Where does everyone have J.M Marquez in their P4P ratings?

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

I just wanna know...

[Tysonbruno]

P4P#2 because thats what he is

[Jimanuel Boogustus]

Okay then

[BIG H]

P4P#2 because thats what he is

How did you score the 2 fights with Pac ?

[Kev]

Number 3

He's a terrific fighter but a draw and a loss to Manny,a loss to Chris John and wins over Barrera, Juarez and Casamayor isn't a Calzaghe beating resume

[XaduBoxer]

Number 3

He's a terrific fighter but a draw and a loss to Manny,a loss to Chris John and wins over Barrera, Juarez and Casamayor isn't a Calzaghe beating resume

Well said Master Bilbo...
.

[ICB]

P4P number 1 he beat Chris John and Manny Pacquiao twice.

[leftylee]

1.Pac
2.Joe.
3. B Hop.
4. JMM

[ICB]

Number 3

He's a terrific fighter but a draw and a loss to Manny,a loss to Chris John and wins over Barrera, Juarez and Casamayor isn't a Calzaghe beating resume

Bilbo have you seen the Chris John fight ? that was a robbery JMM won that quite comfortably by atleast 3 rounds.

[Kev]

Number 3

He's a terrific fighter but a draw and a loss to Manny,a loss to Chris John and wins over Barrera, Juarez and Casamayor isn't a Calzaghe beating resume

Bilbo have you seen the Chris John fight ? that was a robbery JMM won that quite comfortably by atleast 3 rounds.

So not only do we not pay attention to world title trinket belts anymore but even the actual oficial fight results arn't important either?

If he lost the fight he lost he lost the fight. If he got robbed or not it still counts as a loss and you can't count it as a win.

For what's it worth I've not seen the Chris John fight.

I've only seen highlights of the first Pacqiaio fight, actually watched the whole fight but I wasn't paying enough attention to score it, but it seems the general consensus was that he won most of the rounds after getting out the first.

His rematch with Pacquaio I didn't score rbr but I had the impression it was a very very close fight that Manny was lucky to win seeing as Marquez was the champ, although as nobody regards the belts as worth a damn any more it's a bit rich that some people insist you still have to 'beat the champ' whilst not acknowledging the belt that makes him a champ in the first place!

But I do feel that young, media friendly, income generating fighters tend to always do better with the judges.

I mean Manny against Marquez, Calzaghe against Hopkins, Dawson against Johnson, Hatton against Collazo, Taylor against Hopkins in all cases in these very close fights it does seem that the more box office friendly fighter with the commercial appeal seems to be favoured. Even Casamayor's win over Santa Cruz, there was no doubt that the boxing world wanted Casamayor vs Juan Diaz at that time and Santa Cruz wouldn't have been a popular winner.

Not saying any of these decisions were 'wrong' well aprt from the Santa Cruz robbery but sometimes in hindsight there almost seems like a sense of inevitability about the scoring.


Still just becuase you don't agree with a result doesn't mean you can change it

[ICB]

Number 3

He's a terrific fighter but a draw and a loss to Manny,a loss to Chris John and wins over Barrera, Juarez and Casamayor isn't a Calzaghe beating resume

Bilbo have you seen the Chris John fight ? that was a robbery JMM won that quite comfortably by atleast 3 rounds.

So not only do we not pay attention to world title trinket belts anymore but even the actual oficial fight results arn't important either?

If he lost the fight he lost he lost the fight. If he got robbed or not it still counts as a loss and you can't count it as a win.

For what's it worth I've not seen the Chris John fight.

I've only seen highlights of the first Pacqiaio fight, actually watched the whole fight but I wasn't paying enough attention to score it, but it seems the general consensus was that he won most of the rounds after getting out the first.

His rematch with Pacquaio I didn't score rbr but I had the impression it was a very very close fight that Manny was lucky to win seeing as Marquez was the champ, although as nobody regards the belts as worth a damn any more it's a bit rich that some people insist you still have to 'beat the champ' whilst not acknowledging the belt that makes him a champ in the first place!

But I do feel that young, media friendly, income generating fighters tend to always do better with the judges.

I mean Manny against Marquez, Calzaghe against Hopkins, Dawson against Johnson, Hatton against Collazo, Taylor against Hopkins in all cases in these very close fights it does seem that the more box office friendly fighter with the commercial appeal seems to be favoured. Even Casamayor's win over Santa Cruz, there was no doubt that the boxing world wanted Casamayor vs Juan Diaz at that time and Santa Cruz wouldn't have been a popular winner.

Not saying any of these decisions were 'wrong' well aprt from the Santa Cruz robbery but sometimes in hindsight there almost seems like a sense of inevitability about the scoring.


Still just becuase you don't agree with a result doesn't mean you can change it

Bilbo no offense here but i think you actually need to watch the fight first, before you make a comment on it. It was a robbery and its widely regarded as a robbery, if you want the fight just tell me. And i'll PM you the fight.

[Taeth]

I have him after Pacquiao, Calzaghe if he still fighting, and last but not least Hopkins. IMO they are all better than him or in Pacquiao's case similar, but came out on top

[GAME]

I voted 2 just behind Calzaghe but i find it hard to put him infront of Hopkins so

1. Joe
2. Hopkins
3. JMM

[CFH]

I voted 2 just behind Calzaghe but i find it hard to put him infront of Hopkins so

1. Joe
2. Hopkins
3. JMM

No Pac?

[CFH]

I'd have him 2 or 3.

1. Pac
2. JC/JMM
3. JC/JMM
4. Hop.