JMM is the best p4p fighter

He can't even beat Pacquiao and after watching the fight with Casamayor,he never will beat him.Casamayor was hitting him at will.Marquez would of never takin that many punches 5 years ago.

 

Dude, I don't know where you're coming from, but Pac and Marquez fought about 6 month ago in an extremely close fight that alot of people had Marquez winning. So I don't know where you're going with your "Marquez would of never takin that many punches 5 years ago.".

 

just an MMA guy trolling around the boxing boards... ::

 

Based on what? Who did he fight? Everyone thought Gainer was garbage.

Gainer was in the mix to fight a 122 title holder? OK.

False. MAB was the featherweight champion after beating Hamed. Pacquiao was the defending champion when he fought Marquez.

It's your opinion. I'm not using my opinion, I'm talking factually about the 126 landscape at the time.

He had some decent wins and was a very good fighter. Beyond that? Start naming names, bro.

No complaints on that. I have to question your ability to score a fight, but they were the two best at the time.

 

gainer is/was a boring fucker but not an easy guy to beat at featherweight. no one was dying to fight that stinker but marquez completely shut him down. saying everyone thought he is garbage is completely untrue.

 

Yeah, he was a stinker, but no one thought he was a very good fighter. Marquez/Gainer is also arguably the worst fight I've ever seen.

 

Now you see that right there? That's what we call a contradiction. I find it funny how you sit here and rave about the mystically twisting of boxing records through time and space by the millions of JMM fans (who in the real world don't even exist). Yet in reality it is you who are the one exaggerating, blowing shit out of proportion, and even contradicting yourself to go on another of your many hate filled rants, about your dislike of this or that fighter, and through it all there is always this underlying reason why you dislike the fighter. You can never have the balls to just say you don't like them, it always has to be some underlying reason. Like in the case of JMM you blame it on his over obsessive fans, but like I said where are these fans. Yeah there were a lot of people who thought JMM beat Pacman in what was 2 close fights but other than that nobody here remembers this time where JMM had such a high support base. Look Ike, you my boy and all and I know I'm supposed to dilute everything you say by 50% but if you hate a fighter just say you hate them and leave it at that.

 

Uhh, actually Steve_Dave is right. Everyone was always dissing Gainer and nobody ever respected him, especially on the boards. And why should they, what has he ever done to be respected? Hell he damn near pissed himself when he got in the ring with JMM. There probably hasn't been that much obvious fear of an opponent since Tyson fought Seldon.

Someone mentioned earlier that Latin King was the only guy who would stretch things to defend JMM. They must have been right because he's actually trying to say Gainer was a credible opponent. :notallthere:

 

I clearly stated that I never liked Gainer.

But he was a belt holder that was in the mix to fight MAB and Pacquiao at the time. MAB signed to fight Pacquiao and JMM signed to fight Gainer. The winners imediately faced each other.

So he was in the mix for big fights at 126 that is all I was saying. At the end of the day it ended with Pacquiao and JMM facing each other to determined the best at 126.

Funny though cause that lineal tittle that pacquiao won from MAB and MAB won from Hamed. The same Hamed who ducked JMM for years.

Either way JMM beat Pacquiao but got a draw. I don't give a shit about a Ring Magazine or the ABC belts. JMM proved to be better than Pacquiao and the original argument was how he managed to become the best at 126.

 

I agree JMM schooled the shit out Pacman the first fight and definitely deserved the win, but the 2nd one was too close for me to pick a winner either way.

 

All those words and no point. It isn't a contradiction. The fight could have gone either way and therfore a John victory was legit. I felt John won. I don't hate Marquez at all. He got destroyed by Pacman in the first fight though and anyone who thinks he won that fight knows nothing about scoring a fight. I had the rematch a draw, but again I would have accepted pac or marquez's hands being raised. I am sorry you Marquez Maricones feel wronged.

 

dude you hate every fucking boxer period ::

The funny thing is you watch the fighters you claim are not watchable. Whatever happened to not watching Midgets? remember that nonesense? ::

and I finally remember the scrub you were hypeing as a future hall of famer it was JC Candelo ::

 

I never hyped Candelo. Stop lying.

 

yes you did! but it's been so long you can pretend you never did :bears:

 

All i said is I doubt a overrated shot guy like Shannon Mosely would beat him or any other non-shot 154 pounder. Hardly hyping Candelo. It was more of an anti-Mosley comment. ::::

 

Marquez lost,get over it.

 

I know he lost, it doesn't change the fact that your comment was ridiculous. 5 years ago :: Dimwit.

 

Man your stupid.I was posting here when it was strictly a boxing forum.

 

Your mother

 

dude you started a Candelo bandwagon with gold rims :kick:

 

I don't understand your comment. Candelo is pretty average at 154.

 

I read that JMM could be fighting Carlos hernandez next? I hope that shit is a lie. :atu:

 

some stiff named sanchez derailed any last remains of a candelo bandwagon, and on about 13 minutes notice

 

that would be glorious finally seeing someone ko that club fighter hernandez. I'd pay 50 for that ppv

 

JMM shouldn't be wasting his time with a bum like hernandez at this point. Waste of time, but yeah it would be a hellacious beating. :bears:

 

JMM proved her was better than Pacquiao yet fell down three times. ::

That fight was incredibly easy to score for Pacquiao.

 

It wasn't too difficult to score it for Marquez either.
Hindsight doesn't add to his legacy but Gainer was definitely picked by quite a few pundits at the time of the marquez unification because of his power at featherweight and his awkward southpaw stance and roy jones lite style, Marquez had already shown his vulnerability to the left hand in the norwood fight. It was a good win for Marquez despite Gainer's unwillingness to compete.

 

It's interesting, though...for Pac-Marquez II, the response you hear is "Marquez lost; that's what's in the record books, get over it."

But when it comes to Marquez-Pac I - it was a scoring error, it was really 6-6 in rounds (hell, I've even read 7-5 for Pac); the socks gave him a blister...when it's Morales-Pac I - he was too bulked up, the cut over the eye threw him off, etc., etc.

It's quite entertaining.

If you're willing to entertain rationale and explanations for those fights, you should certainly be willing to civilly discuss the scores and the context of fights like Pac-Marquez II...and why Pac-Diaz means quite little.

And :::atu: at anyone who thinks Marquez "legitimately" lost to John.

That right there is about as hysterical as it gets.

I don't care which fighter you "like" or don't...but at least apply a fair rule in the discussion.

Peace.

 

Agreed.

Funny how bad some folks' memory is, and how relatively few now seem to remember just how marginalized and largely disliked JMM was on the boards - and how anonymous he basically was in boxing, despite his skill...until recently.

It's not a "defense" or nuthuggery...it's simple fact.

Peace.

 

I actually thought Pacman clearly, CLEARLY beat Marquez in the first fight, when you factor in the 3 knockdowns. Fuck, even if he just knocked him down once he'd be a clear winner.

The rematch was a different story though, it was very close, and I wouldn't have complained if Marquez got the decision.