Marquez-Naz? Why did Marquez blatantly refuse to fight Naz? Fact.

[Fenster]

AdamGB - Tripped over his words? Agenda? You're interpreting Fenster's totally inoffensive question utterly wrong.

I asked... even if Marquez was guaranteed a KO loss why would he refuse a HUGE career high payday? Why turn the fight down even if he believed he would lose? He refused a $500,000 payday for a $5000 one. A very puzzling course of action, surely?. I have NEVER once said he would be KO'd.

Titofan - Assumption 1: is a 100% verifiable fact. If you want to ignore it that's fine by me. Assumptions 2, 3 and 4: have NEVER been called "fact" by Fenster at any point during this fantastic thread (that both you and AdamGB think is boring/pointless/tired but can't stop replying too).

Mars_ax - what an extremely pertient observation. Although I have never studied law, I do rather enjoy John Grisham adaptations.

[TitoFan]

AdamGB - Tripped over his words? Agenda? You're interpreting Fenster's totally inoffensive question utterly wrong.

I asked... even if Marquez was guaranteed a KO loss why would he refuse a HUGE career high payday? Why turn the fight down even if he believed he would lose? He refused a $500,000 payday for a $5000 one. A very puzzling course of action, surely?. I have NEVER once said he would be KO'd.

Titofan - Assumption 1: is a 100% verifiable fact. If you want to ignore it that's fine by me. Assumptions 2, 3 and 4: have NEVER been called "fact" by Fenster at any point during this fantastic thread (that both you and AdamGB think is boring/pointless/tired but can't stop replying too).

Mars_ax - what an extremely pertient observation. Although I have never studied law, I do rather enjoy John Grisham adaptations.

Out of morbid curiosity.... show me ONE quote from JMM where he says he'd rather not fight Naz.
That's the ONLY way you can use the word "verifiable". If not, it continues falling under the category of "assumption."

[Fenster]

AdamGB - Tripped over his words? Agenda? You're interpreting Fenster's totally inoffensive question utterly wrong.

I asked... even if Marquez was guaranteed a KO loss why would he refuse a HUGE career high payday? Why turn the fight down even if he believed he would lose? He refused a $500,000 payday for a $5000 one. A very puzzling course of action, surely?. I have NEVER once said he would be KO'd.

Titofan - Assumption 1: is a 100% verifiable fact. If you want to ignore it that's fine by me. Assumptions 2, 3 and 4: have NEVER been called "fact" by Fenster at any point during this fantastic thread (that both you and AdamGB think is boring/pointless/tired but can't stop replying too).

Mars_ax - what an extremely pertient observation. Although I have never studied law, I do rather enjoy John Grisham adaptations.

Out of morbid curiosity.... show me ONE quote from JMM where he says he'd rather not fight Naz.
That's the ONLY way you can use the word "verifiable". If not, it continues falling under the category of "assumption."

TitoFan - there is no need to apologise...

Featherweight Marquez said no to Hamed

Juan Manuel Marquez conceded Friday that he turned down a fight with Prince Naseem Hamed, the World Boxing Organization featherweight champion. "I had been waiting two years," said Marquez, speaking through a translator. "Now they want the fight. I wasn't prepared."

"Hamed is difficult to fight. Hamed is like a wrestler," Marquez said. "He will toss you around if he can. I'll have to knock him out to get the victory."

Marquez said he would like to fight Hamed as the champion of one of the other sanctioning bodies. Otherwise, Marquez said, fighting Hamed "is not on even terms."

Nacho Beristain, Marquez's manager, said: "They want to get us when all of our energies are gone (from negotiating)," Beristain said. "We never want to fight (Hamed). Who do they think they are? They came out with an offer of $400,000. It is not worth it."

LAS VEGAS RJ:SPORTS: Featherweight Marquez said no to H...

There you go.

1. Proof that Marquez admits refusing to face Naz. Fact.

2. Proof that Marquez wanted a title first. Fact.

3. Proof that Marquez manager "NEVER wants to fight Hamed." Fact.

4. Proof that Marquez turned down a career high payday (at the time). Fact. (research that if you don't believe me, although trust me, it's a fact)

5. Proof that every single thing Fenster has said is verifiable fact. Fact.

Whoomp there it is!

[ruthless rocco]

AdamGB - Tripped over his words? Agenda? You're interpreting Fenster's totally inoffensive question utterly wrong.

I asked... even if Marquez was guaranteed a KO loss why would he refuse a HUGE career high payday? Why turn the fight down even if he believed he would lose? He refused a $500,000 payday for a $5000 one. A very puzzling course of action, surely?. I have NEVER once said he would be KO'd.

Titofan - Assumption 1: is a 100% verifiable fact. If you want to ignore it that's fine by me. Assumptions 2, 3 and 4: have NEVER been called "fact" by Fenster at any point during this fantastic thread (that both you and AdamGB think is boring/pointless/tired but can't stop replying too).

Mars_ax - what an extremely pertient observation. Although I have never studied law, I do rather enjoy John Grisham adaptations.

Out of morbid curiosity.... show me ONE quote from JMM where he says he'd rather not fight Naz.
That's the ONLY way you can use the word "verifiable". If not, it continues falling under the category of "assumption."

TitoFan - there is no need to apologise...

Featherweight Marquez said no to Hamed

Juan Manuel Marquez conceded Friday that he turned down a fight with Prince Naseem Hamed, the World Boxing Organization featherweight champion. "I had been waiting two years," said Marquez, speaking through a translator. "Now they want the fight. I wasn't prepared."

"Hamed is difficult to fight. Hamed is like a wrestler," Marquez said. "He will toss you around if he can. I'll have to knock him out to get the victory."

Marquez said he would like to fight Hamed as the champion of one of the other sanctioning bodies. Otherwise, Marquez said, fighting Hamed "is not on even terms."

Nacho Beristain, Marquez's manager, said: "They want to get us when all of our energies are gone (from negotiating)," Beristain said. "We never want to fight (Hamed). Who do they think they are? They came out with an offer of $400,000. It is not worth it."

LAS VEGAS RJ:SPORTS: Featherweight Marquez said no to H...

There you go.

1. Proof that Marquez admits refusing to face Naz. Fact.

2. Proof that Marquez wanted a title first. Fact.

3. Proof that Marquez manager "NEVER wants to fight Hamed." Fact.

4. Proof that Marquez turned down a career high payday (at the time). Fact. (research that if you don't believe me, although trust me, it's a fact)

5. Proof that every single thing Fenster has said is verifiable fact. Fact.

Whoomp there it is!

well there you go... all the answers to your question are right there in your post.

case solved.

thread closed.

(btw referring to yourself in the third person makes you look like a douche. thats something we can all agree on.)

[antimoron]

what year is it? i loss track about everything here in saddo..
who's gonna be Naz next opponent?

[ruthless rocco]

what year is it? i loss track about everything here in saddo..
who's gonna be Naz next opponent?

hamed buffet.jpg

he's going for that KO in under 60 seconds.

[Master]

Fenster, what started out as a recycled thread that you started for a laugh, I bet you are now regretting it.

[Abelardus]

AdamGB - Tripped over his words? Agenda? You're interpreting Fenster's totally inoffensive question utterly wrong.

I asked... even if Marquez was guaranteed a KO loss why would he refuse a HUGE career high payday? Why turn the fight down even if he believed he would lose? He refused a $500,000 payday for a $5000 one. A very puzzling course of action, surely?. I have NEVER once said he would be KO'd.

Titofan - Assumption 1: is a 100% verifiable fact. If you want to ignore it that's fine by me. Assumptions 2, 3 and 4: have NEVER been called "fact" by Fenster at any point during this fantastic thread (that both you and AdamGB think is boring/pointless/tired but can't stop replying too).

Mars_ax - what an extremely pertient observation. Although I have never studied law, I do rather enjoy John Grisham adaptations.

Out of morbid curiosity.... show me ONE quote from JMM where he says he'd rather not fight Naz.
That's the ONLY way you can use the word "verifiable". If not, it continues falling under the category of "assumption."

TitoFan - there is no need to apologise...

Featherweight Marquez said no to Hamed

Juan Manuel Marquez conceded Friday that he turned down a fight with Prince Naseem Hamed, the World Boxing Organization featherweight champion. "I had been waiting two years," said Marquez, speaking through a translator. "Now they want the fight. I wasn't prepared."

"Hamed is difficult to fight. Hamed is like a wrestler," Marquez said. "He will toss you around if he can. I'll have to knock him out to get the victory."

Marquez said he would like to fight Hamed as the champion of one of the other sanctioning bodies. Otherwise, Marquez said, fighting Hamed "is not on even terms."

Nacho Beristain, Marquez's manager, said: "They want to get us when all of our energies are gone (from negotiating)," Beristain said. "We never want to fight (Hamed). Who do they think they are? They came out with an offer of $400,000. It is not worth it."

LAS VEGAS RJ:SPORTS: Featherweight Marquez said no to H...

There you go.

1. Proof that Marquez admits refusing to face Naz. Fact.

2. Proof that Marquez wanted a title first. Fact.

3. Proof that Marquez manager "NEVER wants to fight Hamed." Fact.

4. Proof that Marquez turned down a career high payday (at the time). Fact. (research that if you don't believe me, although trust me, it's a fact)

5. Proof that every single thing Fenster has said is verifiable fact. Fact.

Whoomp there it is!

Dude the links you provide seem like crap.

[AdamGB]

Your agenda is that you want us to circle jerk about how 'special this little naz cunt fella' was'.

And it's a FACT that you went from saying a KO loss for JMM was guaranteed to saying that you never said JMM would definetly lose.

JMM has fought all comers over his career, turning down a certain date once is not the same as continuely avoiding a fight all together.

After his humiliating, 12 round shut out embaressment loss (the one that DID stop him EVER being a great) I'm sure that Hamed could have pursued another fight with the likes of JMM (who in your words was a nobody compared to Hamed) but instead he chose not to, sulking off without even retiring properly. Fact

This was because a GUARANTEED 2nd hiliarious, embarassingly one sided beat down to only the 2nd elite he'd faced would have deleted any legacy he had. Fact

But this is besides the point, you don't actually want to discuss the fighters who Hamed should have fought... All that will keep you happy is a circle jerk over the goblin fella.

I looked up 'fact, discuss' in the dictionary and it just said 'verb: humoring and agreeing with a hamed fan boy'

[Fenster]

Adam GB,

"fanboy" "agenda" "circle jerk" "naz is a cunt" "goblin" "guaranteed humiliating 2nd loss" "Marquez fights all-comers" etc

What are you talking about?

None of these points have a single thing to do with the original question. You either have an opinion on why Marquez ducked Naz, at this particular time, or you don't. It really is that simple.

Even if Marquez believed he would suffer a devastating KO loss inside 60 seconds he would still have gone on to be great.

Is that not a perfectly reasonable assumption? Marquez greatness would not be defined by a KO loss to Naz. That's all i'm saying.

[AdamGB]

Pfff, come on Fenster. Don't try and be cute... It doesn't suit you, you're asking loaded questions, inferring things or just flatout stating bollocks in the same sentances as your redundant question. That's why you're getting more than just one answer.

Keep repeating the same patter and maybe you'll get me to inadvertantly say what you want...

I agree with one thing you've said. A fighter with a great legacy is a fightet with a strong enough record that a single loss doesn't destroy it. If your legacy is sensationaly, devistatingly, stunningly damaged by a single loss then you can't have been that good,

Jmm has fought several good or flat out great fighters, his record is rich enough that he can afford a loss and still have plenty of change left over.

Its a shame a single loss bankrupt your boy's credibility though.

I shouldn't be too cruel, seeing as it's your birthday:
Why did Marquez duck Hamed? He was fearful of Hameds masterful boxing skills and physical prowess. Boy, that little Naz fella was something special









Whatever happened to him?

[TitoFan]

Adam GB,


Even if Marquez believed he would suffer a devastating KO loss inside 60 seconds he would still have gone on to be great.

Is that not a perfectly reasonable assumption? Marquez greatness would not be defined by a KO loss to Naz. That's all i'm saying.

Wow dude. You are one SICK, WARPED puppy. How on EARTH do you get "Even if Marquez believed he would suffer a devastating KO loss inside 60 seconds" from your bullshit quotes on a previous post?!? You just gave us the rope to hang you with. All I see in Marquez's (and his corner) quotes are BUSINESS concerns. Nothing more. In addition.... JMM has all the right in the world to refuse a fight on Naz's terms. Why should he yield to that clown?

You, sir, are a MASTER at the art of twisting logic to make it suit your sick agenda. Listen to your f*cking self, for crying out loud. Are you this way in real life? What you're doing here is a classic case of the backhanded compliment. Oh sure...... JMM is an all-time great. And would've STILL been an all-time great had he suffered a devastating KO loss inside 60 seconds to the EVEN GREATER NAZ!!! Just stop it bro!! I'm busting a kidney here laughing so hard. You even dress it up for us: Devastating KO loss inside 60 seconds You give us a time and everything.

"Marquez's greatness would not be defined by a KO loss to Naz." That's f*cking brilliant, bro!! Forget the KO part..... that's a foregone conclusion. What's being debated here is whether Marquez would still be considered an all-time great. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Bro, if you're not some sleazy, ambulance-chasing lawyer........ you've totally missed the boat. I gotta hand it to you, bro. The true mark of a delusional lunatic is that he has totally convinced himself that what he's saying is the absolute truth. No "I think"........ no "I firmly believe"....... no "I strongly feel"...... none of that crap. It's the DAMN TRUTH..... but I'm throwing you guys another statement (like a smokescreen), so we can debate THAT.

F*cking unbelievable........