606 Scorecards: Pacquaio vs. Marquez.

First topic message reminder :

This is my last Pacquaio vs. Marquez thread of the day, but I thought it'd be nice to evaluate all of the scorecards ON THE NIGHT of (in my opinion) the worst example of judging since Holyfield vs. Lewis.

Here's scorecards of some of the most respected Boxing Journalists:

Spoiler:

As for us, what were your scorecards?

School Project: 117 - 112 Marquez.

oxring wrote:Lads - with my mod hat on - can I just say well done for keeping this debate civil and not letting things become personal

For the record - Ghosty has hit the nail firmly on the head for me. If MAB isn't great, how is Floyd - given that MAB is better than anyone either has fought.

Marquez is the best fighter either has fought...Mayweather won more rounds in 1 fight then Pacquiao has in 3...How can a guy who has been exposed by Marquez 3 times and knocked out twice have a better record than Floyd Mayweather?

John Bloody Wayne wrote:Didn't fight at championship distance. Got a ring size that suited his style. Used gloves that wouldn't allow a guy to get thumbed in close etc.

All this from the challenger, all things that gave Leonard an advantage. You said yourself greats don't get added avantages. How come it's ok for Leonard (by the way, top 5 ATG!?) but not for Pacquiao?

The champ distance was either 12 or 15 depending on the organisation. My issue is weights. Asking a boxer to come in at a weight lower than their limit is deliberately physically weakening them. Its a huge difference from fighting in a bigger ring.

Was Hagler physically weakened?

The genius of PBF wrote:

oxring wrote:Lads - with my mod hat on - can I just say well done for keeping this debate civil and not letting things become personal

For the record - Ghosty has hit the nail firmly on the head for me. If MAB isn't great, how is Floyd - given that MAB is better than anyone either has fought.

Marquez is the best fighter either has fought...Mayweather won more rounds in 1 fight then Pacquiao has in 3...How can a guy who has been exposed by Marquez 3 times and knocked out twice have a better record than Floyd Mayweather?

Because records aren't compared on one fighter.

The Galveston Giant wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

oxring wrote:Lads - with my mod hat on - can I just say well done for keeping this debate civil and not letting things become personal

For the record - Ghosty has hit the nail firmly on the head for me. If MAB isn't great, how is Floyd - given that MAB is better than anyone either has fought.

Marquez is the best fighter either has fought...Mayweather won more rounds in 1 fight then Pacquiao has in 3...How can a guy who has been exposed by Marquez 3 times and knocked out twice have a better record than Floyd Mayweather?

Because records aren't compared on one fighter.

Mosley, Marquez, Hatton, De La Hoya, Hernandez, Ortiz, Judah, Baldomir, Chavez, Castillo etc and no losses...Mayweather's record is so much superior.

The genius of PBF wrote:

oxring wrote:Lads - with my mod hat on - can I just say well done for keeping this debate civil and not letting things become personal

For the record - Ghosty has hit the nail firmly on the head for me. If MAB isn't great, how is Floyd - given that MAB is better than anyone either has fought.

Marquez is the best fighter either has fought...Mayweather won more rounds in 1 fight then Pacquiao has in 3...How can a guy who has been exposed by Marquez 3 times and knocked out twice have a better record than Floyd Mayweather?

Foreman smashed Frazier in 2 rounds, Ali struggled over 3 fights.

But wait, Ali knocked Foreman out.

PBF remember the PM I sent to you last week, please.

There is no way on God's green earth you can truly believe what you have just typed.

Scottrf wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

oxring wrote:Lads - with my mod hat on - can I just say well done for keeping this debate civil and not letting things become personal

For the record - Ghosty has hit the nail firmly on the head for me. If MAB isn't great, how is Floyd - given that MAB is better than anyone either has fought.

Marquez is the best fighter either has fought...Mayweather won more rounds in 1 fight then Pacquiao has in 3...How can a guy who has been exposed by Marquez 3 times and knocked out twice have a better record than Floyd Mayweather?

Foreman smashed Frazier in 2 rounds, Ali struggled over 3 fights.

But wait, Ali knocked Foreman out.

Very good but Mayweather is better than Ali.

Scottrf wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

oxring wrote:Lads - with my mod hat on - can I just say well done for keeping this debate civil and not letting things become personal

For the record - Ghosty has hit the nail firmly on the head for me. If MAB isn't great, how is Floyd - given that MAB is better than anyone either has fought.

Marquez is the best fighter either has fought...Mayweather won more rounds in 1 fight then Pacquiao has in 3...How can a guy who has been exposed by Marquez 3 times and knocked out twice have a better record than Floyd Mayweather?

Foreman smashed Frazier in 2 rounds, Ali struggled over 3 fights.

But wait, Ali knocked Foreman out.

Styles makes etc etc etc. Floyd is superior to JMM. When Manny fought SSM, he didn't have a Plan B. He looked pedestrian and looked very uncomfortable the moment SSM threw a jab.

The genius of PBF wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

oxring wrote:Lads - with my mod hat on - can I just say well done for keeping this debate civil and not letting things become personal

For the record - Ghosty has hit the nail firmly on the head for me. If MAB isn't great, how is Floyd - given that MAB is better than anyone either has fought.

Marquez is the best fighter either has fought...Mayweather won more rounds in 1 fight then Pacquiao has in 3...How can a guy who has been exposed by Marquez 3 times and knocked out twice have a better record than Floyd Mayweather?

Foreman smashed Frazier in 2 rounds, Ali struggled over 3 fights.

But wait, Ali knocked Foreman out.

Very good but Mayweather is better than Ali.

Eh?

azania wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

oxring wrote:Lads - with my mod hat on - can I just say well done for keeping this debate civil and not letting things become personal

For the record - Ghosty has hit the nail firmly on the head for me. If MAB isn't great, how is Floyd - given that MAB is better than anyone either has fought.

Marquez is the best fighter either has fought...Mayweather won more rounds in 1 fight then Pacquiao has in 3...How can a guy who has been exposed by Marquez 3 times and knocked out twice have a better record than Floyd Mayweather?

Foreman smashed Frazier in 2 rounds, Ali struggled over 3 fights.

But wait, Ali knocked Foreman out.

Styles makes etc etc etc. Floyd is superior to JMM. When Manny fought SSM, he didn't have a Plan B. He looked pedestrian and looked very uncomfortable the moment SSM threw a jab.

So uncomfortable that he won every single round...whereas Floyd nearly got decapitated by him. There are two sides to every argument, my friend.

Fists of Fury wrote:PBF remember the PM I sent to you last week, please.

There is no way on God's green earth you can truly believe what you have just typed.

I got ridiculed and laughed at for saying Marquez beat Cotto at welter...after last weeks fight it does not seem that bad now even Marquez said he could beat Cotto and Margarito.

Styles make fights, PBF, you need to remember that. I think JMM would lose to both at welter.

Fists of Fury wrote:

azania wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

oxring wrote:Lads - with my mod hat on - can I just say well done for keeping this debate civil and not letting things become personal

For the record - Ghosty has hit the nail firmly on the head for me. If MAB isn't great, how is Floyd - given that MAB is better than anyone either has fought.

Marquez is the best fighter either has fought...Mayweather won more rounds in 1 fight then Pacquiao has in 3...How can a guy who has been exposed by Marquez 3 times and knocked out twice have a better record than Floyd Mayweather?

Foreman smashed Frazier in 2 rounds, Ali struggled over 3 fights.

But wait, Ali knocked Foreman out.

Styles makes etc etc etc. Floyd is superior to JMM. When Manny fought SSM, he didn't have a Plan B. He looked pedestrian and looked very uncomfortable the moment SSM threw a jab.

So uncomfortable that he won every single round...whereas Floyd nearly got decapitated by him. There are two sides to every argument, my friend.

Still was uncomfortable. And I wrote that here after the fight. I also stated that he seemed to lack a plan B and to all intense and purpose, the JMM fight showed that. Look at his punch output in his fights with Cotto, Clottey, Marg where he threw near on 1000 punches. In the SSM he threw 700+. Against JMM he threw just over 500+. Still a tremendous output, but the better the opposition, the less he throws. Both SSM and JMM used a jab and Pac was hesitant to commit. Against Marg et al they didn't employ a jab and Pac was the buzzsaw.

Against Floyd, he would throw less than 500 because he knows when he commits, he'll get countered to death.

The genius of PBF wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:PBF remember the PM I sent to you last week, please.

There is no way on God's green earth you can truly believe what you have just typed.

I got ridiculed and laughed at for saying Marquez beat Cotto at welter...after last weeks fight it does not seem that bad now even Marquez said he could beat Cotto and Margarito.

Especially if Cotto is asked to come in as 145.

azania wrote:Still was uncomfortable. And I wrote that here after the fight. I also stated that he seemed to lack a plan B and to all intense and purpose, the JMM fight showed that. Look at his punch output in his fights with Cotto, Clottey, Marg where he threw near on 1000 punches. In the SSM he threw 700+. Against JMM he threw just over 500+. Still a tremendous output, but the better the opposition, the less he throws. Both SSM and JMM used a jab and Pac was hesitant to commit. Against Marg et al they didn't employ a jab and Pac was the buzzsaw.

Against Floyd, he would throw less than 500 because he knows when he commits, he'll get countered to death.

Agree.

Scottrf wrote:

azania wrote:Still was uncomfortable. And I wrote that here after the fight. I also stated that he seemed to lack a plan B and to all intense and purpose, the JMM fight showed that. Look at his punch output in his fights with Cotto, Clottey, Marg where he threw near on 1000 punches. In the SSM he threw 700+. Against JMM he threw just over 500+. Still a tremendous output, but the better the opposition, the less he throws. Both SSM and JMM used a jab and Pac was hesitant to commit. Against Marg et al they didn't employ a jab and Pac was the buzzsaw.

Against Floyd, he would throw less than 500 because he knows when he commits, he'll get countered to death.

Agree.

Huh?

The genius of PBF wrote:

The Galveston Giant wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

oxring wrote:Lads - with my mod hat on - can I just say well done for keeping this debate civil and not letting things become personal

For the record - Ghosty has hit the nail firmly on the head for me. If MAB isn't great, how is Floyd - given that MAB is better than anyone either has fought.

Marquez is the best fighter either has fought...Mayweather won more rounds in 1 fight then Pacquiao has in 3...How can a guy who has been exposed by Marquez 3 times and knocked out twice have a better record than Floyd Mayweather?

Because records aren't compared on one fighter.

Mosley, Marquez, Hatton, De La Hoya, Hernandez, Ortiz, Judah, Baldomir, Chavez, Castillo etc and no losses...Mayweather's record is so much superior.

Hernandez? Hatton at 147? Judah? BALDOMIR

As I said before. Wumming REMAINS unacceptable.

As I said earlier - its like some episode of the outer limits. Where Barrera ceases to be great. Where Baldomir IS a great win for Floyd but Clottey for Manny isn't.

Sometimes I despair.

Az - genuinely, have missed debating with you. Partly because arguing helps me analyse my own opinions. Partly because it is always a new experience - you are truly unpredictable (excepting Rocky and Manny). And old time fighters. And morality...

For the record - its not always true that Manny's output goes down against counterpunchers - his output was still pretty high against Marquez 1 and 2.

Anyway - why doesn't Manny ever get credit for stopping Morales? Morales who beat 10 shades out of Maidana and then went on to win an (only slightly) gifted title at 140...

oxring wrote:

PBF wrote:Mosley, Marquez, Hatton, De La Hoya, Hernandez, Ortiz, Judah, Baldomir, Chavez, Castillo etc and no losses...Mayweather's record is so much superior.

Hernandez? Hatton at 147? Judah? BALDOMIR

As I said before. Wumming REMAINS unacceptable.

As I said earlier - its like some episode of the outer limits. Where Barrera ceases to be great. Where Baldomir IS a great win for Floyd but Clottey for Manny isn't.

Sometimes I despair.

Az - genuinely, have missed debating with you. Partly because arguing helps me analyse my own opinions. Partly because it is always a new experience - you are truly unpredictable (excepting Rocky and Manny). And old time fighters. And morality...

For the record - its not always true that Manny's output goes down against counterpunchers - his output was still pretty high against Marquez 1 and 2.

Anyway - why doesn't Manny ever get credit for stopping Morales? Morales who beat 10 shades out of Maidana and then went on to win an (only slightly) gifted title at 140...

? Hernandez is one of his better wins.

oxring wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

The Galveston Giant wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

oxring wrote:Lads - with my mod hat on - can I just say well done for keeping this debate civil and not letting things become personal

For the record - Ghosty has hit the nail firmly on the head for me. If MAB isn't great, how is Floyd - given that MAB is better than anyone either has fought.

Marquez is the best fighter either has fought...Mayweather won more rounds in 1 fight then Pacquiao has in 3...How can a guy who has been exposed by Marquez 3 times and knocked out twice have a better record than Floyd Mayweather?

Because records aren't compared on one fighter.

Mosley, Marquez, Hatton, De La Hoya, Hernandez, Ortiz, Judah, Baldomir, Chavez, Castillo etc and no losses...Mayweather's record is so much superior.

Hernandez? Hatton at 147? Judah? BALDOMIR

As I said before. Wumming REMAINS unacceptable.

As I said earlier - its like some episode of the outer limits. Where Barrera ceases to be great. Where Baldomir IS a great win for Floyd but Clottey for Manny isn't.

Sometimes I despair.

Az - genuinely, have missed debating with you. Partly because arguing helps me analyse my own opinions. Partly because it is always a new experience - you are truly unpredictable (excepting Rocky and Manny). And old time fighters. And morality...

For the record - its not always true that Manny's output goes down against counterpunchers - his output was still pretty high against Marquez 1 and 2.

Anyway - why doesn't Manny ever get credit for stopping Morales? Morales who beat 10 shades out of Maidana and then went on to win an (only slightly) gifted title at 140...

Hernandez? Hatton at 147? Judah? BALDOMIR

Hatton was undefeated and a champion at 147 GREAT WIN...Hernandez a hall of famer great win...Judah and Baldomir were the men at 147 something Clottey or Cotto never have done.

Plus Clottey was coming off a loss probably why Pacquiao choose to fight him...Morales was also coming off a loss which is why he shouldn't get credit or do think David Diaz deserves credit as well for beating a shell Morales...Likewise the Mosley fight...See a pattern emerging here?

Maidana beat Morales...Morales is the one that looked like he had 10 shades beaten out of him by Maidana.

Well both Clottey and Cotto comfortably beat Zab Judah while according to your own theory Margarito was once the man at the weight having beaten Cotto who was subsequently beaten by Pacquiao.

Not disputing that Hatton was a great win for Mayweather but at the same time it was a great win for Pacquiao too, really wouldn't be too much to ask for a bit of objectivity when the pair are concerned is it, seems you can only consider one great at the detriment of the other.

As for Leonard his stipulations and matchmaking were in my opinion far worse than Pacquiaos, victories over Duran, Hagler and Lalonde were all based upon this.

You say Hernandez is going to be a hall of famer of which i'm not too sure but Morales, Barrera and Cotto will definitely be in as well as mutual opponents De La Hoya, Hatton, Marquez and Mosley. I make that at a quick glance 7 HOF opponents as opposed to 5 with the possible but unlikely addition of Gatti, Castillo or Corrales.

oxy lets be fair here you scored hatton as a great win for pac... you cant have it both ways hatton wasta fantastic win albeit possibly not at his optimum weight the version pac beat was at his best weight but the punch resistance appeared to have gone at that stage and was a somewhat weathered hatton - i would rank the wins pretty even...

oxring wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

The Galveston Giant wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

oxring wrote:Lads - with my mod hat on - can I just say well done for keeping this debate civil and not letting things become personal

For the record - Ghosty has hit the nail firmly on the head for me. If MAB isn't great, how is Floyd - given that MAB is better than anyone either has fought.

Marquez is the best fighter either has fought...Mayweather won more rounds in 1 fight then Pacquiao has in 3...How can a guy who has been exposed by Marquez 3 times and knocked out twice have a better record than Floyd Mayweather?

Because records aren't compared on one fighter.

Mosley, Marquez, Hatton, De La Hoya, Hernandez, Ortiz, Judah, Baldomir, Chavez, Castillo etc and no losses...Mayweather's record is so much superior.

Hernandez? Hatton at 147? Judah? BALDOMIR

As I said before. Wumming REMAINS unacceptable.

As I said earlier - its like some episode of the outer limits. Where Barrera ceases to be great. Where Baldomir IS a great win for Floyd but Clottey for Manny isn't.

Sometimes I despair.

Az - genuinely, have missed debating with you. Partly because arguing helps me analyse my own opinions. Partly because it is always a new experience - you are truly unpredictable (excepting Rocky and Manny). And old time fighters. And morality...

For the record - its not always true that Manny's output goes down against counterpunchers - his output was still pretty high against Marquez 1 and 2.

Anyway - why doesn't Manny ever get credit for stopping Morales? Morales who beat 10 shades out of Maidana and then went on to win an (only slightly) gifted title at 140...

He wasn't the threshing machine buzzsaw in any fight against JMM. You seem to be under the impression that I believe Pac is on par with Rocky in terms of talent and ability. Wrong. I believe he is good. Very good but not great. He has been gifted at least 2 decisions against JMM. If any of those decisions had gone the other way we wouldn't be talking about Pac the ATG. Similarly Bhop is being called an ATG because of what he has done at his age. He isn't an ATG. Not a chance. Beating Pascal doesn't make you an ATG. He is an ATG for boxers over 40 and thats it. If he was 25 and beat Pascal would anyone be claiming how good he is and putting him on such a pedestal? No. Face facts and dont let emotion cloud your judgement,

Similarly Pac gets credit for rising from Fly to LMW. But look at the record. He lost at least 2 to JMM. Lost to Morales. Beat a severely weight drained Morales in a rematch and a washed up and tired Morales at a higher weight. When did Morales beat Maidana? He lost a close decision to Maidana. Again people are letting the fact that he performed better than expected to cloud their judgement. EM lost a clear and uncontroversial decision to Maidana. No argument there.

Regarding ODLH. He over-estimated himself and his ability at 147. Plus he under-estimated Pac. Good win for Pac on paper. But in reality, he beat a severely weight drained Oscar. Would you give Berbick credit for beating Ali? After all Ali was younger that Vitali when Berbick schooled him. Won by shutout. On paper he beat Ali. In reality he beat a shell of Ali. Interestingly both Ali and Oscar didn't fight after their respective losses.

Cotto? Great win. Why the weight stip if only to get an advantage and get Cotto in less than optimum condition. Pac was the money man. Cotto took the fight for money. Most boxers would do it. If Floyd asked Martinez or JCC jnr to come in at 150 and offered him $10m for it, watch JCC do an Atkins diet before you can say "Bob's your uncle". Why? Because of $10m. Would you credit Floyd for beating JCC? I wouldn't. To be the man you have to beat the man at the man's weight.

That leaves us with Hatton. Great win for him. No argument there. So beating Hatton legitimately makes Pac an ATG does it?

What's wrong with my morality? I think its immoral to allow yourself and your family to get slapped and then to offer your other cheek to get that slapped.

AlexHuckerby wrote:oxy lets be fair here you scored hatton as a great win for pac... you cant have it both ways hatton wasta fantastic win albeit possibly not at his optimum weight the version pac beat was at his best weight but the punch resistance appeared to have gone at that stage and was a somewhat weathered hatton - i would rank the wins pretty even...

OR you could say that Hatton at 147, where he had never been effective was less impressive than stopping a Hatton in 2, at his optimum weight, where he was unbeaten and where he was coming off the back of a comprehensive win over the number 3 in the division.

oxring wrote:

AlexHuckerby wrote:oxy lets be fair here you scored hatton as a great win for pac... you cant have it both ways hatton wasta fantastic win albeit possibly not at his optimum weight the version pac beat was at his best weight but the punch resistance appeared to have gone at that stage and was a somewhat weathered hatton - i would rank the wins pretty even...

OR you could say that Hatton at 147, where he had never been effective was less impressive than stopping a Hatton in 2, at his optimum weight, where he was unbeaten and where he was coming off the back of a comprehensive win over the number 3 in the division.

Could also say that as the challenger chasing the fight he was fine accepting the weight. That's usually the excuse people use for Pacquiao's wins over Cotto and Margarito.

Not sure either Cotto or Margarito need an excuse. Both incredible wins over naturally bigger men.

Mayweather Hatton was an impressive performance and an impressive win - but it wasn't a win "against the odds" or against people's expectations.

Plenty were tipping Hatton do be just too big for Pacquiao. They were wrong as it turned out - but plenty were picking it anyway.

Against the odds would be his win over Corrales I would suspect a win far better than Margarito but slightly below Cotto.

Slightly perplexed that anyone can try and suggest that Pacquiao, Hopkins and Barrera are not great fighters though.

Welcome back Ghosty.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Against the odds would be his win over Corrales I would suspect a win far better than Margarito but slightly below Cotto.

Slightly perplexed that anyone can try and suggest that Pacquiao, Hopkins and Barrera are not great fighters though.

Agreed - why I have Corrales as such a great win.

oxring wrote:Not sure either Cotto or Margarito need an excuse. Both incredible wins over naturally bigger men.

Mayweather Hatton was an impressive performance and an impressive win - but it wasn't a win "against the odds" or against people's expectations.

Plenty were tipping Hatton do be just too big for Pacquiao. They were wrong as it turned out - but plenty were picking it anyway.

Not saying they need excuses. Saying that if we're gonna make excuses for Hatton fighting above his 'natural' weight, why not make them for Cotto and Margarito at catchweights? People are quick to say "oh, but Cotto didn't HAVE to sign the contract", but the same then is true for Hatton against Mayweather.

Well - Margarito had been a WW and was allegedly too big for WW any more - so its a bit harsh to criticise that fight for being at 151.

Certainly - we could aim the same criticism at Manny for making Cotto cut 2 pounds as opposed to Floyd for making Hatton gain 7.

In theory, the argument is identical, however - I grant you.

Relative to the size of each fighter though Oxy, Hatton and Mayweather are pretty much the same size so the weight they fought at isn't all that important whereas Pacquiao was and is clearly a smaller man than Cotto so is benefitted by the 145lb catchweight more. I don't think much of the Margarito win especially as an old Mosley had battered him senseless round the ring.

There's a different between fit weight and fat weight. Hatton was relatively fleshy in the ring - and not as strong as at 140.

I'm starting to sound like D4.

Manny is great, so is Floyd. Also Barrera.

I'm done.

Not disputing that Oxy but have always felt it easier to gain weight rather than lose it.

Back to the main point Marquez was a clear winner last weekend.

Yeah - he probably won it. I'm not sold on it being the biggest robbery I've ever seen - I could see why it could be scored for Manny. Mostly with heavy weighting towards aggression/compubox.

It wasn't a Huck-Lebedev, though. Now that was bad.

However - in such a high profile matchup - boxing needed a clear and definite result.

It was a pretty clear and definitive result. Marquez won. A draw or a majority draw would've been harsh. 8-4 for Pacquiao was a joke.

hatton was fleshy against floyd got photographic evidence of this? cos thats bull.

AlexHuckerby wrote:hatton was fleshy against floyd got photographic evidence of this? cos thats bull.

What a fatty:

Spoiler:

Anyway - why doesn't Manny ever get credit for stopping Morales? Morales who beat 10 shades out of Maidana and then went on to win an (only slightly) gifted title at 140...

Pac deserves less credit than Zahir Raheem for beating a faded Morales.

Mayweathers record is better than Manny's. Floyd has fought a similar calibre of opponent without losing. Mayweather has had one disputed decision, vs Castillo 1, Pac has had 2 disputed decisions and one down right robbery vs JMM, a loss to Maorales and two losses to bums.

The talk of who is better between Manny and Floyd is over, Mayweather is clearly far superior. A better topic of conversation would be comparing Manny to JMM.

Compared with this - he's more cut against Pacquiao - the same as in his other fights at 140.

Unless we're trying to suggest that Hatton was as effective at 147 as 140 - and as cut/ripped/shredded at 147 as 140 etc. Cos that's bull.

Spoiler:

-----------------------------------------------------
Really Jukebox? The talk is over? Sure - Manny isn't as effective as Floyd at WW - but given that a couple of years ago he was fightin at 130 - is that really surprising?

One of the losses to "bums" was to Singsurat - a good flyweight champion - where he moved up in weight. Hopkins has a loss to a bum as well - doubtless he's not great either.

Pacquiao stopped Morales - someting Maidana couldn't do. That same "shot" Morales has recently won a title at 140. So he's probably not as shot as was originally claimed.

One of the losses to "bums" was to Singsurat

Perhaps thats his level then.

Morales lost to Maidana, a guy who wouldn't have been fit to lace his boots when Eric was in his prime. And If Morales was so good back when Pac beat him how'd he lose to Raheem?

Thing is with Pacquiao, he will always be remembered for not being able to deal with Marquez. Mayweather does not have that monkey on his back.

Is Mayweather clearly superior because Manny had a tough time against a counter puncher whom Mayweather shutout?

Because Mayweather had a tough time against the pressure fighting of Castillo, remember?

In my opinion, rematches favour the boxer over the fighter. That's disputable and not always the case but it's the way I see it. Now when Manny last fought Marquez he weighed in at 143 and Marquez at 142. They were at a catchweight (that favoured Marquez) of 144. Mayweather v Marquez was also at a catchweight of 144. Mayweather came in at 146. Lets not pretend the cards weren't stacked in Mayweather's favour there.

Mayweather needed two goes at Castillo to figure him out and beat him decisively. What can Castillo do offensively that Pacquiao can't?

Also, why do the times when a razor close Marquez victory went the other way get mentioned, but not the time an admitted score card mess up turned a Pacquiao victory into a draw?

Mayweather gave Castillo an immediate rematch and beat him comfortably. Pac struggled with Marquez first time out; waited 4 years to give him a rematch; struggled again; waited another 3 years for a 3rd fight and got beaten pretty decisively IMO. You can't compare the two situations.

Marquez won, what, 9 rounds pretty clearly v Pac in their first fight, he was unlucky not to get the decision.

From what I know Pacquiao wanted to rematch Marquez earlier but Marquez went up against Chris John for much less money and lost instead.

My point regarding Marquez/Pacman/Floyd/Castillo is that people say because Pacquiao struggled with Marquez, he'll therefor be beaten by Mayweather. Yet when Mayweather struggling with Castillo is apprently not an issue. Double standards in my opinion.

i actually thought castillo got beat by floyd twice...

how long ago did floyd struggle against castillo?

Castillo won the first one for me. Floyd, to his credit, came back in an immediate rematch and put it right.

Pac v Mayweather is still a fight I'd like to see.

It's a styles thing though. If Pac struggled so badly with the back foot counterpunching of Marquez then you'd think Mayweather, who is bigger stronger, faster, and simply better than Marquez, would walk it. I take your point about Mayweather no thaving it all his own way against a Pac esque pressure fighter in Castillo. That was 10 years ago though. Castillo was was much bigger and stronger than Mayweather that night. It also appeared that Floyd wasn't lying about being injured, as he easily beat Castillo in the rematch.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Pac v Mayweather is still a fight I'd like to see.

It's a styles thing though. If Pac struggled so badly with the back foot counterpunching of Marquez then you'd think Mayweather, who is bigger stronger, faster, and simply better than Marquez, would walk it. I take your point about Mayweather no thaving it all his own way against a Pac esque pressure fighter in Castillo. That was 10 years ago though. Castillo was was much bigger and stronger than Mayweather that night. It also appeared that Floyd wasn't lying about being injured, as he easily beat Castillo in the rematch.

You could also say Marquez was so great against the offensive machine in Pacquiao because his movement is very economical and precise, he never got caught on the ropes. Mayweather on the other hand was roughed up against the ropes by Ortiz, who isn't as good at anything as Pacquiao.

I've read that Mayweather does everything better than Marquez but it's not true. There's more than one kind of counter puncher.