If Martinez is the best fighter in the sport how about fighting Ward, Kessler, Froch,

[marbleheadmaui]

Here's the problem I have with that. People seem to assume that fighting in the amateurs is some delightful cakewalk where you fight 8 year old girls wearing pillows. In bouts you wear 10oz gloves just like the pros & anyone who boxes to international level will largely be up against full grown men, particularly from Cuba & the former Soviet states. People are trying to hurt you, there's a slightly different focus on scoring, but believe the punches still hurt. It's why I personally factor in amatuer achievements in how I rate someone. Most US boxers will not be teen champs simply for the fact the very best will almost certainly want to represent their country internationally. Not to mention that US boxers have to work about 5x as hard as any other country to win points at Olympics & have to deal with some shocking disruption tactics on the international amateur stage.

I'm not denying it's a tremendous achievement by Manny, but equally I don't think that guys who choose to represent their country in one of the biggest sporting spectacles in the world should have their positions ignored. That aside I agree with the points you & Marble are putting forward, it's ridiculous that he gets heat for not moving to 154 to challenge Martinez or that he's now catching shit for fighting Marquez. To me he's had 3 gimme fights in a row, but Marquez took him to hell so there's no way this is a gimme even if I heavily favour Pac to win (as I did in the Cotto fight, also no gimme).

Nice post!

Fair point on high level amateurs facing grown men. But they are doing so while wearing headgear, with far more protective referees and only for 8-9 minutes (depending on what era we are talking about). So they do not face a huge number of the challenges pros do. Fighting while hurt, fighting while really exhausted, and it is impossible in 8-9 minutes of fighting to have to deal with the same number of adjustments as one will face over 30-36 minutes of fighting. Staying disciplined and focuised for that far longer period is enormously different. It just isn't the same thing. The difference between amateur and pro boxing are at least as big as the difference between college and pro football or Triple A Baseball and the Majore Leagues.

That is not to deny amateur accomplishments (I help out training them from time to time), it is merely to note the differences.

I agree on the referees & the timing, although amateur bouts are generally fought at a quicker pace because of that time difference. Where I disagree is headgear as to my mind it makes no difference to the force of a blow & I find it inhibits my head movement as this is a game of inches & it adds a little. Although at least it does prevent your face getting smashed up by headclashes. I also disagree on having to fight when hurt, if anything I believe this is where many top pros first have to learn to do this. It was a point Richardson made before the Mayweather-Mosley fight that he'd seen Floyd hit hard in the ams & that's when as he called it 'the dragon comes out'.

What I'd argue is that being a top amateur is equivalent to the early fights in any pro fighter's career assuming they're matched against guys with in or around .500 records. I think that until Chokchai, Pacquiao hadn't faced anyone who should have been remotely a threat given his amateur record & natural gifts (ignoring Torrecampo obviously). I suppose my point is that you may well face better opponents as an amateur than you will early in your pro career.

Don't disagree at all. But you are doing so in far less risky and therefore less demanding environment.

There are reasons that pros don't come right out of the gate with ten round fights.