Pacquiao-Marquez or Ali-Norton, which trilogy result annoys you more?

Well, firstly, I'm a Pacquiao & Norton fan, so you could pretty much assume my answer. That said, I actually think Pacquiao`s legacy would have grown much higher had he lost one fight to Marquez. Personally I believe Manny just about won the first one. The second one could have been a draw. While the third one, if we go by the fact that at it's root boxing is about hitting the other guy better than he hits you, imo also goes to Manny. But considering how close the fights have been, it is a little sad that Marquez never won a fight. 2-1 to Manny with Marquez winning the second would be fair. Ali-Norton on the other hand, is a flat out travesty! Norton didnt lose ONE of those fights. I strongly feel Norton won III, maybe Ali could claim a draw in II. But the thing with the third fight is that it was a championship fight, and Norton's legacy as a result was never 'the guy who beat Ali TWICE', but rather the 'guy who got Beat by Foreman & kept the title warm for Holmes` (another fight I feel he won!!)

there was no need to say you are a pacman fan. the fact that you had him winning all 3 fights tells us that loud and clear. no doubt hes already won the 4th in many peoples mind. manny will dart back and forth punching the air and you will say he outworked him.

the manny one really irks me, especially the third, which was a clear victory as ive seen. i think marquez has and always will have mannys number, some fighters just do, if marquez gets his decision this time round (which i think he will) then ill be a happy man.

He just about won the first one...

Could you please tell me which rounds he won after the drawn second!!

It was a shut out...from the third onwards...

But to go back to the question.....None of them annoy me because I have other things in my life more important......and I take Boxing with a pinch of salt these days...

As it's basically killed itself and has lost all it's credibility.....

If your guy is a big promoter and is promoting the fight and you are more marketable...You are already four rounds ahead!!

and you must be a twonk as an opponent not to see it....

Just as bad over here...

i honestly think that marquez will win the next one and get the decision. he's always known how to be manny, and now manny isnt a good it should be a easy nights work for jmm

Pacquiao-Marquez and here's why.

Ken Norton always was a real handful for anyone without devastating punching power. Ali was the best of a number of that type of fighter against whom Norton enjoyed great success. His awkward defence; his overhand right and his knowledge that he was safe from real harm made him an incredibly difficult opponent.

I always regarded Ken, though, as an essentially negative fighter; despite freely acknowledging the fact that he won the third Ali fight, therefore, I can't say that I was ever that miserable about the fact that he got screwed. Kenny wouldn't have held the title for long, in any case. One of Lyle, Foreman, Shavers (or indeed, anyone else with a punch) would have scared the Bejesus out of him and ripped the crown away. In essence, what I'm trying to say is that the result of this trilogy had little overall bearing on boxing history.

I think this is not true of Pacquiao-Marquez, by contrast. The results of those fights have not only been one building block in constructing Pacquiao's case to be recognised as one of the two premier fighters of his era; they have also had a corresponding effect on the career of JMM. Let's suppose that JMM had been awarded both the verdicts in their first two fights. We wouldn't have been hollering for Floyd-Manny to the same extent, that's for sure; it would all have been about Floyd-JMM. That fight, of course, has happened, and I suspect that even the unbelievers would have been forced to recognise Floyd as the pre-eminent fighter of his era. Paradoxically, I reckon that Mayweather-Pacquiao would actually have happened too, under these circumstances; not quite the hype, less need for the prima donnaish behaviour on either side or the endless list of unreasonable demands.

In some senses, I believe that the results of the Pacquiao-JMM trilogy have altered the course of boxing history.

i cant argue with a close win for 1st fight, around a draw wasnt too far off with the second either (i had jmm by 1 first time round if i remember correctly) but there was only one winner in the third and by a fair margin, and im a pac fan. as to the question the ali norton trilogy there wasnt as clear a robbery as pac v jmm 3 so this trilogy is the worse of the two.

I'm not sure anyone else need respond following the above post by Captain.

Summed it up perfectly for me.

Truss - Do you think 'robbery' is as bad over here as in the states? I have to say off the top of my head I can't think of to many really terrible decisions...certainly not in recent times anyhow. Although obviously the bigger fights tend to happen over in the states.

britain is as bad as anywhere for robberies. the judges, referee and doctor are all regularly corrupted by the promoter over here. have you never seen a frank warren card

ha, captain taking the robbery even further i heard it also was to blame for greeces current finacial status and harry being pictured in that hotel.

but i do agree with you, just first time reading it i had the image of you fuming throwing all sorts of abuse about what it caused.

Captain

Lance - Ha....Wow I must have missed a lot of boxing. If you could point me in the direction of these huge travesties and corrupted cards with some examples that would be great....

Like Truss, I am, to a degree, a little disillusioned about the sport that I still love, compelling. If the Pacquiao-Marquez trilogy had happened any time up to the end of my 20s, I would probably still be seething about it.

I can take a slightly more disinterested view now, although I would point out that the Arab spring might have been a late response to at least one of the decisions in Manny's favour!

I never witnessed the Ali/Norton trilogy firsthand as it was before my time, so it never quite has the same feel looking back retrospectively on something.

However with Pacquaio/Marquez I genuinely dont think the first two fights were unjust or indefensible scores so I wouldnt neccessarily agree that history was altered for worse. Had Marquez got the decisions we might have been robbed of Pacquiao as a superstar who was able to go up so many weights and participate in huge fights. I think Marquez was unfairly denied his dues in the last fight but by then I think any Mayweather/Pacquaio clash had been overcooked in any event. JMM deserved to split the trilogy I think but I dont subscribe to the idea he was robbed in all three fights.

captain carrantuohil wrote:Like Truss, I am, to a degree, a little disillusioned abouth the sport that I still love, compelling. If the Pacquiao-Marquez trilogy had happened any time up to the end omy 20s, I would probably still be seething about it.

I can take a slightly more disinterested view now, although I would point out that the Arab spring might have been a late response to at least one of the decisions in Manny's favour!

one of the most disappointings things for me, was that i wasnt even suprised. i expected it! and that was really does tell you what i think about todays boxing. watching it live when they said split desicion i said to my mate they have screwed jmm here. and they wonder why fans are turning away

manos de piedra wrote:I never witnessed the Ali/Norton trilogy firsthand as it was before my time, so it never quite has the same feel looking back retrospectively on something.

Was thinking that myself, Manos, and it's part of the reason why the Pacquiao-Marquez trilogy sticks in the craw a bit more for me.

I tend to think that Norton's place in boxing history is a little overblown at times, you see. He's forever entwined in the 'Champions Forever' era of Heavyweights to the casual boxing fan, but essentially the only thing separating him from someone like Jimmy Young, forgotten in comparison, were the visually impaired judges who scored Young's fight against Ali, you could argue. On the basis of his points win over him, you could argue that Norton belongs marginally ahead of Young, of course, but my point is that, for me, he's closer to the Young, Lyle and Shavers class than he is to the Ali, Foreman and Frazier one. I don't think being 1-2 against Ali on the official record has harmed his standing too much, in short.

On the other hand, I think Marquez's failure to secure a single win over Pacquiao has resulted in the Mexican being unfairly overlooked and underappreciated. And as others have alluded to, we have this whole stink of a possible Mayweather-Pacquiao 'super fight' largely as a result of Pacquiao getting the nod against Marquez when it could easily be argued that he shouldn't have done.

Moreover, I don't think either of the decisions that Norton lost were as disappointing as the one that Marquez supposedly dropped to Pacquiao last November. Marquez more or less did to Pacquiao what he'd done in their first fight, only this time without suffering the knockdowns, which are the only things which cost him that first decision; Pacquiao was kept off balance, couldn't get off freely, took the cleaner punches etc. I actually think he won the fight decisively and would throw out any ridiculous suggestions that, as challenger, he should have done more to 'take' the belt from Manny.

Both unfair scorelines when all's said and done, but the Marquez-Pacquiao one riles me a wee bit more than Norton-Ali.

owen10ozzy wrote:Lance - Ha....Wow I must have missed a lot of boxing. If you could point me in the direction of these huge travesties and corrupted cards with some examples that would be great....

several of eubanks fights are a good place to start. not to mention the old doctor bailing cleverly, khan and others out during warren cards. come on the khan barrera decision is disgraceful. the doctor knew full well who he was representing. also warren has helped maccrinelli a few times, look at his last fight. also poor old mcdermott could tell you about being robbed too. froch dirrell opens a can of worms but was clearly home town scoring. then weve got this years olympics which was disgraceful at times.

The Marquez/Pacquiao trilogy riles me to such an extent that I was pleased when Pacquiao was screwed in the Bradley fight. Marquez has been done out of a lot of money and respect due to the results in the trilogy, I have him winning the first and third fights comfortably while the second was closer but still had it to Marquez.

You've upset d4 saying that, Ghosty!!

shame on you..

I remember watching all the Ali-Norton trilogy fights and the third fight I think was the worst robbery. The commentators were saying about the twelvth round that Ali needs a knockout to pull this one out of the bag, we all know he didn't get one but he did get the decision. I had to go back to work as it was in the afternoon in New Zealand and I was in a bad mood for the rest of my shift.