MANNY PACQUIAO-JUAN MANUEL MARQUEZ 4 IS A RERUN!

December 7th, 2012 By Kevin Perry

FILIPINO & MEXICAN GO HEAD TO HEAD IN ANOTHER EVEN SCRAP

Los Angeles, CA- It’s apparent that this bout didn’t need to happen. For Juan Manuel Marquez(54-6-1, 39 KOs) though it’s his opportunity to put a W in the win column against Manny Pacquiao (54-4-2, 38 KOs), From my perspective the Filipino Congressman is in a no win proposition. Unless you count the payday of course. Regardless of the naysayers, Manny has already won two of the previous bouts, albeit by a close margin.

Juan Manuel Marquez-Manny Pacquiao in 2004

The first bout in which Marquez was knocked down three times in the first round, only to comeback strong in the remaining rounds to salvage a draw, was marred in controversy. Judge Bert Clements, admittedly didn’t know that he could score a round 10-6, which would be the correct score for Pacquiao getting three knockdowns. Thus he scored it 10-7, which led to his 113-113 score. As much as people make of the closeness of that bout, it’s inconceivable that Marquez dominated enough of the remaining rounds to either win or make a case for a draw. The inadequate at best Guy Jutras, had the bout an incomprehensible 115-110, basically giving Marquez the benefit of the doubt in every close round. One must also consider that many referee’s would have stopped that bout after the third knockdown. In this case the “three knockdown” rule was waved and you have to give credit (or blame) referee Joe Cortez for this rivalry.

 

 

WILL A CLEAR VICTOR EMERGE THIS TIME?


It’s been redundantly clear that Marquez has a style the gives the Filipino icon problems. While styles make fights, can the Mexican do anything differently to secure a victory? What made JMM more successful in fights 2 and 3 in the minds of many was his reluctance to engage and his preference to counterpunch. This style helped him stay on his feet in the last bout, however that style led to his largest margin of defeat, a majority decision last November. It’s obvious that once Marquez gets more aggressive with his approach he ends up getting the worst of exchanges, but when he lays back and waits for Pacquiao to make mistakes, he winds up losing many close and crucial rounds. At 39, even with a bulked up incredible body, can he do anything differently to change the minds of the judges?

FIGHT WILL BE CLOSE WITH A CLEAR WINNER

Many are picking Marquez to pull out a victory this time out. All the talk of the judges possibly getting it right this time is just that; talk. All three fights were close, however when you compare scoring criteria, it is more likely than not that effective aggression, or just aggression period trumps ring generalship in the minds of judges. The idea that people expect judges, who are human beings, to not be able to make critical errors in scoring when they literally have ten seconds after a round to turn in a scorecard is unrealistic. It is apparent that when one fighter “appears” to be doing more damage, he is. Much of judging is the perception a judge gets from the action. It’s clear in my mind this is the reason Pacquiao will win this fourth fight and lay all the controversy to rest. The impression the Filipino gives to spectators, especially those who have little or no knowledge of boxing, is that he’s winning. In my mind his ability to leave a lasting impression in the minds of judges in comparison to Marquez’ laid back workman like approach to boxing is the major reason he lost the last two bouts and loses here.

-Kevin Perry

COMMENTS

  1. KP,

    There was NO 3 knockdown rule and Cortez is on the record as saying that he allowed the fight to continue because JMM was not hurt. How is it inconceivable that JMM did enough to win or earn a draw? In fact, many a boxing writer thought just that at the time. Most writers or “Boxing experts even had JMM winning “way” more rounds than Pac after the 1st 2 fights. Just saying…

    SKERGE

    SKERGE on December 7th, 2012 at 2:14 PM
  2. I wasn’t saying the fight should have been stopped by Cortez, I am just stating a lot of referee’s would have stopped the bout after the third knockdown.I applaud him for not stopping it. I was just stating the facts. it wasn’t an opinion. In regards to the decision in the first fight, i find it hard for anyone who’s objective to give one fighter every close round in a fight. Marquez was at a 3 point hole after round one. Jutras score was way off in my view. I can see a case for a draw, but I didn’t see the blowout in rounds many saw it as. Marquez’s miraculous comeback from the knockdowns I believe created an impression that he was doing more than he really was. I beleive many judges give pity rounds to fighters who come back from adversity in a bout. It’s well documented and happens all the time. If you gave Manny round 1 and 2, which I believe he won both clearly, you basically had to give Marquez all the remaining rounds besides two for him to get the draw. i just didn’t see it that way, and Jutras has been known to put in some horrendous scorecards.

    Kevin Perry on December 7th, 2012 at 4:53 PM
  3. 4.5 years ago, you could have sold pacquiao-Marquez rematches every 16 weeks. Today, I would not pay for this fight. My firend says there’s a bar showing it for free and I’m on my way to checking it out only on those terms.

    The only good thing about Pacquiao-Marquez 3 was that the night before I stayed up watching film of the first two fights over and over again for almost 5 hours and enjoying every second of it.

    However, it sure poisned the mind for the next day, as the third fight showed both guys to be a shadow of what they were in 2008. The fight was nowhere near that level.

    The decline of Marquez was predictable and had been on display for a couple of years going into that night. But all that was missing form Pacquiao was more shocking, even knowing that he was looking deceptively dominant againt opponents who were a) declining 2) psyched out (scared) and 3) never as good as Barerra/Marquez/Morales to begin with. But even suspecting that didn;t prepare me for seeing it actually demonstrated.

    This is quite anti-climatic. Wrong age, wrong weight, too familliar.

    In his last fight against that terrified Russia guy, marquez lowering his left hand and then unfolding a lead hook was slow enough to pass for time lapse photography – guy was just too intimidated to punch with him.

    Yet you can’t count marquez out because i suspect he wants it more than Pacquiao, and the styles just match up well for him. He is COMFORTABLE against Pacquiao! While other guys look like they have no idea what manny’s foing or where the punches are coming from, Marquez looks like he knows exactly what’s comming.

    So I’m not surprised by some people picking Marquez, it’s entirely arguable. But I’m goign to say he’s just not able to produce and maintain the activity level needed to sell a decision to the judges – I don;t think he’ll get a worse version of Pacquiao than last time, so same result.

    Ten Count on December 8th, 2012 at 8:01 PM
  4. Wow, I guess now we will see if Pedro accuses Marquez, age 39, who never hurt Manny in 3 previous fights, of using PED’s. I am shocked by the physique and power he exhibited at 39 years old. Credit to Marquez for the win, but if you think for one second that Manny was juicing, you have to wonder what drugs Marquez was taking to do that damage.

    Richard on December 8th, 2012 at 11:01 PM
  5. Well, well, well. Pacquiao just go KTFO’ed, and Freddy Roach’s bad year got much, much worse. Kinda feel bad for Pacquiao, but then again, he’s been coasting on his power for years and spending less and less time in LA training like he should have. Don’t feel bad at all for Roach, though. He’s been getting more and more arrogant as his success has increased, so it’s good to see him drop back down to earth. And REAL glad that Arum is now short one cash cow.

    Keith on December 8th, 2012 at 11:14 PM
  6. Manny should have showed up off his PED and took a dive for Floyd for 100m.

    pirate on December 8th, 2012 at 11:36 PM
  7. Richard, payback is a ……………….you know!

    Pedro Fernandez on December 9th, 2012 at 12:07 AM
  8. Richard,

    The difference is when Roach accused JMM, JMM immediately said; “Lets both test then”. When Floyd accused Pac, Pac sued him. Now, both Pac and Floyd lost out on the biggest payday in Boxing history. It wasn’t the steroids brother, it was the beans, rice, & the overhand right.

    SKERGE

    SKERGE on December 9th, 2012 at 1:40 PM
  9. KP,
    Point taken about Cortez. I didn’t see Floyd beating Castillo the 1st time, so I get your point (but don’t agree on the outcome of Pac vs JMM 1).

    SKERGE

    SKERGE on December 9th, 2012 at 1:43 PM
  10. Kevin…kevin….you fell flatter… harder…and more square in the face….than paq did with this article.

    tone on December 10th, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Leave a Reply

Powered by Crowd Ignite