Marquez Wanted Manny Pacquiao Bout For Pride

[Williamb45]

You can't deny the fact that after the fight those Mexicans and haters will just say Marquez is 34 and a washed up fighter period.. l0l...... hahahaaha

First Statement: Pac have no chance against Marquez.. JMM will counter him to a UD..

2nd statement: After Marquez lost, he becames old and washed up fighter

hahahahahahahaha

Depending on how he looses or wins. If he looks like Castillo did in his match against Hatton then he is old. If he looks like Mosly did VS Cotto then he is not.

[kasangga]

You can't deny the fact that after the fight those Mexicans and haters will just say Marquez is 34 and a washed up fighter period.. l0l...... hahahaaha

First Statement: Pac have no chance against Marquez.. JMM will counter him to a UD..

2nd statement: After Marquez lost, he becames old and washed up fighter

hahahahahahahaha

Always happens with every Mexican legend that Pac sends to retirement.
Before the fight, their Mexican fans all say that their champ will school Pacquiao; that Pac is not an intelligent boxer; and other bunch of crap.

After Manny proves them wrong, Presto!
Pac gets blamed for fighting a washed up, poor old man. It's really pathetic the excuses you hear just to deny Pac the credit he deserves.

[freedom213]

who has improved most since they first fought; Pacman or Marquez? Marquez has definitely absorbed more damage in his in-between fights

[Papa Ace]

who has improved most since they first fought; Pacman or Marquez? Marquez has definitely absorbed more damage in his in-between fights

Good, Ill take note of that it could be another legitimate excuse on March 15

[Bare Knuckle KO]

barrera said the exact same **** and during their fight he didnt do ****. all he did was to avoid getting punched so he wouldnt get knocked down

[kasangga]

Oh cmon man, Pac didn't send Barera or Morales into retirement. Those guys have had their run, just so happens that they lost their last fight to Pac.

With all due respect, my friend. I beg to disagree.

In my book I keep it simple. The last fighter that beats a boxer before that said boxer quits pro boxing is the one who sent him to retirement. You see, that particular boxer, ...old as he is, ...took another shot at winning. He got paid, correct? Therefore, he was still active when he fought the last guy. Since you consider him washed up, would you prefer calling him already retired as they face up in the ring? That would be a very interesting introduction as they prepare to start the first round.

There is no point in dwelling on the time that a boxer was "prime" and comparing him to someone he fought and lost to. That boxer exists only in the dreams and fantasies of the fans who speculate on the performance that he could have done. If we all indulged in this activity, who would decide when a boxer was "prime", and who would decide who wins?

Endless debates will follow, I'm sure.

[MakeDamnSure]

Depending on how he looses or wins. If he looks like Castillo did in his match against Hatton then he is old. If he looks like Mosly did VS Cotto then he is not.

It does not depends it is a fact.. l0l right now they are saying Marquez will school Pacquiao.. After that Marquez will be proclaimed as a washed up fighter l0l.... That's what you call losers.. hahaha

[kasangga]

Back to the topic:

Marquez is not doing this fight for pride. That's the height of hypocrisy!

He swallowed his pride and took a pay cut out of desperation. Anyway, he stands to get a lesser but reasonable paycheck, --- more than he could ever hope to generate by himself if he fought another boxer in case Pac walked away from him.

[BennyST]

With all due respect, my friend. I beg to disagree.

In my book I keep it simple. The last fighter that beats a boxer before that said boxer quits pro boxing is the one who sent him to retirement. You see, that particular boxer, ...old as he is, ...took another shot at winning. He got paid, correct? Therefore, he was still active when he fought the last guy. Since you consider him washed up, would you prefer calling him already retired as they face up in the ring? That would be a very interesting introduction as they prepare to start the first round.

There is no point in dwelling on the time that a boxer was "prime" and comparing him to someone he fought and lost to. That boxer exists only in the dreams and fantasies of the fans who speculate on the performance that he could have done. If we all indulged in this activity, who would decide when a boxer was "prime", and who would decide who wins?

Endless debates will follow, I'm sure.

What the hell are you talking about? This is just dribble. Both of the fighters were going to retire after their fights with Pacquiao. Barrera did, but Morales decided to give it one more shot for his fans to get that elusive fourth title, which he couldn't.

Keeping it simple is fine but don't knock other people that come onto a discussion forum about boxing to discuss...BOXING! Thats the whole point of this thing.

There is a difference between a prime boxer getting retired (Barrera vs Hamed is a perfect example) by someone who beats him and another boxer saying 'I'm retiring after this fight' because he is old and can't keep doing it. That is pretty simple as well isn't it?

The fact is Pacquiao didn't retire anybody because they were both going to retire anyway.

Also, Morales fought Diaz after he fought Pac, therefore, by your guys reasoning, Diaz retired Morales, not Pacquiao!

[kasangga]

What the hell are you talking about? This is just dribble. Both of the fighters were going to retire after their fights with Pacquiao. Barrera did, but Morales decided to give it one more shot for his fans to get that elusive fourth title, which he couldn't.

Keeping it simple is fine but don't knock other people that come onto a discussion forum about boxing to discuss...BOXING! Thats the whole point of this thing.

There is a difference between a prime boxer getting retired (Barrera vs Hamed is a perfect example) by someone who beats him and another boxer saying 'I'm retiring after this fight' because he is old and can't keep doing it. That is pretty simple as well isn't it?

The fact is Pacquiao didn't retire anybody because they were both going to retire anyway.

Also, Morales fought Diaz after he fought Pac, therefore, by your guys reasoning, Diaz retired Morales, not Pacquiao!

All I’m saying is to let the record speak for itself.

Letting fighters face off in the ring and later on deny the winner the credit that is due him is unfair. It’s sometimes hard for the fans to accept that their champion has lost, but nobody lasts forever. There is no point on harping about the time when the losing boxer was at his “prime” and how he would have won the fight, ... simply because that match-up never happened and downright impossible unless we have a time machine. Well, I would agree perhaps to a friendly discussion over a bottle of beer, but then, after all has been said and done, we must let the record stand.

If Morales never climb the ring to fight again, then let it be known that Diaz retired him. I have no problems with that. Just let it be known also that Pac beat him two times out of three. And that Barrera never in his life beat Pac, having lost against him in two outings. These are events that ACTUALLY happened. The problem with Pac haters is that they are in complete denial of these facts. They choose to acknowledge only the first Morales-Pacquiao fight and claim that Pac would never beat a “prime” Morales. How, in heaven’s name, can we determine that without going into pointless debates?

Regarding Barrera: It’s true that he has been a legend in his own time. His great record and accomplishments speak for themselves, but let us accept the reality that he met his match in Pacquiao. Again, the fans fault Pac for “beating up an old man”. So, what was Pacquiao to do? Was he to let himself lose the rematch? He didn’t force Barrera to fight him again. Barrera wanted to fight him for a final paycheck and Manny just obliged him. He even went easy on Barrera and look what he got in return.

Yet you say:

“The fact is Pacquiao didn't retire anybody because they were both going to retire anyway.”

I rest my case.