Does JMM have a case for being undefeated?

Can you give me the exact timings of round 12 when Pac lands big punch after big punch. Ive watched round 12 like 5 times and Juan dominates it everytime.

 

There were at least 4-5 Mexicans at Jaws house last night, all of which thought Pacquiao won.

 

which ones in particular?

 

I had 12th round for Pac too, it was a close one. It wasn't nearly the dominant round that Lampley saw

 

I also scored round 12 for pacman. For the first minute, he did basically nothing, but then again Marquez didn't land any meaningful punches in that minute either.

Pacman then won the last 2 minutes of the round.

 

LOL... After every close fight there's someone that comes up with that joke of an argument. I've read the opposite one on another board, a guy saying he watched the fight with 4-5 Filipinos who all thought Pac lost. Bullshit argument IMO. Especially if Jaws is as postal as when he posts here when he watches a fight. They were probably weary of contradicting him in fear of seeing him completely turn crazy and not be able to hold another fight party.::

 

Nonsense, there were Pacquiao fans there and Marquez fan there, Jaws and Ike call a fight like they see it just like anyone else there. We were all in consensus that Pacquiao had won, just by different rounds....
Most were shocked at Jerry Roths scorecard.
Just typing what I saw, Jaws had about 20 people in the house for that fight....no filipinos

 

I watched the fight with 20 suppoters of Eugene Williams and they all thought Jerry Roth's scorecard was right on the money

 

The only time I saw JMM truly robbed was against Chris John. his other losses were all close.

 

For the record JMM still has a case for being a blockhead.

He wants a 3rd fight, well where was he when Pac wanted a rematch to begin with? What go around come around.

Pac is lookin to have a title in 4 different divisions instead of a rubbermatch.

 

Marquez style is just not good in close fights.His resume speaks for itself.

 

Agreed.

 

cosign

 

4-5 mexicans? Are you sure Jaws wasn't at their house?

 

This is what I was thinking. Like most people of any race would be able to accurately score close rounds anyway. Most people suck at judging fights, especially close ones...

 

his style? that's a bullshit reason. If you win more rounds you win the fight. I'ts not like the guy is a runner or a clincher.

The guy has enough skill to outbox oponents but is pretty agressive. That I what I like about his style. His fights are not boring but he don't need to fight stupid to be agressive.

 

Marquez has had some complete stinkers, a few years ago when he seemed intent on winning fights to keep his name in the sweepstakes, instead of going and pushing his name with impressive showings.

For the better part of his career though, he's been the typical mexican boxer/puncher. Me likes. Particularly this late career turnaround, where he's thrown away the pure counterpunch BS.

I fucking HATE counterpunchers.

 

Havent seen the John fight.

I've heard from a LOT of people that he was robbed against norwood, something to do with new scoring or something??

And IMO, he BEAT Pacman twice. And I'm not speaking from my pocket either, he won the fights on my scorecard.

It's hard to criticise Marquez, he's a great boxer and he is aggresive and has power. I would have loved to see him against Morales. Personally I think he was the best of the featherweights of his era.

 

I think Morales and a prime MAB would have beaten JMM but we will never know. I thought he lost the first fight to Pacquiao and the 2nd fight was a toss up. The Norwood fight fucking stunk. I think the controversy was more of them not counting a KD when Marquez dropped Norwood if I remember right. Regardless, that was a horrible fight and horrible to score as well. I wouldn't wish that fight on anyone.

 

Norwood v Marquez ranks up there with Marquez v Gainer, in the shittest featherweight title fights of the past 15 years.

 

Jaws is white

 

Nobody wants to see a Mexican counterpuncher, would rather see a Mexican warrior, that combined with the infamous "pics" of Juan and Raffy and also the fact that they are excuse making sore losers...

...I am not a fan of either

 

And Pacquiao isn't?

 

::

The Gainer fight was hilarious. What a fucking PUSSY Gainer was. I had heard him all hyped up by Roy and that was the first time I saw him. AWFUL.

 

Absolutely.

That's what I wonder myself.

I understand he's been in some "stinkers" - I get it. But most fighters have, at one point or another.

And two of those 'stinkers' - Norwood & Gainer - had the opponent as much to blame - if not MORE SO - than Marquez himself.

And even if you don't tend to like counterpunchers - as a fan of the sweet science, it's hard to NOT appreciate the amount of craft and skill that goes into what he does.

And he doesn't run & tap & dance.....he BOXES to counterpunch.

I've also always found that folks often exaggerate his counterpunching tendencies....you'd swear he's a Johnny Nelson-type, when clearly that is not the case.

The guy hits hard, accurately, punches textbook, has a vast repertoire, punches in combination, moves well without running, integrates offense & defense, WILL engage and trade when needed....

I find it hard to dislike what he does...just as I find it hard to dislike Pacquiao's willingness to fight everyone and his do-or-die attitude and relentlessness in the ring.

Peace.

 

Remember the socks... ::

And again - all of Marquez's losses (or draws) have been CLOSE - in that scenario, you won't find ONE boxer who will say he lost....it's a CLOSE FIGHT!

I had him beating Norwood by 2pts. and Pacquiao by 1pt. on Saturday (though I won't argue with a draw or a 1pt. Pac win). The John fight was an outright terrible decision.

Peace.

 

Marquez changed his style way too late in the game. Had he used this boxer-puncher style when he was being touted as a possible Hamed opponent, he might have actually forced a Hamed, Barrera, or Morales fight.

Marquez has himself (and Bernstein) to blame when it comes to his lackluster career. I mean he's on the way out of boxing and his career purse was last night ($1.5 million or more than 3 times LESS than Pacquiao's). Ridiculous.

 

Nah, I really have a problem with the mindset of counterpunchers. CounterpunchING? Less of a problem, but guys who predicate their entire offense on forcing another man to make mistakes doesn't sit well with me. It's like they do not wish to go out there and win the fight themselves. They are content not to win the fight, but to make the opponent lose. I can't stand the mentality of that.

I respet a fighter far more for going out there and trying to figure out a way to land shots. Making something happen. Not sititng back and waiting for a mistake.

We've all seen what can hapen when two counter punchers get in there. Nothing. Ugh.

I actually have les of a problem with jab and move guys. They're usually getting off first and then getting back the range to control the bout. It's their intiative to be pro-active, rather than re-active.

Just so you know, I have this problem across the board. Chess players, football teams, fucking uno players. All of it. Pisses me off.

 

It makes a lot worse if the counterpuncher is a south paw. Ugh i hate defensive southpaws.

 

In short...no.