Does JMM have a case for being undefeated?

I hear you....but there are counterpunchers, and then there are counterpunchers. ::

I don't put JMM specifically in the camp of "negative, wait-and-see counterpunchers"...even when he was trying to 'stay in the sweepstakes' as you put it. That's been my point.

ANd there is beauty in hard, accurate, aggressive counterpunchers (that punch in combination) - forcing opponents to make mistakes and exposing flaws/holes. But yeah, some initiative has to be shown. To me, JMM does do that.

Peace.

 

I didn't put him there either. But there was a period of his career where he was consistently in shitty fights, because of his reluctance to commit to an attack and simply win fights on the back foot. It cost him millions of dollars, IMO. Some fans hold grudges and they remember that and it explains why his popularity is still slow to pik up on the boards.

I'm not saying theyre right to do that (it reflects worse on them for it), but it does appear true.

 

Marquez will always be remembered, as the fighter who got clocked on his arse 4 times in losing a two fight series to Manny Pacquioa. :doh: His legacy is sealed Latinking, read about it in the paper tomorrow :crafty: .

 

I had him 2-0 against Pacquiao. Even against this Ali like Pacquiao people were hypeing ::

your still a Zoo fan? is that guy dead already? :dunno:

 

"Juan Manuel Marquez, lost to a little known Indonesian fighter called Chris John"..they will read in the history books Latinking :crafty: , "for 30k".. "Not long afterwards, the mystery behind Juan's true motive for this seemingly senseless travel into obscurity became unravelled, through a shocking breakout of contraversial snapshots showing Juan soliciting an Indonesian minor", "It is presumed Pacquioa, regarded as a hero to the area, chose this low calibre of person, and opponent, to raise global spectator interest, in seeing Juan beaten thoroughly, which he was, once again".

:crafty: Read about it in the paper tomorrow my son.

 

There are some rare exceptions.

Earnie Shavers said in an interview a couple years ago that Ali deserved that win over him in a close fight.

In fact, I disagree to an extent that it was even that close. I had it 9-6 Shavers, and I thought I was being a tad nice to Ali.

 

tam, I seem to be agreeing with you a lot lately.

I also hate the counterpunch mentality.

Although boxing has REALLY, REALLY picked up in the last couple of years, a lot of fighters these days DO have that mentality compared to say the 70's fighters etc.

They fight not to lose, rather than to win. Eg - Floyd Vs Oscar.

A couple of decades ago, it seemed most boxers would actually fight to win, and try and force the fight, rather than just try not to lose.

 

One should always agree with me. It's not only the right thing; it's polite.

 

My only question for that is what happens if Pac wins another close decision?

Do they keep fighting until JMM gets the decision? :dunno:

 

Like I said ,his resume speaks for itself.HIs style is a gift and a curse,when he's dominating its a great fighting style to have but when he's in a close fight not so good.I think it give's judges the impression he's not trying.I'm just throwing stuff out there because I doubt boxing's out to get Marquez

 

The Marquez nuthuggers think so:: Manny owes Marquez nothing.He's the sole reason Marquez is even relevent,he should thank Manny for givnig him the opportunity so many other fighters wouldn't.