Pacquaio v Marquez - This is a DIRTY fight (Steroid use and lack of testing)

by School Project Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:55 pm

Food for thought chaps…

I am writing this as a massive Marquez fan, but also a boxing fan and something concerns me greatly…

There’s so much speculation surrounding Marquez and his changed physique, his use of a proven steroid distributor in Hernandez, so many rumours of drug use surrounding Pacquaio of past and Manny’s apparent approval of random drug testing…

(The simple question remains) Why aren’t they doing the tests?

I was disappointed to find out that the NSAC were signed to test both fighters, after all the scoring controversy following the two previous Manny Pacquaio fights (Marquez and Bradley)… why would a fighter or promoter put trust in the NSAC? Only recently NSAC were put on notice for a legal dispute with Nick Diaz (following inconstant findings in a test) and only this year agreed to start testing haemoglobin (they still solely rely on urine tests). Another controversial issue is what they believe to be a high level of testosterone; A number of other commissions believe anything higher than a 3:1 ratio for testosterone to be suspicious and will require further testing. NSAC rate 6:1 as their allowance (anything higher would mean further investigations).

To put things in consideration – Lamont Peterson had a 3.77:1 ratio of testosterone in his system after using a synthetic “medicinal”… NSAC allow for 6:1.

That’s an easy shout for fights to be commissioned in Las Vegas – the glitz and the glamour is the facard… their “drug tests” aren’t as stringent as the likes of USADA (who GBP have a “contract” with), WADA or the newly formed VADA (who Nonito Donaire is currently being tested by).

NSAC imply they give random blood tests to fighters – let’s be fair, we know there’s inconsistencies in the way they work (granted they’re not as bad as Texas)… but how can two guys, with a number of allegations of usage get away with a simple urine test?

I don’t mean to repeat what we seem to discuss an awful lot on here, but I’m starting to doubt if Marquez has got to the shape he’s in by drinking his own pee and throwing rocks around on a mountain. As long as NSAC are governing the drug tests in this fight, I question the cleanliness of the fight.

/Rant over.

by Valero's Conscience Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:03 pm

Pac/Top Rank are a law to themselves, if you can'tbeat them join them!

A bad stance but what can you do. Boxing doesn't have many morals left anymore.

by Bartley Gorman Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:43 pm

Valero's Conscience wrote:Pac/Top Rank are a law to themselves, if you can'tbeat them join them!

A bad stance but what can you do. Boxing doesn't have many morals left anymore.

Exactly. All that matters to the 'powers that be' is that an entertaining fight is put on to increase revenue. If that requires both to be juiced up to the eyeballs, then so be it.

Let them do what they want, i have no interest in this fight and hope it does terrible numbers!

by Valero's Conscience Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:07 pm

I desperatrately want JMM to win simply because he dserves at least 1 win from this rivalry but I seriously have zero interest.

I normally watch all 24/7's as soon as they're on youtube but haven't bothered watching one yet and doubt i will.

I think I'll just wake up to hear the result online rather than watch live, the first time i've done that for either fighter for a while!

by Bartley Gorman Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:15 pm

Valero's Conscience wrote:I desperatrately want JMM to win simply because he dserves at least 1 win from this rivalry but I seriously have zero interest.

I normally watch all 24/7's as soon as they're on youtube but haven't bothered watching one yet and doubt i will.

I think I'll just wake up to hear the result online rather than watch live, the first time i've done that for either fighter for a while!

Will a win now really give him the credit he deserves? I doubt it.

People will say that Pacquiao is waaaay past his best, which he is.

Its like if Tommy Hearns had got the nod over Sugar Ray in the rematch, i dont think he'd have got the credit he deserved as both of them were past prime as well...and they were still both younger than these two!

This fight basically means nothing to anybody except their bank managers!

by School Project Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:27 pm

[quote="Bartley Gorman"]
Will a win now really give him the credit he deserves? I doubt it.

People will say that Pacquiao is waaaay past his best, which he is.

Its like if Tommy Hearns had got the nod over Sugar Ray in the rematch, i dont think he'd have got the credit he deserved as both of them were past prime as well...and they were still both younger than these two!

This fight basically means nothing to anybody except their bank managers![/quote]

Spot on, hence the lack of interest in actually testing if these guys are geared up. I just can't believe after the year the sport has had, so much ignorance is apparent from the powers that be.

I guess a fighters welfare is worth the money, but not the tests.

by manos de piedra Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:23 pm

Its still a fight between two of the top fighters in the world that have produced entertaining contests. Both are past their best, but its not like they are shot.

by Bartley Gorman Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:47 pm

manos de piedra wrote:Its still a fight between two of the top fighters in the world that have produced entertaining contests. Both are past their best, but its not like they are shot.

Are you suggesting that a 39 year old Marquez is one of the best welterweights in the world?

by Valero's Conscience Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:48 pm

Agreed Manos, their certainly not shot in the slightest, just maybe lost a small amount of speed.

I just think the previous fight left a sour taste with a lot of people so has lost interest

by Bartley Gorman Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:54 pm

Valero's Conscience wrote:Agreed Manos, their certainly not shot in the slightest, just maybe lost a small amount of speed.

I just think the previous fight left a sour taste with a lot of people so has lost interest

Pacquiao's last three fights suggest he is massively on the slide.

by mobilemaster8 Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:55 pm

This fight is an absolute joke for Pacquiao and his team.

He turned down a rematch with Bradley because "Pacquiao had convincingly beaten Bradley". Errrr last time i checked, it was close, but he lost.

So why, based on that, is he fighting Marquez YET AGAIN when the fights in the past were EVEN CLOSER?!

Pacquiao could be out fighting Garcia/Mayweather/Cotto/Matthysee/Brook/Khan/Rios/Maidana/Alexander/Bradley to name but a few.

But he instead opts for money in fighting Marquez.

Marquez, in my eyes, deserves this fight purely based on him winning 2 of the past 3 in many peoples eyes (ESPECIALLY the 3rd!!).

I just dont see anything changing here.

Marquez to dominate using counter style and pacquiao to win a close decision yet again.

If Pacquiao loses, i hope he retires, his opponents starting with De La Hoya have been absolute joke fights on his terms and Arums.

by manos de piedra Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:59 pm

Bartley Gorman wrote:
manos de piedra wrote:Its still a fight between two of the top fighters in the world that have produced entertaining contests. Both are past their best, but its not like they are shot.

Are you suggesting that a 39 year old Marquez is one of the best welterweights in the world?

Yes

by Bartley Gorman Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:03 am

manos de piedra wrote:
Bartley Gorman wrote:
manos de piedra wrote:Its still a fight between two of the top fighters in the world that have produced entertaining contests. Both are past their best, but its not like they are shot.

Are you suggesting that a 39 year old Marquez is one of the best welterweights in the world?

Yes

Oh dear.

by **superflyweight** Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:04 am

If Pacquiao loses, i hope he retires, his opponents starting with De La Hoya have been absolute joke fights on his terms and Arums.

Really - all of them? Nice balanced perspective there.

by manos de piedra Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:04 am

mobilemaster8 wrote:This fight is an absolute joke for Pacquiao and his team.

He turned down a rematch with Bradley because "Pacquiao had convincingly beaten Bradley". Errrr last time i checked, it was close, but he lost.

So why, based on that, is he fighting Marquez YET AGAIN when the fights in the past were EVEN CLOSER?!

Pacquiao could be out fighting Garcia/Mayweather/Cotto/Matthysee/Brook/Khan/Rios/Maidana/Alexander/Bradley to name but a few.

But he instead opts for money in fighting Marquez.

Marquez, in my eyes, deserves this fight purely based on him winning 2 of the past 3 in many peoples eyes (ESPECIALLY the 3rd!!).

I just dont see anything changing here.

Marquez to dominate using counter style and pacquiao to win a close decision yet again.

If Pacquiao loses, i hope he retires, his opponents starting with De La Hoya have been absolute joke fights on his terms and Arums.

Marquez is a more credible opponent than all but Mayweather or possiby Bradley.

Saying he could fight Cotto who beat easily, Khan who has lost two in a row and is rebuilding, Brook who hasnt even fought at world level etc is pretty bizzare. You criticise him for his opposition post de la Hoya and then mention he coud fight Bradley and Cotto? He did!

Why does nobody acknowledge Pacquiao is actually taking on one of toughest fights out there for him?

by manos de piedra Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:05 am

Bartley Gorman wrote:
manos de piedra wrote:
Bartley Gorman wrote:
manos de piedra wrote:Its still a fight between two of the top fighters in the world that have produced entertaining contests. Both are past their best, but its not like they are shot.

Are you suggesting that a 39 year old Marquez is one of the best welterweights in the world?

Yes

Oh dear.

Why? I suppose you a massive list of welterweights that are better?

by mobilemaster8 Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:27 am

manos de piedra wrote:
mobilemaster8 wrote:This fight is an absolute joke for Pacquiao and his team.

He turned down a rematch with Bradley because "Pacquiao had convincingly beaten Bradley". Errrr last time i checked, it was close, but he lost.

So why, based on that, is he fighting Marquez YET AGAIN when the fights in the past were EVEN CLOSER?!

Pacquiao could be out fighting Garcia/Mayweather/Cotto/Matthysee/Brook/Khan/Rios/Maidana/Alexander/Bradley to name but a few.

But he instead opts for money in fighting Marquez.

Marquez, in my eyes, deserves this fight purely based on him winning 2 of the past 3 in many peoples eyes (ESPECIALLY the 3rd!!).

I just dont see anything changing here.

Marquez to dominate using counter style and pacquiao to win a close decision yet again.

If Pacquiao loses, i hope he retires, his opponents starting with De La Hoya have been absolute joke fights on his terms and Arums.

Marquez is a more credible opponent than all but Mayweather or possiby Bradley.

Saying he could fight Cotto who beat easily, Khan who has lost two in a row and is rebuilding, Brook who hasnt even fought at world level etc is pretty bizzare. You criticise him for his opposition post de la Hoya and then mention he coud fight Bradley and Cotto? He did!

Why does nobody acknowledge Pacquiao is actually taking on one of toughest fights out there for him?

Firstly he fought Cotto at a catchweight for his title which was a joke, but yet when he fought against Margarito, he was happy to have it at 154lbs.

Then when Cotto states he would fight him at his current weight (ironically 154lbs) Pacquiao insists on a catchweight of 150lbs.

What?

If Mayweather can do it, or Dawson, then why cant Pacquiao?

If you want to win a legitimate world title, then let the champion fight at HIS weight class! Ridiculous.

He also turned down Bradley for a rematch which was bizzare.

So what about Alexander, Maidana, Matthysee, Rios, Ortiz, then? Forget Khan and Brook, can anyone justify a 4th fight when Marquez was clearly robbed in one at least.

by manos de piedra Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:30 am

Marquez is better than all those fighters you listed. Its precisely because he was robbed in the last fight that a rematch is justified. Or would you prefer Pacquiao to just fight guys hes already beaten or the likes of Maidana, Rios or Ortiz who would be massacred?

by mobilemaster8 Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:34 am

manos de piedra wrote:Marquez is better than all those fighters you listed. Its precisely because he was robbed in the last fight that a rematch is justified. Or would you prefer Pacquiao to just fight guys hes already beaten or the likes of Maidana, Rios or Ortiz who would be massacred?

No. Based on the fact HE (Pacquiao) was robbed in his last fight as he says, then why not fight Bradley?

the younger, hungrier and fresher unbeaten fighter?

Makes zero sense.......

Dont get me wrong, i love Marquez and think HE deserves the fight, but for Pacquiao, he should be fighting a rematch with Bradley to bury the hatchett.

Not re-opening a hatchett from 2004 or whatever.

by manos de piedra Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:40 am

I wouldnt object to rematch with Bradley but as far as Im concerned he beat Bradley and lost to Marquez so hes taking on the tougher fight this time against an opponent that has constantly caused him problems. I cant see how its a joke fight or terribly unworthy. The hatchet between Pacquiao and Marquez has never been buried in my view and probably never will be given the stigma surrounding the first 3 fights.

by mobilemaster8 Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:44 am

manos de piedra wrote:I wouldnt object to rematch with Bradley but as far as Im concerned he beat Bradley and lost to Marquez so hes taking on the tougher fight this time against an opponent that has constantly caused him problems. I cant see how its a joke fight or terribly unworthy. The hatchet between Pacquiao and Marquez has never been buried in my view and probably never will be given the stigma surrounding the first 3 fights.

I KNEW id spelt it wrong!!

But seriously, I think 3 fights is enough.

Nobody wanted Scream 4 or Halloween 329, Lord of the Rings 17 etc etc.

3 fights were very contraversial.

I have Marquez winning 1st and 3rd with Pacman winning 2nd.

But as its stands, Marquez has won 0.

Id just rather Pacquiao fight someone younger and fresher to see how he is in terms of "on the slide"

No matter what the state of fighters, Marquez is and has always had his number.

by manos de piedra Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:48 am

Thats fair enough if you would rather see him fight someone else, but Im just saying that I dont think that makes this next fight a joke. Marquez is a proven world class fighter who has always given Pacquiao hell. Its a tough fight for Pacquiao to take on. There are plenty of easier options out there for him.

by BoxingFan88 Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:51 am

No point in the Bradley rematch, he won convincingly in my eyes.

I also think that this time its an even more dangerous fight for Marquez. Pacquiao to me seems like he has been going through the motions in the ring and not really trying to put the hurt on anyone. Even against Cotto he backed off, I honestly think he is going to be more dangerous this time.

by mobilemaster8 Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:53 am

But there a other ones out there probably more difficult aka Mayweather (for example).

Even stepping up for Cotto at HIS weight, a Bradley rematch etc etc.

I see what your saying, i just dont see the huge appeal myself because ill be dissapointed with Marquez battering him and yet still losing.

by BoxingFan88 Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:57 am

mobilemaster8 wrote:But there a other ones out there probably more difficult aka Mayweather (for example).

Even stepping up for Cotto at HIS weight, a Bradley rematch etc etc.

I see what your saying, i just dont see the huge appeal myself because ill be dissapointed with Marquez battering him and yet still losing.

I think Mayweather beats Pacquiao but his purse demands are totally unreasonable, its a 50/50 purse fight, end of. If he won't give that to Pacquiao, then he is the reason the fight isn't happening.

The ship for that fight sailed long ago, but the outcome is still going to be the same.

by mobilemaster8 Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:00 am

I dont see how it was ever a 50/50 fight to be honest.

Where was Pacquiao when Mayweather was world champion back in 1999 etc?

Being knocked out in the Phillipines.

Who is undefeated?

They fought common oppenents in Marquez at the same time frame (well, within a couple of years) and Mayweather made him look pathetic yet Pacquiao struggled.

Who had the higher PPV numbers?

Its all in Money Mayweathers favour.

Id have thought it would have been a 60/40 split or a 65/35.

But your right, the outcome would have been no different no matter when they fought.

by manos de piedra Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:01 am

I dont think weight was a significant factor in Cottos loss to Pacquaio. I dont agree with Cotto having to defed his title, but I think Pacquaio just beat him decisively. He could move up to LMW, but he isnt really a LMW and I just think that fight is water under the bridge.

Id prefer to see him face JMM than Bradley because as I said, I think he neat Bradely and would beat him again. I think he lost to JMM last time out, it was the better fight, and that this one is tough to call again. I also dont think its a given Marquez gets robbed. He might even benefit from the last decision. I think Pacquiaos loss to Bradley was partly prompted by the general outrage that he had robbed Marquez and the perception he got lucky in their trilogy. But who knows?

Mayweather, yes, no argument there. Its been well over cooked and will have alot of its historical value but I wont lie and say its not a fight I would still like to see. Still remains the biggest fight in boxing at the moment despite the increasing negativity.

by Bartley Gorman Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:07 am

manos de piedra wrote:
Bartley Gorman wrote:
manos de piedra wrote:
Bartley Gorman wrote:
manos de piedra wrote:Its still a fight between two of the top fighters in the world that have produced entertaining contests. Both are past their best, but its not like they are shot.

Are you suggesting that a 39 year old Marquez is one of the best welterweights in the world?

Yes

Oh dear.

Why? I suppose you a massive list of welterweights that are better?

Can you please tell me Marquez's record as a welterweight?

by WHU_Champo_League_in_7Yrs Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:26 am

Don't really buy the whole Pacquiao beat Bradley clearly so no need for a rematch because imo Marquez has beat pacquiao twice convincingly, not as convincingly but you get what I mean and it could have been closer had Bradley not injured both feet

Marquez was 38 when he last fought Pacquiao, he isn't going to improve. On the other hand Bradley is 28 and pacquiao was his debut at welterweight so he would have acclimatised o the weight better and if he doesn't injure his ankles it could be very interesting

This fight is for money and the even sadder thing is Arum has already mentioned Pacquiao-Marquez V if its close again

by manos de piedra Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:06 am

Bartley Gorman wrote:
manos de piedra wrote:
Bartley Gorman wrote:
manos de piedra wrote:
Bartley Gorman wrote:
manos de piedra wrote:Its still a fight between two of the top fighters in the world that have produced entertaining contests. Both are past their best, but its not like they are shot.

Are you suggesting that a 39 year old Marquez is one of the best welterweights in the world?

Yes

Oh dear.

Why? I suppose you a massive list of welterweights that are better?

Can you please tell me Marquez's record as a welterweight?

Why? Look it up on boxrec if you dont know it. I think he beat a guy that was one of the top two fighters in the world at the time not long ago. And I think he is better than most of the welterweights operating at the moment. You didnt list all the welterweights you think that are better than him.

by Bartley Gorman Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:17 am

manos de piedra wrote:
Bartley Gorman wrote:
manos de piedra wrote:
Bartley Gorman wrote:
manos de piedra wrote:
Bartley Gorman wrote:
manos de piedra wrote:Its still a fight between two of the top fighters in the world that have produced entertaining contests. Both are past their best, but its not like they are shot.

Are you suggesting that a 39 year old Marquez is one of the best welterweights in the world?

Yes

Oh dear.

Why? I suppose you a massive list of welterweights that are better?

Can you please tell me Marquez's record as a welterweight?

Why? Look it up on boxrec if you dont know it. I think he beat a guy that was one of the top two fighters in the world at the time not long ago. And I think he is better than most of the welterweights operating at the moment. You didnt list all the welterweights you think that are better than him.

OK, i'll tell YOU his record at welterweight....Two fights.....Two defeats! Now, do you still think he's one of the best fighters at the weight?! Thought not.

Listen, Marquez was a fabulous fighter at feather, Super Feather and, to a lesser extent, Lightweight, but if you truly believe he is a top welter you dont know the game.

I'll name you five off the bat that would beat him at welter: Mayweather, Bradley, Cotto (even though he's campaigning at the weight above), Guerrero and Ortiz.

Marquez doesnt hit nearly hard enough at welter to dissuade any of the above guys. Plus, hes 39, yes 39 years old and no longer the great fighter he once was!!

by manos de piedra Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:22 am

I dont think he lost to Pacquiao, in fact I think it was an excellent performance and win from him that would beat most welters. Cotto I no longer consider a welterweight. Mayweather obviously beats him (if hes still counted as a welter). Bradley and Guerrero are certainly no foregone conclusions and outside of that I would make Marquez favourite over the rest. So I would rate him among the top 5/6 welters in the world which fits my own personal description of amongst the top welters in the world. Marquez beat Pacquiao more convincingly than Bradley did for me so I think Marquez credentials as a welter are justified.

by Bartley Gorman Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:26 am

manos de piedra wrote:I dont think he lost to Pacquiao, in fact I think it was an excellent performance and win from him that would beat most welters. Cotto I no longer consider a welterweight. Mayweather obviously beats him (if hes still counted as a welter). Bradley and Guerrero are certainly no foregone conclusions and outside of that I would make Marquez favourite over the rest. So I would rate him among the top 5/6 welters in the world which fits my own personal description of amongst the top welters in the world. Marquez beat Pacquiao more convincingly than Bradley did for me so I think Marquez credentials as a welter are justified.

Each to their own. If you think having an 0/2 record at a weight makes you one of the best, well, i cant argue with that logic!

by **88Chris05** Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:29 am

Bartley Gorman wrote:OK, i'll tell YOU his record at welterweight....Two fights.....Two defeats! Now, do you still think he's one of the best fighters at the weight?! Thought not.

Listen, Marquez was a fabulous fighter at feather, Super Feather and, to a lesser extent, Lightweight, but if you truly believe he is a top welter you dont know the game.

Two fights against the top two pound for pound fighters on the planet at the time, one of which should be a win if we strip away the silly scoring. Ward's never fought professionally as a Light-Heavyweight, so if he ventured up now would you refuse to acknowledge him as one of the best in the weight class as he can't boast a winning record there?

Answer me this. Pacquiao has had half a dozen fights as a Welterweight; De la Hoya, Cotto, Clottey, Mosley, Marquez and Bradley. Of those six, which gave Pacquiao the most problems and took the most rounds off of him, in your eyes? If you're in line with 99% of the general population, you'll say Marquez, surely.

Marquez's performance last time out against Pacquiao was more than good enough to beat the likes of Cotto (who'll never box as a Welterweight again in any case), Guerrero and Ortiz. Manos is bang on the money with this one. Mayweather's a better Welter than Marquez for sure. Bradley perhaps, too (though this is unproven thus far). Outside of that, you're struggling to find men who can really claim to be superior to Marquez at 147 lb, even if his greatest moments have come between 126 and 135 lb.

I'm surprised this fight has been received so negatively, to be honest. I'm also surprised that there seems to be a whispering campaign regarding the fight suggesting that Pacquiao has somehow cherry picked it, which is laughable to say the least.

by Valero's Conscience Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:30 am

Gorman, your defence is a little rose-tinted as the 2 defeats you mention are against Mayweather (everyone loses to him at WW so pointless and no one said JMM is the best WW) and Manny which is only a defeat on paper!

I don't want to argue every point but the 5 you mention:

Cotto: doubt he could effectively come down now at this point in his career considering the money he turned down to fight Manny again at 147ibs so I would probably back JMM at this point in time.

Geurrero - he's only had 2 fights, one against Ardyin (spelling?) who's fought no one and Berto, hardly a CV which would you make you heavily back him.

Bradley - perhaps but again he's a top welter.

Ortiz - I would back JMM for being too smart for Ortiz.

Manos didn't say he was the best WW but one of and I can't see how you can disagree?

by manos de piedra Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:31 am

Yeah and whats Ortiz record at welter? A win over Berto and then losses to Mayweather and the unheralded Lopez. Whats Bradleys record? A "win" over Pacquiao that 85% of the boxing world thought he lost. Yet they seem to make your cut.

I saw enough in Marquez performance against Pacquiao to rate him as one of the top welters. You havent exactly provided an extensive list of welters that rank above him. Two of the guys you mentioned last fought at light middle and the other two dont have any performances I think can top Marquez "losing" effort against Pacquaio.

by Bartley Gorman Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:46 am

88Chris05 wrote:
Bartley Gorman wrote:OK, i'll tell YOU his record at welterweight....Two fights.....Two defeats! Now, do you still think he's one of the best fighters at the weight?! Thought not.

Listen, Marquez was a fabulous fighter at feather, Super Feather and, to a lesser extent, Lightweight, but if you truly believe he is a top welter you dont know the game.

Two fights against the top two pound for pound fighters on the planet at the time, one of which should be a win if we strip away the silly scoring. Ward's never fought professionally as a Light-Heavyweight, so if he ventured up now would you refuse to acknowledge him as one of the best in the weight class as he can't boast a winning record there?

"If he stepped up and lost two fights in a row at that weight, yes i would refuse to class him as one of the best in that weight class."

Answer me this. Pacquiao has had half a dozen fights as a Welterweight; De la Hoya, Cotto, Clottey, Mosley, Marquez and Bradley. Of those six, which gave Pacquiao the most problems and took the most rounds off of him, in your eyes? If you're in line with 99% of the general population, you'll say Marquez, surely.

"First rule of boxing: If A beats B and B beats C, it doesnt mean A beats C. By this i mean that Marquez has a style that puzzles Pacquiao, but it doesnt mean id have picked Marquez to beat any of the mentioned fighters at 147."

Marquez's performance last time out against Pacquiao was more than good enough to beat the likes of Cotto (who'll never box as a Welterweight again in any case), Guerrero and Ortiz. Manos is bang on the money with this one. Mayweather's a better Welter than Marquez for sure. Bradley perhaps, too (though this is unproven thus far). Outside of that, you're struggling to find men who can really claim to be superior to Marquez at 147 lb, even if his greatest moments have come between 126 and 135 lb.

"My list of fighters i believe beat Marquez at 147 and i'd be happy stake money on it if any of those fights ever go ahead.

I actually find it laughable to think that you truly believe Marquez beats Cotto at 147..in fact, i'll LOL on that in the middle of the office and accept the stares. Cotto would walk him down and maul him, much the way Diaz did at lightweight before getting stopped. But Cotto would do it with much greater punching power and stop him."

I'm surprised this fight has been received so negatively, to be honest. I'm also surprised that there seems to be a whispering campaign regarding the fight suggesting that Pacquiao has somehow cherry picked it, which is laughable to say the least.

I've answered within you above message.

by Bartley Gorman Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:48 am

Valero's Conscience wrote:Gorman, your defence is a little rose-tinted as the 2 defeats you mention are against Mayweather (everyone loses to him at WW so pointless and no one said JMM is the best WW) and Manny which is only a defeat on paper!

I don't want to argue every point but the 5 you mention:

Cotto: doubt he could effectively come down now at this point in his career considering the money he turned down to fight Manny again at 147ibs so I would probably back JMM at this point in time.

Geurrero - he's only had 2 fights, one against Ardyin (spelling?) who's fought no one and Berto, hardly a CV which would you make you heavily back him.

Bradley - perhaps but again he's a top welter.

Ortiz - I would back JMM for being too smart for Ortiz.

Manos didn't say he was the best WW but one of and I can't see how you can disagree?

If by one of, he means he's in top ten then, i apologise and accept it. But i assumed he meant in the top 3/4. Maybe i should have asked him what he meant by 'one of the best' as it is a subjective term.

by Bartley Gorman Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:50 am

manos de piedra wrote:Yeah and whats Ortiz record at welter? A win over Berto and then losses to Mayweather and the unheralded Lopez. Whats Bradleys record? A "win" over Pacquiao that 85% of the boxing world thought he lost. Yet they seem to make your cut.

I saw enough in Marquez performance against Pacquiao to rate him as one of the top welters. You havent exactly provided an extensive list of welters that rank above him. Two of the guys you mentioned last fought at light middle and the other two dont have any performances I think can top Marquez "losing" effort against Pacquaio.

You're basing your whole argument on his performance against Manny? He gave Manny a hard time at all the weights they fought at...this is called having someones number. Doesnt mean he can go out there and beat everyone else in the division.

Judah gave Mayweather more problems when they fought than Marquez did, does that make him better than Marquez?

C'mon son!

by Bartley Gorman Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:57 am

Schools out for the day lads.

I'll be back tomorrow, class starts at 8am.

Cheers

by **88Chris05** Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:00 am

No you haven't, Bartley, not really.

Do you think Marquez really "lost" to Pacquiao last time out? Strip away the poor scoring and he's effectively 1-1 as a Welter with the loss coming to the best fighter on the planet. What other Welter could have done any better against those two than Marquez did?

What does the old A, B and C rule have to do with my point? I was simply pointing out that nobody else has troubled the Welterweight version of Pacquiao as much as Marquez has to demonstrate that he's hardly a patsy as a 147 lb fighter. Nothing about that can really be argued as far as I can see. If you think Marquez isn't one of the best Welters around, regardless of him being a 'career' Feather to Lightweight, then presumably you think that a few other middling Welterweights who aren't considered amongst the best in the world (the Jones, Lopez, Alexander and Bailey types) could have done exactly the same? For me, they couldn't.

Laugh all you want, but the Marquez who outboxed Pacquiao last November could well have done the same to Cotto at 147 lb. That's not a guarantee that he would have done, of course, and it doesn't mean he'd do the same now (which is irrelevant anyhow, as Cotto's not a Welter anymore), but Marquez put on a great showing whether you like it or not.

I just don't see how you can regard Marquez as anything less than one of (not the, but one of) the hardest fights out there for Pacquiao at Welterweight. It seems to me that Pacquiao just can't win no matter what he does. Regardless of who he fights, he's always cherry picking, working the advantages in his favour, ducking a tougher challenge or taking the boxing public for a ride.

by manos de piedra Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:05 am

Bartley Gorman wrote:
manos de piedra wrote:Yeah and whats Ortiz record at welter? A win over Berto and then losses to Mayweather and the unheralded Lopez. Whats Bradleys record? A "win" over Pacquiao that 85% of the boxing world thought he lost. Yet they seem to make your cut.

I saw enough in Marquez performance against Pacquiao to rate him as one of the top welters. You havent exactly provided an extensive list of welters that rank above him. Two of the guys you mentioned last fought at light middle and the other two dont have any performances I think can top Marquez "losing" effort against Pacquaio.

You're basing your whole argument on his performance against Manny? He gave Manny a hard time at all the weights they fought at...this is called having someones number. Doesnt mean he can go out there and beat everyone else in the division.

Judah gave Mayweather more problems when they fought than Marquez did, does that make him better than Marquez?

C'mon son!

No, I think Marquez fights with Pacquiao show above all else he is a quality fighter, not just a guy with Pacquaios number. I dont think he neccessarily beats all the other welters but I certainly have him in the mix with them.

You scoffed at my opinion that Marquez should be considered one of the top welters out there but then gone on to basically narrow it down to about 4 or 5 fighters. Cotto is not a welter, Mayweather may/may not be yet. At the moment I rate him at light middle because its where he last fought. Bradley I cant see how his credentials top Marquez. Hes had the one fight at welter which the majority of people thought he lost as opposed to Marquez who most think won. And Ortiz? Cant see how deserves to be rated so far ahead of Marquez on the back of his last loss.

And even irrespective of Marquez welterweight record, hes one of the toughest fights out there for Pacquiao whether one considers him a top welterweight or not.

by bellchees Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:13 am

People seem happy to throw the catchweight at Manny for the Cotto fight and say it's not a real win but when Mayweaher fails to make even close to the weight for the Marquez fight it still counts as a welterweight loss for Marquez, that doesn't make sense. For me Marquez has had one fight at welterweight and it was a convincing win against Manny, not a bad record if you ask me.

by **Seanusarrilius** Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:19 am

I feel the same way as you SchoolProject. America has given up on drug testing IMO. All about money there. INtegrity is second to them.

In all honesty, they'll probably both be juicing for this. Sad but true. PAc because he has lost his edge, Marquez to make up for the fact he isn't a natural at the weight

by Rowley Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:23 am

To be Mr Grumpy mod again, should remind you all at this point of the concept of innocent till proven guilty, as I am sure Mr Arum is a regular reader of these boards.

by Sugar Floyd Louis Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:27 am

Good article OP, agree with you.

by Steffan Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:34 am

This latest picture of Manny Poochio doesnt suggest anything dodgy to be fair

Spoiler:

by Rowley Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:35 am

Did you google Truss to find that Steffan?

by Steffan Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:42 am

Rotherham Joe Gans wrote:Did you google Truss to find that Steffan?

Nah I dont like looking at pictures of Truss. His fantastic physique, superior intellect and the fact he comes from the greatest country in the world just makes me feel so worthless

by Rowley Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:43 am

You come from the greatest country on earth Steffan, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. (I'm not even winding you up, I love Wales.)

by Sponsored content