Arum: Marquez next for Pacquiao.

First topic message reminder :

The Mosley fight still has to play but Arum is already planing Pacquiao's next bout.

The fight will complete an thrilling trilogy, when Juan Manual Marquez step into the ring for a 3rd time.

There first fight was an epic battle Pacquiao knocking down Marquez 3 times in the first round only for Marquez to come back with the help of mistake by one of the judges to claim a draw.

The rematch was 4 years in the waiting but is was worth the wait, a great technical battle, his speed chess, Pacquiao put Marquez down again only the once but much more heavier knockdown that the previous ones.

The fight swayed back and forth and in the end Pacquiao sneaked a SD.

Since then they have both move up the weights, and had some impressive victories so what can we expect from the 3rd and probably final fight from these two greats.

Many of you were calling for this fight, and with Marquez being a free agent it should be easy to negotiate and will probably happen in November.

Pacquiao just has to get through Mosley now and the trilogy can be complete.


http://www.boxingscene.com/pacquiao-vs-marquez-likely-next-manny-says-arum--38132

This is regarding 2010 earnings, why do you find it so difficult to either give Pacquiao credit, or ignore it? Hardly 'lies' is it?

coxy0001 wrote:And they wouldn't have done the same for Pacquiao?

"Financial year"?

It clearly states that it only includes 2 fights from 2010 for Pacquiao, nothing about "including fights from the last tax year"... does it always have to be an argument with you Coxy?

It actually clearly states that for boxers it takes into account boxing purses from July 09 to June 10 but that's just me being pedantic

The Mighty Atom wrote:It actually clearly states that for boxers it takes into account boxing purses from July 09 to June 10 but that's just me being pedantic

In the ESPN article?

Edit - Just checked - the ESPN one states calender year, so 2010. The SI one is July 09 - June 10.

wow_junky wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:It actually clearly states that for boxers it takes into account boxing purses from July 09 to June 10 but that's just me being pedantic

In the ESPN article?

No the Sports Illustrated one.

Scottrf wrote:

wow_junky wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:It actually clearly states that for boxers it takes into account boxing purses from July 09 to June 10 but that's just me being pedantic

In the ESPN article?

No the Sports Illustrated one.

Yeah, just checked it.

Looks like D4 is right!

The sports illustrated one, not really too sure how accurate these things can be, have to assume that Hamilton for instance earns a darn sight more than $26mil a year but who knows

The Mighty Atom wrote:The sports illustrated one, not really too sure how accurate these things can be, have to assume that Hamilton for instance earns a darn sight more than $26mil a year but who knows

I think they are base salaries? So endorsements etc aren't included... I think...

wow_junky wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

wow_junky wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:It actually clearly states that for boxers it takes into account boxing purses from July 09 to June 10 but that's just me being pedantic

In the ESPN article?

No the Sports Illustrated one.

Yeah, just checked it.

Looks like D4 is right!

Well all I did was read the link Scottf sent, but then again others fail to do this.

They do include endorsements which is why i'm slightly perplexed by it all

Boxing purses are from July '09 to June 2010

Which means FMJ has Marquez & Mosley. And Manny has Margarito, Clottey & Cotto........ I know i've lost the will to live, but isn't that 2 vs 3?

coxy0001 wrote:

Boxing purses are from July '09 to June 2010

Which means FMJ has Marquez & Mosley. And Manny has Margarito, Clottey & Cotto........ I know i've lost the will to live, but isn't that 2 vs 3?

That's on your link. Mine was 2010.

And I wasn't comparing Pacquiao and Mayweather because I don't have a chip on my shoulder. I was saying it's impressive for a boxer to be the highest paid.

Scott

I think we've crossed arguements or something, because i'm confused.

And moving on

Scottrf wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

Boxing purses are from July '09 to June 2010

Which means FMJ has Marquez & Mosley. And Manny has Margarito, Clottey & Cotto........ I know i've lost the will to live, but isn't that 2 vs 3?

That's on your link. Mine was 2010.

And I wasn't comparing Pacquiao and Mayweather because I don't have a chip on my shoulder. I was saying it's impressive for a boxer to be the highest paid.

Think it's all relative to whose list you go by Scott but moving on because it's fundamentally irrelevant

OK, have just watched and scored the Manny v Marquez 1 fight for the first time in about 2 or 3 years. Has to be said it was a cracking fight and very close, with lots of close rounds. I scored it as follows:

RD----1----2----3----4----5----6----7----8----9----10----11----12----Score
MP---10---10---9----9----9----9----10---9----9----10-----9----10-----113
JM----6---10---10---10---10---10---9---10---10----9-----10----10-----114

I'm a big fan of both fighters and watched it totally objectively as I always have. Manny had a huge first round, not only nearly blowing marquez away but gaining a significant advantage on the cards. He tried the same in the seceond but shipped a lot more coming back. From the 3rd onwards marquez took control of the fight. It's clear how much manny has improved now if you watch him back then - he was an extrememly predictable opponent, constantly coming forward with his swaying upper body, leading with the right before leaping in looking for the big straight left. Marquez was able to control the pace of the fight and control ring centre, landing the cleaner power shots and showing a greater variety of punch combinations. It's also worth noting that Marquez threw less punches but landed more, connecting with 29% of his punches to mannys 23% (manny landed the greater amount of power punches, 43% to Marquez's 36%, which is probably to be expected with his more aggressive style).

After a great start manny basically let the fight get away from him in the middle rounds, which marquez controlled. The last few rounds were more even. It was by no means the worst robbery, never 115-110 to either man, but I've always felt marquez did enough to win and re-watching it tonight has not changed that opinion. The fact that he did enough to win depsite being decked 3 times in the first is even more remarkable and a testamnet to his skill and cajones. There's no doubt marquez won more actual rounds over the course of the fight, with mannys big first round keeping it close on the cards.

D4 - just bumping this as you asked for peoples reviews of the fight and I've given mine. Would be interested to see how you scored the fight, and whether anyone else thinks my assessment is fair?