Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mars_ax
The real test is, name someone P4P besides Pacquiao, (I don't count Mayweather, he doesn't fight often enough) who deserves to be ranked higher than Martinez, there really isn't anyone.
floyd mayweather
manny pacquiao
juan manuel marquez
nonito donaire
wlad klitchko
martinez has looked less than gifted against his last two opponents who are B level fighters at best. the ease with which macklin and barker were able to connect with martinez' head and body doesn't inspire much confidence. if he were to be put in the ring p4p against any of the above fighters i see fairly clear losses for martinez on all counts.
Donaire didn't look all that great last two times out either, difference is Martinez got the KO twice while Donaire didn't come close
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ElTerribleMorales
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mars_ax
The real test is, name someone P4P besides Pacquiao, (I don't count Mayweather, he doesn't fight often enough) who deserves to be ranked higher than Martinez, there really isn't anyone.
floyd mayweather
manny pacquiao
juan manuel marquez
nonito donaire
wlad klitchko
martinez has looked less than gifted against his last two opponents who are B level fighters at best. the ease with which macklin and barker were able to connect with martinez' head and body doesn't inspire much confidence. if he were to be put in the ring p4p against any of the above fighters i see fairly clear losses for martinez on all counts.
Donaire didn't look all that great last two times out either,
difference is Martinez got the KO twice while Donaire didn't come close
Difference is quality of opposition and moves up in weight class:
Narvaez, undefeated in 37 fights at the time, was the #1 ranked super flyweight and former title holder who was moving up in weight to challenge Donaire for his bantamweight title. Donaire blanked him on all 3 judges score cards 120-108.
In his fight against Vasquez Jr, Donaire himself was moving up to challenge the former super bantamweight champ. this was the second weight division Donaire had jumped in a year and a half. Vasquez was the naturally bigger fighter having had spent his entire career at super bantamweight or higher. Donaire fought the majority of that fight with a broken left hand, evidence of which was seen when the gloves were removed and blood was seen soaking through the wraps. Donaire landed a total of 42% of his punches and 60% power punches. while judged a split decision, most observers saw Donaire winning easily.
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ElTerribleMorales
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mars_ax
The real test is, name someone P4P besides Pacquiao, (I don't count Mayweather, he doesn't fight often enough) who deserves to be ranked higher than Martinez, there really isn't anyone.
floyd mayweather
manny pacquiao
juan manuel marquez
nonito donaire
wlad klitchko
martinez has looked less than gifted against his last two opponents who are B level fighters at best. the ease with which macklin and barker were able to connect with martinez' head and body doesn't inspire much confidence. if he were to be put in the ring p4p against any of the above fighters i see fairly clear losses for martinez on all counts.
Donaire didn't look all that great last two times out either,
difference is Martinez got the KO twice while Donaire didn't come close
Difference is quality of opposition and moves up in weight class:
Narvaez, undefeated in 37 fights at the time, was the #1 ranked super flyweight and former title holder who was moving up in weight to challenge Donaire for his bantamweight title. Donaire blanked him on all 3 judges score cards 120-108.
In his fight against Vasquez Jr, Donaire himself was moving up to challenge the former super bantamweight champ. this was the second weight division Donaire had jumped in a year and a half. Vasquez was the naturally bigger fighter having had spent his entire career at super bantamweight or higher. Donaire fought the majority of that fight with a broken left hand, evidence of which was seen when the gloves were removed and blood was seen soaking through the wraps. Donaire landed a total of 42% of his punches and 60% power punches.
while judged a split decision, most observers saw Donaire winning easily.
no, he won CLEARLY, I wouldn't say he won easily, when Martinez began to work he dominated his opponent fully, it's not like either KO was from a lucky shot, the guy set it up and effortlessly took both out taking little to no damage himself, Macklin was one of the top out there right now, lets not forget his rip off "loss" to Sturm who many consider #2 or #3 at 160, as for Donaire against Narvaez, who the hell had Narvaez beaten to be considered elite? the real answer is no one
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ElTerribleMorales
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ElTerribleMorales
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mars_ax
The real test is, name someone P4P besides Pacquiao, (I don't count Mayweather, he doesn't fight often enough) who deserves to be ranked higher than Martinez, there really isn't anyone.
floyd mayweather
manny pacquiao
juan manuel marquez
nonito donaire
wlad klitchko
martinez has looked less than gifted against his last two opponents who are B level fighters at best. the ease with which macklin and barker were able to connect with martinez' head and body doesn't inspire much confidence. if he were to be put in the ring p4p against any of the above fighters i see fairly clear losses for martinez on all counts.
Donaire didn't look all that great last two times out either,
difference is Martinez got the KO twice while Donaire didn't come close
Difference is quality of opposition and moves up in weight class:
Narvaez, undefeated in 37 fights at the time, was the #1 ranked super flyweight and former title holder who was moving up in weight to challenge Donaire for his bantamweight title. Donaire blanked him on all 3 judges score cards 120-108.
In his fight against Vasquez Jr, Donaire himself was moving up to challenge the former super bantamweight champ. this was the second weight division Donaire had jumped in a year and a half. Vasquez was the naturally bigger fighter having had spent his entire career at super bantamweight or higher. Donaire fought the majority of that fight with a broken left hand, evidence of which was seen when the gloves were removed and blood was seen soaking through the wraps. Donaire landed a total of 42% of his punches and 60% power punches.
while judged a split decision, most observers saw Donaire winning easily.
no, he won CLEARLY, I wouldn't say he won easily, when Martinez began to work he dominated his opponent fully, it's not like either KO was from a lucky shot, the guy set it up and effortlessly took both out taking little to no damage himself, Macklin was one of the top out there right now, lets not forget his rip off "loss" to Sturm who many consider #2 or #3 at 160, as for Donaire against Narvaez, who the hell had Narvaez beaten to be considered elite? the real answer is no one
I agree with El Terrible here. Donaire won clearly, but it wasn't easy. Vasquez gave him more problems than anyone anticipated.
Ruthless rocco - Donaire is facing Mijares and Arce next. Really? This is at a time where he could face Rigondeaux or Nishioka. The Mijares and Arce fights put the Rigondeaux and Nishioka fights out for another year, if they are even available then. Consider that prior to the Vasquez and Narvaez fights, the sky was the limit for Donaire. As a result of those fights, his handlers are tempering the level of risk for his next fights.
Vasquez Jr. was very comparable to Macklin. Macklin was ranked number 3 in the middleweight division after essentially beating Sturm in Germany. Vasquez Jr. was ranked number 7 in the division. Granted, the junior featherweight division is a bit deeper than the middleweight division at least at the top, so it evens out. Barker was also ranked in the top ten of the division when Martinez faced him.
In all fairness, Narvaez, is comparable to Sergiy Dzinziruk, a champion at a weight below, moving up in weight to face the champion at the above weight. Martinez figured out Dzinziruk and stopped him in the eighth; Donaire won on the cards in a boring victory.
I can understand why you would have Marquez or Wlad highly ranked in your p4p. If you had Floyd, Manny, Marquez, Wlad, Donaire, Ward, then Sergio, it is what it is. I would disagree but p4p lists are subjective.
My problem with Marquez is that to an extent, it appears he is not facing top guys unless they are big money fights. He's earned that certainly. He is now facing Sergiy Fedchenko who is not ranked in the top ten in any rankings. At least with Sergio, it can be said that he is cleaning out the division while waiting for a big pay day. If he faced Lee next for example, that would mean three top ten guys in a row, and if Chavez Jr. came after Lee, four. I don't see how you fault a guy for that, which is why I don't see how anyone faults Wlad. He's doing what he can do. He didn't set the limits.
My main criticism of Sergio is that he'll face Cotto or Mayweather at 150 or 154, but, when asked about James Kirkland, Kirkland has to come up to 160. I don't understand that. Is that just because he has the leverage in that fight? Why will he only go to 154 for a big name if he truly is a junior middleweight? Is he making more money as a middleweight? Why also is he so excited about facing Chavez Jr. at 160 when he could go on a world tour and face the rest of the middleweight elite? On the other hand, I don't understand why he gets grief for wanting to face Mayweather when Mayweather would be favored in the fight. Taeth keeps bringing up Pacquiao, but Taeth forgets that Roach declined the fight with Martinez because he feels he's too big. So, there is no use speculating. Also, I don't understand the griping about Macklin as an opponent, when his fight against Sturm counts more than anything the other title holders have done, less Sturm.
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
moving up in weight while beating current and former world champs garners more respect from me than a guy who's clearing out a shit division and fighting former domestic champions.
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
moving up in weight while beating current and former world champs garners more respect from me than a guy who's clearing out a shit division and fighting former domestic champions.
moving up in weight when you're already bigger than everyone in that division doesn't really do much for me, which is exactly what Donaire is doing, he should have made the move up in weight ages ago, where as Martinez is already fighting at his natural or a bit above his natural weight, his jump from 154 to 160 was already the same amount weight added on as Donaire's 2 weight jumps
real question is how is beating two guys who aren't considered the top guys in a division any better than sparking an undefeated fighter who has good boxing ability and a size advantage, and the #3 guy at MW? and then going on to STOP both of them
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mars_ax
The real test is, name someone P4P besides Pacquiao, (I don't count Mayweather, he doesn't fight often enough) who deserves to be ranked higher than Martinez, there really isn't anyone.
floyd mayweather
manny pacquiao
juan manuel marquez
nonito donaire
wlad klitchko
martinez has looked less than gifted against his last two opponents who are B level fighters at best. the ease with which macklin and barker were able to connect with martinez' head and body doesn't inspire much confidence. if he were to be put in the ring p4p against any of the above fighters i see fairly clear losses for martinez on all counts.
Eh, you just come off as someone who doesn't like Martinez, most of the P4P rankings have Martinez @ #3., those are just the facts.
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
moving up in weight while beating current and former world champs garners more respect from me than a guy who's clearing out a shit division and fighting former domestic champions.
Do you give a lot of value to WBO/WBA/WBC trinkets? I don't. Objectively, I thought Macklin beat the number two ranked middleweight, Felix Sturm. Thus, even if he doesn't have a belt now, I hold him in high regard in the division.
Dzinziruk was a world champion, as you define it, when Martinez fought him.
Barker is better than his record suggests in my opinion, but I'll grant that is subjective.
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mars_ax
The real test is, name someone P4P besides Pacquiao, (I don't count Mayweather, he doesn't fight often enough) who deserves to be ranked higher than Martinez, there really isn't anyone.
floyd mayweather
manny pacquiao
juan manuel marquez
nonito donaire
wlad klitchko
martinez has looked less than gifted against his last two opponents who are B level fighters at best.
the ease with which macklin and barker were able to connect with martinez' head and body doesn't inspire much confidence. if he were to be put in the ring p4p against any of the above fighters i see fairly clear losses for martinez on all counts.
I agree with ratcatrant's responses in full. I'd just add that Marquez, much as I love watching him, gets hit way more than Martinez, and against worse opposition (Katsidis anyone?).
Floyd and Pac are really the only two I could see above Martinez. I'd put Donaire as 4 (for now -- while I think he'll pick it back up, his last outing was extremely unimpressive; and the MRI showed that he did not, in fact, have a broken hand). And Wlad at 5.
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
shza
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mars_ax
The real test is, name someone P4P besides Pacquiao, (I don't count Mayweather, he doesn't fight often enough) who deserves to be ranked higher than Martinez, there really isn't anyone.
floyd mayweather
manny pacquiao
juan manuel marquez
nonito donaire
wlad klitchko
martinez has looked less than gifted against his last two opponents who are B level fighters at best.
the ease with which macklin and barker were able to connect with martinez' head and body doesn't inspire much confidence. if he were to be put in the ring p4p against any of the above fighters i see fairly clear losses for martinez on all counts.
I agree with ratcatrant's responses in full. I'd just add that Marquez, much as I love watching him, gets hit way more than Martinez, and against worse opposition (Katsidis anyone?).
Floyd and Pac are really the only two I could see above Martinez. I'd put Donaire as 4 (for now -- while I think he'll pick it back up, his last outing was extremely unimpressive; and the MRI showed that he did not, in fact, have a broken hand). And Wlad at 5.
How about Ward and Marquez?
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
guess we'll see what happens if martinez ever fights a top fighter... cause from where i sit he's just not that good.
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
guess we'll see what happens if martinez ever fights a top fighter... cause from where i sit he's just not that good.
Just so we're clear, he beat Kelly Pavlik when he was the lineal middleweight champion, and he beat Paul Williams when he was top 5 p4p on most lists.
Who do you want to see him face?
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
I reckon in addition to Macklin and Barker, Dzinziruk, Williams, and Pavlik must all be fucking bums. :-X
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
shza
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mars_ax
The real test is, name someone P4P besides Pacquiao, (I don't count Mayweather, he doesn't fight often enough) who deserves to be ranked higher than Martinez, there really isn't anyone.
floyd mayweather
manny pacquiao
juan manuel marquez
nonito donaire
wlad klitchko
martinez has looked less than gifted against his last two opponents who are B level fighters at best.
the ease with which macklin and barker were able to connect with martinez' head and body doesn't inspire much confidence. if he were to be put in the ring p4p against any of the above fighters i see fairly clear losses for martinez on all counts.
I agree with ratcatrant's responses in full. I'd just add that Marquez, much as I love watching him, gets hit way more than Martinez, and against worse opposition (Katsidis anyone?).
Floyd and Pac are really the only two I could see above Martinez. I'd put Donaire as 4 (for now -- while I think he'll pick it back up, his last outing was extremely unimpressive; and the MRI showed that he did not, in fact, have a broken hand). And Wlad at 5.
How about Ward and Marquez?
I guess I'd put Ward at 6, though I'm not super committed on that because Kessler and Froch really aren't on the same level as the opponents the top 5 guys have faced (except Wlad, but that's where consistency and longevity come into play). I would love to see Ward move up and fight the Hopkins/Dawson winner (I expect Dawson). To me, that would do way more to solidify his P4P status than fighting Bute, who's even less proven than Kessler or Froch.
Marquez, I don't know. I think he will lose (again) soon, to someone not in the p4p ratings. He obviously has Pacquiao's number but he has not looked P4P-good against anyone else recently. And I really don't think it's fair to completely ignore the embarrassment against Floyd. We can discount it, sure, but the size advantage alone doesn't account for him losing every single second of the fight. I think he matches up poorly against technical boxers. Who's the last one he fought before Floyd -- Chris John? I'd pick Robert Guerrero to beat him tomorrow. I might put Hopkins and Vitali ahead of him on the P4P list. If Dawson looks impressive beating Hopkins, I'd put him up there too.
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
guess we'll see what happens if martinez ever fights a top fighter... cause from where i sit he's just not that good.
Just so we're clear, he beat Kelly Pavlik when he was the lineal middleweight champion, and he beat Paul Williams when he was top 5 p4p on most lists.
Who do you want to see him face?
haha
Exactly. Well said.
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hulk
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
guess we'll see what happens if martinez ever fights a top fighter... cause from where i sit he's just not that good.
Just so we're clear, he beat Kelly Pavlik when he was the lineal middleweight champion, and he beat Paul Williams when he was top 5 p4p on most lists.
Who do you want to see him face?
haha
Exactly. Well said.
i see my post wasn't clear. there's no denying martinez has had a couple of spectacular wins (and a loss and a draw) against against a few of top level opponents a few years ago. what i meant to say was that i think he may be slipping based on his most recent performances. and we'll see how he fares in the future if and when he faces to level opposition again. because he's performed what i feel to be poorly against some basic b level fighters. which i feel lessens his credibility in the P4P rankings. sorry about the confusion on my part.
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hulk
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
guess we'll see what happens if martinez ever fights a top fighter... cause from where i sit he's just not that good.
Just so we're clear, he beat Kelly Pavlik when he was the lineal middleweight champion, and he beat Paul Williams when he was top 5 p4p on most lists.
Who do you want to see him face?
haha
Exactly. Well said.
i see my post wasn't clear. there's no denying martinez has had a couple of spectacular wins (and a loss and a draw) against against a few of top level opponents a few years ago. what i meant to say was that i think he may be slipping based on his most recent performances. and we'll see how he fares in the future if and when he faces to level opposition again. because he's performed what i feel to be poorly against some basic b level fighters. which i feel lessens his credibility in the P4P rankings. sorry about the confusion on my part.
Ruthless, I get your point. I wasn't 100% clear either. I believe he comes on late in fights because a function of his style is that it takes him rounds to figure fighters out. He needs time to find openings. If Macklin had been his usual self, and bum-rushed Sergio, the fight may have been much shorter because he would have left himself open earlier in the fight. Boxers take longer to figure out. The downside of the style is that he leaves himself too little room for error. In the first Paul Williams fight, he didn't completely have Paul Williams figured out by the end of the fight, although I scored the fight for Martinez. As an aside, in the Kermit Cintron fight, he knocked Cintron out in the middle rounds because he had figured it out. It just wasn't called a knock out. If I follow you, you believe that this is more a function of slipping than a style thing. That's fair. We can agree to disagree. Who do you want to see Sergio fight or who at or around his weight class do you believe would be a higher level of opposition and provide a stern test?
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hulk
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
guess we'll see what happens if martinez ever fights a top fighter... cause from where i sit he's just not that good.
Just so we're clear, he beat Kelly Pavlik when he was the lineal middleweight champion, and he beat Paul Williams when he was top 5 p4p on most lists.
Who do you want to see him face?
haha
Exactly. Well said.
i see my post wasn't clear. there's no denying martinez has had a couple of spectacular wins (and a loss and a draw) against against a few of top level opponents a few years ago. what i meant to say was that i think he may be slipping based on his most recent performances. and we'll see how he fares in the future if and when he faces to level opposition again. because he's performed what i feel to be poorly against some basic b level fighters. which i feel lessens his credibility in the P4P rankings. sorry about the confusion on my part.
Ruthless, I get your point. I wasn't 100% clear either. I believe he comes on late in fights because a function of his style is that
it takes him rounds to figure fighters out. He needs time to find openings.
If Macklin had been his usual self, and
bum-rushed Sergio, the fight may have been much shorter because he would have left himself open earlier in the fight. Boxers take longer to figure out. The
downside of the style is that
he leaves himself too little room for error. In the first Paul Williams fight, he didn't completely have Paul Williams figured out by the end of the fight, although I scored the fight for Martinez. As an aside, in the Kermit Cintron fight, he knocked Cintron out in the middle rounds because he had figured it out. It just wasn't called a knock out. If I follow you, you believe that this is more a function of slipping than a style thing. That's fair. We can agree to disagree. Who do you want to see Sergio fight or who at or around his weight class do you believe would be a higher level of opposition and provide a stern test?
the bold text that i have highlighted is the part that makes me believe that martinez is not that good and not deserving of that P4P status. its fair to say that any fighter would fair better if his opponents were more reckless and left themselves open to counter punching. the fact that macklin is a less than stellar fighter and was able to cause martinez trouble because he didn't just bum rush him demonstrates that martinez isn't the factor in his fights as much as his opponent's performance.
as for the williams rematch...that was a well timed lucky punch. he didn't land that because he planned to after, he landed it because williams wasn't even watching what he was doing. in martinez you see calculated genius. i see luck and perseverance. they say you gotta be good to be lucky---but luck does not equal P4P greatness.
as for who i want to see sergio fight... i don't care. the fact that he has little strong opposition at his chosen weight class isn't my concern. but the fact that he can clean out a division with no depth doesn't ensure his P4P status.
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hulk
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ruthless rocco
guess we'll see what happens if martinez ever fights a top fighter... cause from where i sit he's just not that good.
Just so we're clear, he beat Kelly Pavlik when he was the lineal middleweight champion, and he beat Paul Williams when he was top 5 p4p on most lists.
Who do you want to see him face?
haha
Exactly. Well said.
i see my post wasn't clear. there's no denying martinez has had a couple of spectacular wins (and a loss and a draw) against against a few of top level opponents a few years ago. what i meant to say was that i think he may be slipping based on his most recent performances. and we'll see how he fares in the future if and when he faces to level opposition again. because he's performed what i feel to be poorly against some basic b level fighters. which i feel lessens his credibility in the P4P rankings. sorry about the confusion on my part.
Ruthless, I get your point. I wasn't 100% clear either. I believe he comes on late in fights because a function of his style is that
it takes him rounds to figure fighters out. He needs time to find openings.
If Macklin had been his usual self, and
bum-rushed Sergio, the fight may have been much shorter because he would have left himself open earlier in the fight. Boxers take longer to figure out. The
downside of the style is that
he leaves himself too little room for error. In the first Paul Williams fight, he didn't completely have Paul Williams figured out by the end of the fight, although I scored the fight for Martinez. As an aside, in the Kermit Cintron fight, he knocked Cintron out in the middle rounds because he had figured it out. It just wasn't called a knock out. If I follow you, you believe that this is more a function of slipping than a style thing. That's fair. We can agree to disagree. Who do you want to see Sergio fight or who at or around his weight class do you believe would be a higher level of opposition and provide a stern test?
the bold text that i have highlighted is the part that makes me believe that martinez is not that good and not deserving of that P4P status. its fair to say that any fighter would fair better if his opponents were more reckless and left themselves open to counter punching. the fact that macklin is a less than stellar fighter and was able to cause martinez trouble because he didn't just bum rush him demonstrates that martinez isn't the factor in his fights as much as his opponent's performance.
as for the williams rematch...
that was a well timed lucky punch. he didn't land that because he planned to after, he landed it because williams wasn't even watching what he was doing. in martinez you see calculated genius. i see luck and perseverance. they say you gotta be good to be lucky---but luck does not equal P4P greatness.
as for who i want to see sergio fight... i don't care. the fact that he has little strong opposition at his chosen weight class isn't my concern. but the fact that he can clean out a division with no depth doesn't ensure his P4P status.
How can a well-timed punch be lucky? Sergio is a counter-puncher and he had him timed. NO doubt. There is NO debate there. Watch the highlights of the first fight on youtube. You'll see Sergio landing that punch multiple times.
Why do you consider Macklin pedestrian? I say Macklin gives any middleweight from top to bottom of the top ten a tough fight.
What did Sergio do wrong? Most people predicted a late-round KO and that's exactly what happened.
Sergio is the best of the crop at two weight classes meriting p4p ranking.
He's like Rodney Dangerfield - he can't get no respect.
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
obviously well timed... or else it wouldn't have been a ko punch.
lucky cause i don't think he wrote about it in his diary the night before.
he ain't no rodney dangerfield.... more like jimmy kimmel.
Re: Why is HBO so bias against Sergio Martinez ?
Not to butt in .. but that punched was planned, timed and executed. Not only had he landed it many times before, but he knew williams would be there for so much, he threw it blindly. He knew the second it landed, the fight was over. He actually started to walk away without so much as a look back before Williams hit the mat. POP.."...now who do i see about getting paid?.." Thud...
