Pacquiao vs Marquez 4

http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-pacquiao-marquez-20120912,0,6938932.story?track=rss

The most pointless fight in boxing outside of Garcia vs Morales.

Manny Pacquiao is fast becoming a bit of a joke in the sport. He cannot comprehensivley beat Marquez whos style is all wrong for him. So why take this fight?? He is either going to look silly and steal a fourth decision or finally get beaten on the cards.

Either way, this will probably be the nail in the coffin for a Mayweather fight (even though its pointless anyway).

Thoughts?

The only reason I would watch this is so hopefully I can see Marquez finally get the decision that he so craves and deserves as he won 2 of the 3 fights imo

It's a pointless fight between 2 fighters that are into the twilight of their careers and their days at the top are numbered

Pacquiao is not the same on 606v2 p4p top 10's that pacquiao wasn't in hardly anyone's top 5 and another 'win' vs Marquez wont prove anything

Bloody pointless. JMM by UD and Pac by decision. Again.

Well done Arum.

If I was Marquez I wouldnt touch this fight. He has won at least 2 of them by a country mile and the other most still have him up.

Thoughts....

That perhaps given the law of probability..

Manny might actually win this time!!!

Funny isn't it that we had a welterwieght unification series years ago with Breland, Starling and Honeyghan..

all geared towards a Breland v Honey showdown!!

Then Starling upset Honey and HBO dropped Breland-Starling 2.. like a spotty girlfriend with bad personal hygiene...

How times have changed!!!!

You never know Truss, there is the possiblity that Pac can make it 9-2-1

Isn't it always a good fight though?

Jack

Manny brings more money than any other boxer JMM could fight. Plus JMM knows he can beat Manny.

Pointless fight as far as I'm concerned. Didn't think the last one was particularly entertaining. Wonder if they're gonna do a 24/7 - they could just show a repeat of the last one.

This is just about cashing out now for Arum and Manny. Manny has had his time. It was fun, entertaining, and impressive. But, unless he takes on some fresh and inspiring challenges, I'm not that interested. Manny has had a great run of things, but probably has too many asterisks against his opponents/stipulations/etc to be up there with the real greats..........and the fact that he and Floyd could never arrange a fight during that peak 2 year period will always be a black mark for me.

I'm not sure what to make of this fight myself, to be honest.

From the outset, Pacquiao should be applauded for taking a risk, given that Marquez has shown time and again that he can tie him up in knots, make him fall in to traps and generally make him look pretty ordinary. It would have been very easy - and tempting, I'd imagine - for Pacquiao to have drawn a line under their series after last November's contentious win, particularly as each sub-par showing diminishes the chance of a Mayweather fight - already nigh-on pointless as of late 2012 - further still.

On top of that, on the basis of that performance in November, who can really begrudge Marquez a rematch? Of the thirty-six rounds they've boxed, he's probably won something like twenty-three of them but still only has a 0-2-1 record to show for it.

On the other hand, it's two fighters who are clearly well past their sell by date - how much does a win for either man really prove? I said after their third fight that, if I were Marquez, I'd be highly skeptical about a fourth installment; same venue, same 'house' fighter, same promoters, same broadcasters etc. Why shouldn't he be suspicious that, unless he pitches an absolute shut out or stops his man, he'll lose another odd decision yet again?

Moreover, if one man has slipped even further from their unimpressive last outing, and the other wins at a canter, millions of fans will be left wondering "well, what was the point in that?"

Pros and cons for it, I think.

Is Marquez past his best? Old for a boxer yes.

How far has Pac slipped or is it more of a case of him fighting guys who don't stand in front of him and bang with him?

Both past their best for me, Az.

It was still good performances in it's own right, but I think the Marquez of a few years back would have dealt with someone like Katsidis a bit easier, and he didn't look particularly great against Fedchenko, either. He raised his game for Pacquiao - and who knows, maybe he can again - but I don't think he's as sharp as he used to be.

Pacquiao's slide has been even steeper, I think. The Manny who toiled ineffectively for twelve rounds against Marquez (III) and couldn't pull the trigger at key moments against Bradley looks as if he's in slow motion compared to the one who blitzed Oscar, Hatton and Cotto. I accept that Marquez was always likely to cause him problems in retrospect, but I don't think Mosley could have survived twelve rounds fighting the way he did against Pacquiao had he fought the aforementioned version who tore through everyone put in front of him between 2008 and 2010. Likewise, Bradley got pretty gung-ho at times and certainly stood in front of Pacquiao, but got away with it. Again, I don't think that would have been the case three years previously.

Granted I'd agree that Pac has slipped a tad, but I've always said that put him in someone who moves a little and it would confuse him. The first JMM fight proved that. He will never look devestating against a mover. Not even at his supposed dynamic best.

88Chris05 wrote:Both past their best for me, Az.

It was still good performances in it's own right, but I think the Marquez of a few years back would have dealt with someone like Katsidis a bit easier, and he didn't look particularly great against Fedchenko, either. He raised his game for Pacquiao - and who knows, maybe he can again - but I don't think he's as sharp as he used to be.

Pacquiao's slide has been even steeper, I think. The Manny who toiled ineffectively for twelve rounds against Marquez (III) and couldn't pull the trigger at key moments against Bradley looks as if he's in slow motion compared to the one who blitzed Oscar, Hatton and Cotto. I accept that Marquez was always likely to cause him problems in retrospect, but I don't think Mosley could have survived twelve rounds fighting the way he did against Pacquiao had he fought the aforementioned version who tore through everyone put in front of him between 2008 and 2010. Likewise, Bradley got pretty gung-ho at times and certainly stood in front of Pacquiao, but got away with it. Again, I don't think that would have been the case three years previously.

Well he was juicing back in the Hatton, Cotto days

88Chris05 wrote:I'm not sure what to make of this fight myself, to be honest.

From the outset, Pacquiao should be applauded for taking a risk, given that Marquez has shown time and again that he can tie him up in knots, make him fall in to traps and generally make him look pretty ordinary. It would have been very easy - and tempting, I'd imagine - for Pacquiao to have drawn a line under their series after last November's contentious win, particularly as each sub-par showing diminishes the chance of a Mayweather fight - already nigh-on pointless as of late 2012 - further still.

On top of that, on the basis of that performance in November, who can really begrudge Marquez a rematch? Of the thirty-six rounds they've boxed, he's probably won something like twenty-three of them but still only has a 0-2-1 record to show for it.

On the other hand, it's two fighters who are clearly well past their sell by date - how much does a win for either man really prove? I said after their third fight that, if I were Marquez, I'd be highly skeptical about a fourth installment; same venue, same 'house' fighter, same promoters, same broadcasters etc. Why shouldn't he be suspicious that, unless he pitches an absolute shut out or stops his man, he'll lose another odd decision yet again?

Moreover, if one man has slipped even further from their unimpressive last outing, and the other wins at a canter, millions of fans will be left wondering "well, what was the point in that?"

Pros and cons for it, I think.

You think Pacquiao chose Marquez? ...There is a reason why Arum had to put Pacquiao's next fight back from November to December.

Pacquiao really did not want this fight as he thinks it might will jeopardise a potential payday against Mayweather...Cotto at catchweight was his number one choice but Cotto rejected him seeing as how much money he made against Mayweather in May that Arum was robbing him.

Pacquiao wanted Bradley and wanted the same purse but Arum has been convincincing him to fight Marquez for the past 2 months as Arum makes more money from the Marquez fight.

Arum will now makes excuses that Pacquiao has unfinished business with Bradley next year further putting off the Mayweather fight...Yet some of you will still claim Mayweather is the one ducking.

I actually like the fight. All three fights have been entertaining so far. The styles blend well and I dont think its a certain win for either fighter.

Surely you would want to remove the Bradley stain from your record...I liked Hangover film doesn't mean I want to watch it over and over again.

Well I think the majority of the public have felt that was a bad decision against Pacquiao so even if they never fought again he would be held a moral winner. Even after 3 fights with JMM he has just as much if not more unfinished business there as unlike the Bradley fight, the public hold JMM the moral victor in the trilogy. If he could finally get a clear win over JMM I think it would mean more to him than avenging a loss to Bradley most peope think he won.

Better chance for Pacquiao to wait next year for Marquez as he ages more...Pacquiao deep down does not really want it which is why he stalled on it for this long.

At this point its questionable who is ageing quicker between the two though. Marquez is older but doesnt appear to be as far past his best. The latest fight between the two was definately the clearest one.

i think (or should i say hope) JMM will finaly get the decision he deserves and that will be that for manny. great fighter but has lost his spark and hasnt looked go for years really.

if marquez gets done again on the cards i'm giving up on manny and maybe the sport forever. ok, just manny.

my fear is manny has just been done himself and there was a big fuss about it. they'll maybe go the other way and give him a round or two he didn't deserve.

either way, we know who's won. and the most manny has in 3 bouts in a draw.

Utter Poopie fight.

I must be a bit of a weirdo, two guys who always have close, exciting fights facing each other again sounds pretty great to me.

Joke fight for joke Pacquiao and Arum. Just retire. Please.

Lets all watch JMM give pacman a lesson in boxing, to then losing 118-108 on scorecards. Both gt good payday, crowd boo, Part 5 next summer.

When will Pacman fight a live opponent at their own weight?

Last time he did (bradley) he lost.

Fight Mayweather, Ortiz, Khan, Garcia, Matthyse, Maidana, Cotto (154lbs), Bradley 2,

Loads of options.

mobilemaster8 wrote:Joke fight for joke Pacquiao and Arum. Just retire. Please.

Lets all watch JMM give pacman a lesson in boxing, to then losing 118-108 on scorecards. Both gt good payday, crowd boo, Part 5 next summer.

When will Pacman fight a live opponent at their own weight?

Last time he did (bradley) he lost.

Fight Mayweather, Ortiz, Khan, Garcia, Matthyse, Maidana, Cotto (154lbs), Bradley 2,

Loads of options.

None of their fights were one sided. You say he won't take on anyone "live" while also saying he's taking on someone better than himself.

He didn't lose to Bradley, he beat him. A live, hungry, undefeated and able fighter.

If he fought Ortiz people would point out he's coming off a loss and call it a joke fight.
If he fought Khan people would point out he's coming off a loss and call it a joke.
Garcia's signed to fight Garcia, people would probably say he was avoided Marquez if he took it.
Etc. Etc.

Whatever Manny does everybody on here ill ignore the potential for an entertaining fight and find reasons for it to be a joke.

Ok im hearing it still ain't definite Marquez vs Pacquiao...Pacquiao is still stalling wants Mayweather fight but Arum and Koncz are trying to promise Pacquiao if he fights Marquez next Mayweather fight will happen next year. (A promise they probably wont keep)

Pacquiao wants to cash out on Mayweather fight and call it a career.

Not interested in this fight, not interested in the Pacquiao v Mayweather fight really either.

Even though im not a rich man, had the Pacquiao v Mayweather fight been made in 2010 id have found the funds to get myself to Vegas. now i'd probably not even stay up til 5am to watch it on TV.

Out with the old and in with the new, i'm all about the next generation of boxers!

Got to say I tend to agree bartley, that ship has sailed. They had the chance to make one of the biggest fights in history, break countless records and cement their place in history and chose not to do it. Would much rather devote my time and energy on guys who warrant it.

John Bloody Wayne wrote:I must be a bit of a weirdo, two guys who always have close, exciting fights facing each other again sounds pretty great to me.

Exciting? Possibly. Close? Not a chance.

Out of the 36 rounds they have boxed, Manny has probably won 10. As Truss has already mentioned, if Manny some how wins this one properly then where does that leave Marquez... I understand he is doing it for the money, but how much more will he make vs Manny than another top fighter. Is he that desperate for money.

JMM would make sigmificantly more money against Pac than most other fighters. I dont see why he is only taking the fight for money Its a winnabe super fight for him. He would be mad not to take it I think. The last decision was a poor one but at the same time the first two fights were not neccesarily. I dont buy that if they fight a fourth time its a certain robbery. If anything I think the judges will be under pressure to give Marquez his dues. I also actually think Pacquiao is capable of winning the fight legitimately.

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

John Bloody Wayne wrote:I must be a bit of a weirdo, two guys who always have close, exciting fights facing each other again sounds pretty great to me.

Exciting? Possibly. Close? Not a chance.

The only way you couldn't have the first one close is if you simply ignore the 10 point must system. The second was extremely close. I thought the third was made close by Pacquiao's late rally. This rivalry has become the modern day Ali v Norton. Norton won the first, (got the decision too, which gets left out) Ali won the second (fairly too) the third went Ali's way but Norton should've got the nod. Revisionist historian circa 2012: NORTON WAS ROBBED THREE TIMES!!!

Before the last fight we had Coxy saying he'd leave the boards for two weeks if Marquez even heard the final bell, now there's not even a chance Manny can make it close.

Why would JMM just do it for the money if he's such a dead cert to dominate the fight? Even if he is doing it for the money, I can't blame a boxer in his late 30's for doing that.

I'm looking forward to this, can't believe I'm in the minority! They've had a fine fine trilogy, only hope is there's not stupid judging.

I think even using the ten point must system that Marquez won the first fight quite convincingly, the second fight could have gone either way and the third fight was a blatant stitch up, Marquez should be 2-1 in the series.

I agree completely regarding the revisionist history which is already creeping in to discussions regarding this trilogy so far.

As I said above, I believe that Marquez has probably won something like twenty-two or twenty-three of the the thirty-six rounds he's boxed against Manny, but we can't just airbrush out those times at which Manny caught him napping.

The first fight? Well, I believe that Marquez won it by a couple of points, but seriously, are we now saying that a draw was some great injustice? As much as Marquez was on top after the first two rounds, he didn't pitch a shut out by any means, and nor did he produce a knockdown. Ergo, even if you have Marquez ahead at the end, it's not going to be by a huge amount and, lest we forget, he's not the hardest to outwork or outland.

The second fight? A legitimate Pacquiao win, I think - albeit by a thin margin again. Worryingly, some of Pacquiao's harshest critics seem to pass this fight off as a Marquez win as a matter of fact - pretty arrogantly, I might add.

The third one? Well yes, I think Marquez won and I'd say it's the only decision of the series which really riled me up. But even then, Marquez left things to chance somewhat and, upon a second viewing, his performance wasn't as dominant as I first thought, although I still had him two or three points up.

I do believe that Marquez, at the very least, deserves to be 1-1-1 in the trilogy, though perhaps 2-1 or 1-0-2 might be even more accurate. But Pacquiao beating him without generous assistance from the judges isn't an impossibility.

This is a tired trilogy that has been marred by poor judging. I'm disappointed but not surprised there's gonna be a 4th instalment. These are Bob Arums quotes, taken from Sky Sports:

"Because the economics for the Marquez fight were so much greater than for a Bradley rematch, that is what Manny decided to do," said promoter Bob Arum.
"It's so much greater because of the support Marquez has from the Hispanic community. Look at the past numbers.
"When Pacquiao fought Marquez (in November), it sold close to 1.3 million pay-per-view. Bradley was about 900,000. That's a big difference. Plus, the gate goes from probably $8m to $12m."

If it wasn't clear before that Arums only priority when matching manny is profit, then that should clear it up. This fight is clearly about the $$. Whispers are that manny wanted to avenge the Bradley 'defeat' or go after the big final payoff against mayweather. Roach is on record as saying he wanted Bradley again. Arum has pushed for this. I'm not saying its an easy option for manny - far from it, Marquez has shown on 3 occaisions he has his number and by law of averages should get a decision in the end. It's just that, to quote manny after the 2nd fight, this business is over now.

i will watch the 4th, hoping that marquez finally gets the win he craves and deserves. i guess we know what manny has planned after this one then.

If manny wins they will go for the Bradley rematch next may. There is no way manny and mayweather will ever fight while there is blood coursing through Bob Arums veins, that much we've learned over the last 3 years.

As a last hurrah for Pacquiao with over $100mil on the line may make it happen, he'd have nothing to lose.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:As a last hurrah for Pacquiao with over $100mil on the line may make it happen, he'd have nothing to lose.

When pacquiao is a busted flush and the fight means even less than it does now will be the only time Arum relents a little, but even then I'd be amazed if he and floyd could ever work together and compromise - too many massive egos there.

Lance Pugmire ‏@latimespugmire

Pacquiao, as an aside, said he's more confident than in a long time that he can get a Mayweather fight next year, gave no specifics why.

Lance Pugmire ‏@latimespugmire

Advisor Michael Koncz interrupted when Pacquiao was asked why he thinks he'll fight Mayweather and said, "Secret."

Lance Pugmire ‏@latimespugmire

There's some who give @50cent credit as a real factor in @FloydMayweather-@MannyPacquiao talks, others in Pac camp call it a farce.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This what I was telling you all before Bob Arum and Koncz have been telling Manny if he takes the fight with Marquez that they promise him a fight with Mayweather next year.

Manny Pacquiao really does not want Marquez again which is why they had to put the fight back from November to December because Manny was stalling.

I also have read this is the lengths Pacquiao's advisor Michael Koncz goes to:

"Koncz regularly acts like he's (pretending to call) calling Mayweather's advisor Al Haymon in front of Manny, pretending like he's working hard to make the fight. In fact, believe it or not, at one point, Koncz told Manny that David Levi and 50 Cent were handling Floyd's career."

I have read Pacquiao has 2 fights with top rank left including Marquez but not sure if that is true.

How can anyone take the words of Michael Koncz seriously, he's a piece of filth - essentially a bag carrying tea boy that brown nosed his way into a position of authority within manny's ridiculous entourage of clowns - the man is a rancid infected pimple on the bum of humanity, it's testament to what a simpleton manny pacquiao is that he lets these vile parasites cling to him for their lifeblood.

Sugar Boy Sweetie wrote:How can anyone take the words of Michael Koncz seriously,

How anyone is either willing or interested in listening to a word anyone has to say in this sorry shameful affair is beyond me.

rowley wrote:

How anyone is either willing or interested in listening to a word anyone has to say in this sorry shameful affair is beyond me.

That sums it up for me. No one is telling the 100% truth on either side. You can't trust one side or the other. The whole thing has been one protracted example of how not to promote a sport.

I think 50 cent will take them into a room, sit between them and have them talk it all out until they're friends again.

He won't make the fight, he'll fix the friendship, and that's the most important thing of all.

I imagine fiddy and Floyd falling out being similar to Stringer v Avon.