were hyped to be.

I think he owed Marquez a rematch but you complain about someone taking on Hatton and Cotto instead

Balti

Couple of points;

Perhaps, I'm just trying to point out that the Hatton fight was equally, if not more viable than a 3rd Marquez one.

Also, to suggest Hatton went life and death with Lazcano is misleading, would you say Mayweather Jr went life and death with Mosely because of 1 hairy moment? A better life and death scenario would be Marquez-Casamayor, with the scorecards being even when Marquez scored the the KO punch...

Scottrf wrote:You could spend your whole career giving rematches. He chose to move up and has had a number of tough fights. I don't think Lewis owed Vitali a rematch, the same here.

Did Lewis go on to fight a bunch of in-house, weight-drained or undeserving opponents, all for huge sums and/or paper belts in more divisions? No. He retired.

imperialghosty wrote:I think he owed Marquez a rematch but you complain about someone taking on Hatton and Cotto instead

Aye, you can't begrudge that career path over a Marquez 3 one. Even taking into account the Clottey and Margo fights, I don't think staying at 135lb would have been better for his career than moving up.

BALTIMORA wrote:

Scottrf wrote:You could spend your whole career giving rematches. He chose to move up and has had a number of tough fights. I don't think Lewis owed Vitali a rematch, the same here.

Did Lewis go on to fight a bunch of in-house, weight-drained or undeserving opponents, all for huge sums and/or paper belts in more divisions? No. He retired.

I see you are a fan of overdone cliches.

BALTIMORA wrote:

Scottrf wrote:You could spend your whole career giving rematches. He chose to move up and has had a number of tough fights. I don't think Lewis owed Vitali a rematch, the same here.

Did Lewis go on to fight a bunch of in-house, weight-drained or undeserving opponents, all for huge sums and/or paper belts in more divisions? No. He retired.

Hatton and Cotto weren't undeserving were they? And by the time the Cotto fight had happened, Marquez had lost to Mayweather Jr and probably his chance at a 3rd fight.

wow_junky wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Scottrf wrote:You could spend your whole career giving rematches. He chose to move up and has had a number of tough fights. I don't think Lewis owed Vitali a rematch, the same here.

Did Lewis go on to fight a bunch of in-house, weight-drained or undeserving opponents, all for huge sums and/or paper belts in more divisions? No. He retired.

Hatton and Cotto weren't undeserving were they? And by the time the Cotto fight had happened, Marquez had lost to Mayweather Jr and probably his chance at a 3rd fight.

Those two were good wins, but the Cotto win will always have that 145lb asterisk. Why had Marquez-Mayweather happened by that time? It's not like JMM had been hiding under a rock. He'd been chasing Pacquiao since the second fight.

So you think Marquez 3 at 140lb would have been a tougher fight than Cotto at 145lb?

Stylistically yes

But stylistically Guzman would have also been a tougher fight...

Besides, Cotto is hardly a bad boxer is he? He is a pretty damn effective boxer puncher, rather than the come-forward brawler some make him out to be!

But Marquez and Pacquiao aren't far apart with regards to size, would assume they'd enter the ring around the same weight so it's hardly comparable to Guzman.

Guzman would've probably come in at 156lbs anyway

^^

Guzman was a lightweight at the time of the Hatton fight, and a welter not long after the Cotto fight

But he was merely overweight at the time, he wasn't a genuine lightweight or welterweight

He was genuine enough to fight for the IBF title against Funeka

Anyway, it's getting a bit off topic - my point was that Cotto was probably the sternest test available, aside from Mayweather Jr, despite the stylistic problems that Marquez poses

Cotto was more of a size disadvantage than anything, he didn't have the style to trouble Pacquiao like Marquez did

Point is if Marquez wasn't the bigger challenge, why hadn't he been soundly beaten twice already, and why has he been avoided?

imperialghosty wrote:Cotto was more of a size disadvantage than anything, he didn't have the style to trouble Pacquiao like Marquez did

In hindsight.

Even without hindsight the biggest perceived problem Pacquiao was going to have with Cotto was his size

Doesn't really matter how the disadvantage came, if people saw Cotto as a favourite/tough fight it's not much of a stick to beat him round the head with.

Scottrf wrote:Doesn't really matter how the disadvantage came, if people saw Cotto as a favourite/tough fight it's not much of a stick to beat him round the head with.

It's a stick to beat those people with though.

BALTIMORA wrote:It's a stick to beat those people with though.

Hope you got rich. It's unlikely though seeing as they only take bets before the fight.

Scottrf wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:It's a stick to beat those people with though.

Hope you got rich. It's unlikely though seeing as they only take bets before the fight.

Thanks for your concern, but I'm not a gambling person. I was of the opinion that if Cotto could negate Pacquiao's speed then he'd be in with a chance. He couldn't, and wasn't.

Great. When picking a fight and analysing whether people are seeking to take challenges, you can only look at how much of a challenge it was percieved as beforehand, not how the fight played out.

Scottrf wrote:Great. When picking a fight and analysing whether people are seeking to take challenges, you can only look at how much of a challenge it was percieved as beforehand, not how the fight played out.

Excellent insight, captain obvious.

BALTIMORA wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Great. When picking a fight and analysing whether people are seeking to take challenges, you can only look at how much of a challenge it was percieved as beforehand, not how the fight played out.

Excellent insight, captain obvious.

Then why aren't you able to apply it? Hatton and Cotto were seen as tough tests, now you refer to them as cherrypicked weight drained shells coming off heavy defeats etc. You're just a poor WUM with a clear agenda.

Scottrf wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Scottrf wrote:Great. When picking a fight and analysing whether people are seeking to take challenges, you can only look at how much of a challenge it was percieved as beforehand, not how the fight played out.

Excellent insight, captain obvious.

Then why aren't you able to apply it? Hatton and Cotto were seen as tough tests, now you refer to them as cherrypicked weight drained shells coming off heavy defeats etc. You're just a poor WUM with a clear agenda.

Alright sweet-cheeks, if you insist. When did I ever say Hatton was weight-drained? I didn't say Cotto was, but that but should be viewed with an asterisk. My point which you seem to have trouble with is that JMM was also a tough test, yet was side-stepped. Why?

It just didn't have the public pressure that you seem to think it had. He moved on with his career and took challenges elsewhere. If he struggled again does Marquez get a 4th?

Balti

I guess you'd forgotten that the Mayweather Jr - Marquez fight was arranged for July very soon after the Hatton - Pac fight, but then postponed. Was Pac supposed to wait from May til Jan/Feb to fight Marquez coming off a loss from Mayweather Jr? OR perhaps fighting the available, equally tough Cotto was a good idea?

Manny's already had two fights with Marquez, he rematched him the second time and beat him, so he's already done it. There is no unwritten rule in boxing which states you have to fight an opponent 3 times, where would it end - why not 4-5? The fights were close, but thats not uncommon in boxing, the knock downs tip it for me. If you knock somebody down 3 times, a draw is hardly a travesty. Marquez if asked at the end of the day, would probably take the draw (he may not say that publically).

Pacquiao is now to large for Marquez, he can now generate even more power and it probably would not do Marquez any good. Clearly, Marquez is in good form has recently defeated two respected fighters. But, Diaz was a bit past it and both he and Katsidis are limited boxers. He still has something left and to be competing as well as he is at 37 is impressive, but I reckon the cracks are being papered over slightly. In a supreme top level fight, I'm not sure if Marquez could hack it anymore. At 37 you don't want to be moving up 2 or even 1.5 weight classes and taking on among the best around. Fine, Pacquiao managed to do it, but it wasn't a title fight and at that time DLH wasn't at the top. How many 4 weight Mexican world champs have there been? Marquez would be competing in technically a 5th - its uncharted territory. If Pacquiao can demolish Hatton, Cotto and Margarito, im not sure if Marquez is big enough anymore.

Manny will want to cerment his reputation at WW and fighting a LW isn't going to do that. A couple of years ago perhaps the fight could have taken place, but Manny's a fully fledged welter now and he's to large. I wouldn't back Marquez against Berto either and a number of LWW's would give him severe problems. Like RJJ and Holyfield, sometimes its good to know when to call it a day. Boxing into 38-39 isn't going to do Marquez any favours long term. Personally, i'd consider bringing in a ban at 37 or after a certain number of years in the business.