JMM is the best p4p fighter

dsimon writes:

Actually au contraire' you can be thick headed all you want but it is obvious to anyone with a brain that I am quite deliberately AVOIDING any spin at all. Vis a vis I am not saying JM won or lost, my point is that if two guys have close battles like that and it the victories are somewhat discrecianary it is worth noting. If the judges saw the last fight the other way I would still feel this way.

 

dsimon writes:

Your alleged point whatever it may be went way over my head. opcorn:

 

word.

 

When did they fight a third time?

 

Although i wouldn't have Marquez P4P #1 i think he's already achieved HOF credentials. Two razor thin fights with the P4P best fighter, wins over Barrera, Casamayor and others. World champion in 3 weight classes.

 

lost to john almost got beat by shot berrera than beat old casmayor and now he is p4p wtf you must be joking

 

the shermanator is back! are you starting for the vikings this year, sherm?

 

You're just such an angry boy aren't you qwert? Every single post of yours ever has that same angry little face doesn't it? Is that exactly what your face looks like when you write these angry, incoherent, nonsensical posts?

 

the point was that Pac and JMM only fought each other twice, yet you analyzed their three fights in your postopcorn:

 

World champion in one weight class. :warning:

 

Ok, maybe he wasn't quite "the man" @ 126 and 130 but damn near.

He wasn't just a guy that cherry picked belts.

 

No, but in my eyes, he was never a real world champion until Saturday. Pretty crazy when you consider his career, but both fights with Pacquiao are the only true title shots he received at either weight. His rematch with Pac was for the vacant title, IMO.

 

I know where you're coming from and i don't really dispute it. It's hard to even remember who was the "real champion" at all these weight classes looking back even a few years ago.

All i'm getting at is i don't think calling Marquez a three division champ is disingenuous.

It's not like calling Oscar a five division champion by picking up the WBO trinket from Sturm (regardless if the decision was just) or even Roy Jones beating Ruiz for his strap.

 

Is there really a difference between Felix Sturm, John Ruiz and Manuel Medina?

 

I didn't even remember that Marquez won his title from Medina.

Did 126 have a "clear"champ at the time JMM won whatever ABC title from him? I honestly don't remember.

Bernard and Lennox were clearly above Sturm and Ruiz at the time.

Argh i feel like i'm arguing both sides in a way. :bangh:::

I respect the Ring title.

All i'm trying to say is that i haven't considered Marquez a fraudulent champion when he's picked up belt like i do of a lot of the other cherry pickers out there.

For example if Duddy beats Verno Phillips.

 

Marquez was a 3 times champion at 126 winning the IBF and unifying the WBA

after he got robbed against Jhon in INdonesia he won the WBO at 126

He then won the WBC at 130 and how the Ring at 135

To me the Ring means as much as the ABC tittles. The fighter makes the tittle anyways.

I never understood why people only value the Ring Magazine belt.

Alot of the times the best fighter in a division doens't have the Ring. Who the fuck cares? Is just another belt no more no less than the others.

 

Yeah, MAB was the clear champ at 126 after he beat Hamed. He lost that title to Pacquiao. While that was happening, Marquez was winning meaningless paper belts.

I don't disagree with you on Marquez. I wouldn't call him fraudulent at all. I just don't consider him a three division champion. He's still a great fighter.

 

Edited for accuracy.

 

:bears: thats about as accurate as it gets.

 

Edited for accuracy

 

My edit was actually accurate. I like Marquez, but it's amazing how shit I made him look with solid facts. ::

 

I am Mexican, but there are reasons I do not like Mariconquez besides his ducking out of the immediate rematch with Pac until he "got his groove back".

Exhibit A


Exhibit B


With plenty more of that garbage out there, I dont think I want to know what "Pound for Pound" his fans rate him #1 @

 

If it's a shitty resume for you, I wonder what it takes to please you. Marquez is a great fighter IMO, I see him on par with Morales and Barrera. These guys are more popular and have more to show but if Morales and Barrera fought Marquez in their respective primes, I think there's a good chance Marquez would have come on top. He's a hell of a fighter.

I really laughed when I read someone pointing out his legion of fans, he's almost the least appreciated great of his era. Floyd and Roy had more haters, but they had a lot of hardcore fans to counter balance that. Marquez has very few fans and a lot of detractors.

 

It's not, I was just pointing out when you just state the facts - as I did - and you only look at what actually happened, it doesn't look that impressive. I wasn't lying when I said he won his featherweight title from Medina and unified with Gainer. Those are solid facts.

I never hate on guys, but I should. I'm gifted.

 

How is Verno Phillips a fraudulent champ? Granted, Winky was the man at 154 when Ouma won the title Phillips now possesses... but that title became vacant because Winky didn't (wouldn't?) fight Ouma.

Phillips beat Spinks, who beat Karmazin, who beat Ouma, who beat several top ten fighters BEFORE finally getting a title shot. It's not exactly murderer's row, but not like Verno scooped the belt out of a trash can, either.

Hell, it can be argued he has more legitimacy to the "championship" label than any other 154 lb. titlist at the moment, when you factor in lineage.

 

:bears:

 

And on Marquez - it's true that he's only a linear champion in one division (fuck what The Ring says, this is strictly on historical lineage). But also take into consideration that, score one more round in his favor in both Pac fights, and he's a legit three-division champ.

I wouldn't consider Barrera borderline-shot when Marquez fought him. Sure he showed signs of slowing down in the Juarez fights, but looked far worse (to the point of accepting retirement) in the Pac rematch than he did against JMM earlier in the year.

The featherweight years weren't much of note. He was among the best featherweights, but his lone signature performance was the draw against Pacquiao. Steve_dave is correct in pointing out (inadvertantly or otherwise) that beating Medina and Gainer en route to becoming a unified titlist is still little more than resume filler.

 

:bears: on the bold.


I was probably exaggerating on Barrera. He wasn't shot, but he was past it. At that point I was just countering the all the sugar coating LatinKing was doing.

 

what jake said won't matter anyhow when phillips punches holes in duddy.

 

I don't like GAiner but I remember he was considered one of the top featherweights at the time.

so much that when Pacquiao signed to fight MAB, Gainer was in the mix to fight both of those guys.

when Pacquiao fought Marquez the first time it was to determine the real champion at 126

so it's not sugar coating anything. It's simple opnions.

You think Marquez didn't acomplish shit at 126 but that's just your opinions i'ts not facts. Dont' act like everyone agrees with you.

I thought Marquez and Pacquiao were the best two when they fought and I though Marquez won the fight. Either way I still ranked JMM the best at 126:cheer: