Same old, marquez can’t beat pacquiao, fourth fight is a waste of time.

Your next Mayweather!:boxing:

ROFL, so biased. About rounds 11-12.. people are saying Marquez did nothing but that's not true imo. Pacquiao did absolutely nothing in round 12, he was terrible saturday and marquez got robbed. Period.

when you have to play stuff in slow motion to convience yourself a p4p#1 fighter at ww beat a 38 year old lightweight.that tells the whole story lol! I was convinced Pac won the fight. This videos just the proof. Watch every captions in this videos.

SAME OLD, SAME OLD, MARQUEZ CAN’T BEAT PACQUIAO, FOURTH FIGHT IS A WASTE OF TIME THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2011 http://www.nowboxing.com/2011/11/same-old-same-old-marquez-cant-beat-pacquiao-fourth-fight-is-a-waste-of-time/21826/ By Don Donatello According to Juan Manuel Marquez he has beaten Manny Pacquiao in all three of their fights. In all three of their meetings Marquez contends that he was robbed of a victory. He also claimed that his loss to Chris John of Indonesia was also a robbery. In Marquez’s lopsided defeat to Floyd Mayweather Jr., Juan and his trainer Nacho Beristain blame the training regimen and Floyd’s weight advantage as the reason why he was so ineffective and therefore lost the fight. For a guy who benefited from bad calls and judgements in the past, Marquez sure does a lot of complaining when the calls don’t go his way. In Marquez’s first fight against Manny Pacquiao, he was the beneficiary of a gift draw from an erroneous scoring by ringside judge Bert Clements. In that fight Marquez was sent to the canvas three times in the first round from Pacquiao’s straight left punch. Judges Guy Jutras and John Stewart correctly gave Pacquiao a 10-6 round in the first round. The experienced judge Bert Clements initially claimed that he did not know that three knockdowns would warrant a 10-6 score under the WBA rules. Bert Clements later admitted that he was wrong and should have awarded Pacquiao a 10-6 round for the first round. In the final scoring, Guy Jutras scored the fight 115-110 for Marquez, judge John Stewart scored it for Pacquiao 115-110. Bert Clements scored it a draw 113-113. If judge Clements had scored the first round correctly, his final scorecard would have been 114-112 for Pacquiao. Thus giving Pacquiao a win by majority decision. But even in the aftermath of Clements announcement of his error, Marquez was the one claiming that he was robbed. In March of 2007, in the 7th round in a fight between Marco Antonio Barrera and Marquez for the WBC Super Featherweight title, Barrera scored with a straight right to knockdown Marquez. The man with the best seat in the house, referee Jay Nady, ruled it a slip. If all the judges in the three fights between Marquez and Pacquiao had scored the fight according to the governing body’s rules, Marquez has not beaten Manny Pacquiao even once. All three fights were won by Manny Pacquiao, according to the official judges at ringside. In each loss that Marquez has suffered at the hand of Pacquiao, Marquez has disagreed with the outcome and claims he should have won all three fights. By the claim of robbery coming from Marquez, one might be led to believe that Marquez fought Pacquiao in Pacquiao’s backyard, the Philippines. All three fights took place in Las Vegas. As of 2008, Mexicans account for 32% of all immigrants living in the USA, Filipinos accounts for 5%. Except for the Godfather movie franchise, the sequel is NEVER better than the original. Manny Pacquiao vs. Juan Manuel Marquez 1st was the best, it had three knockdowns, back and forth action, blood and drama. The second was a lot less of everything, less knockdowns, and less drama. JMM went down once in the 3rd round from a short left as he came in low to throw a body punch to Pacquiao’s left right side. The third fight was less of everything. There were no knockdowns, less action, less punches thrown, and less entertainment value. As one can see, Pacquiao vs Marquez gave you less of what is good with each subsequent fight. One thing that stayed the same in all three fights was the controversial scoring and final score. The other is the the constant claim of robbery from the Marquez camp after each fight. Does Marquez think that he is entitled to win all close rounds? Judges in the US traditionally favor the aggressive fighter who initiates the action when the round is a close one. A possible fourth fight between Marquez and Pacquiao would be the worst one. In oppose of their first fight where both fighters took great risk, each subsequent fight the fighters got more cautious and took less risk. That makes for a much less entertaining fight. In the ring between Marquez and Pacquiao, I did not see much that has changed. Pacquiao’s much ballyhooed improved right hand weapon was MIA. The new and more offensive Marquez was also missing, he was his old counter punching self as he was in all three fights. Pacquiao was his old jab-jab-straight left knockout attempt self. Same old, same old. With that, the outcome is the same in each fight; the judges awarding Pacquiao the decision in a very close fight. And of course, Marquez repeats his claim of being robbed after each fight. There is no reason for a fourth fight that benefits Manny Pacquiao. He has already beaten Marquez three out of three. And every time Manny wins, Marquez and his trainer disparages the judges decision. The latest claim is the worst. Nacho Beritains is now saying he wants the judges from the last fight to be banned for judging in boxing. Shouldn’t Marquez win at least one fight against Pacquiao to warrant a fourth fight? The Filipino fans should counter the Mexican fans that showed up in Vegas in huge numbers. The Marquez fans booed and heckled Pacquiao to no end after the scoring didn’t go their way. By the way it sounded, Pacquiao fans were drowned in a sea of Marquez fans by a factor of 32% to 5%. If a fourth fight is being discussed, let the Pacquiao fans show their displeasure at Marquez’s claim of robbery in all three fights. Let the Pacquiao fans show their disdain for Marquez’s demand that the fourth fight should take place in Mexico. And what about Marquez’s trainer Nacho Beristain demanding $25 million dollars to grant Pacquiao a fourth fight. Grant Pacquiao the opportunity to fight Marquez? Is that what I’m hearing? So according to Marquez and Beristain, Marquez is now the cash cow who dictates the terms of a fight against Pacquiao. I will show my disdain by putting Marquez back in his place, a low PPV selling fighter without Manny Pacquiao. I will not pay for a fourth Marquez/Pacquiao fight. Why would I? Present trend shows that a fourth fight between the two combatants will have less action, less punching, and overall it will be less entertaining and more disappointing. The only thing that a fourth fight will be more of is the amount of complaining of robbery from Juan Manuel Marquez and his trainer. Dude how long have you been watching boxing Mexicans tend to get robbed alot. Take Castillo vs Mayweather, Delahoya vs Mosley Boner got a gift agnist that Mexican fighter There's many I have seen just the list is to long

when you have to play stuff in slow motion to convience yourself a p4p#1 fighter at ww beat a 38 year old lightweight.that tells the whole story

Round 3 Another dominating round by Pacuiao!

Round 2 Pacquiao clearly dominated Marquez in this round by landing more punches.

how can you call marquez washed up and manny went life and death with him??what does that sa about manny?

Just finish watching this video (take notes on every caption). It proves the fight is far from a robbery and Pacquiao clearly won the fight in a close fight. Round 1 close round that can go either way.

news needs links. Post a link or it goes away. Link>>>http://www.nowboxing.com/2011/11/same-old-same-old-marquez-cant-beat-pacquiao-fourth-fight-is-a-waste-of-time/21826/

You just said "Paquiao" and "ring generalship" in the same sentence...

same old, same old, marquez can’t beat pacquiao, fourth fight is a waste of time thursday, november 17, 2011 . news needs links. Post a link or it goes away.

SAME OLD, SAME OLD, MARQUEZ CAN’T BEAT PACQUIAO, FOURTH FIGHT IS A WASTE OF TIME THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2011 By Don Donatello According to Juan Manuel Marquez he has beaten Manny Pacquiao in all three of their fights. In all three of their meetings Marquez contends that he was robbed of a victory. He also claimed that his loss to Chris John of Indonesia was also a robbery. In Marquez’s lopsided defeat to Floyd Mayweather Jr., Juan and his trainer Nacho Beristain blame the training regimen and Floyd’s weight advantage as the reason why he was so ineffective and therefore lost the fight. For a guy who benefited from bad calls and judgements in the past, Marquez sure does a lot of complaining when the calls don’t go his way. In Marquez’s first fight against Manny Pacquiao, he was the beneficiary of a gift draw from an erroneous scoring by ringside judge Bert Clements. In that fight Marquez was sent to the canvas three times in the first round from Pacquiao’s straight left punch. Judges Guy Jutras and John Stewart correctly gave Pacquiao a 10-6 round in the first round. The experienced judge Bert Clements initially claimed that he did not know that three knockdowns would warrant a 10-6 score under the WBA rules. Bert Clements later admitted that he was wrong and should have awarded Pacquiao a 10-6 round for the first round. In the final scoring, Guy Jutras scored the fight 115-110 for Marquez, judge John Stewart scored it for Pacquiao 115-110. Bert Clements scored it a draw 113-113. If judge Clements had scored the first round correctly, his final scorecard would have been 114-112 for Pacquiao. Thus giving Pacquiao a win by majority decision. But even in the aftermath of Clements announcement of his error, Marquez was the one claiming that he was robbed. In March of 2007, in the 7th round in a fight between Marco Antonio Barrera and Marquez for the WBC Super Featherweight title, Barrera scored with a straight right to knockdown Marquez. The man with the best seat in the house, referee Jay Nady, ruled it a slip. If all the judges in the three fights between Marquez and Pacquiao had scored the fight according to the governing body’s rules, Marquez has not beaten Manny Pacquiao even once. All three fights were won by Manny Pacquiao, according to the official judges at ringside. In each loss that Marquez has suffered at the hand of Pacquiao, Marquez has disagreed with the outcome and claims he should have won all three fights. By the claim of robbery coming from Marquez, one might be led to believe that Marquez fought Pacquiao in Pacquiao’s backyard, the Philippines. All three fights took place in Las Vegas. As of 2008, Mexicans account for 32% of all immigrants living in the USA, Filipinos accounts for 5%. Except for the Godfather movie franchise, the sequel is NEVER better than the original. Manny Pacquiao vs. Juan Manuel Marquez 1st was the best, it had three knockdowns, back and forth action, blood and drama. The second was a lot less of everything, less knockdowns, and less drama. JMM went down once in the 3rd round from a short left as he came in low to throw a body punch to Pacquiao’s left right side. The third fight was less of everything. There were no knockdowns, less action, less punches thrown, and less entertainment value. As one can see, Pacquiao vs Marquez gave you less of what is good with each subsequent fight. One thing that stayed the same in all three fights was the controversial scoring and final score. The other is the the constant claim of robbery from the Marquez camp after each fight. Does Marquez think that he is entitled to win all close rounds? Judges in the US traditionally favor the aggressive fighter who initiates the action when the round is a close one. A possible fourth fight between Marquez and Pacquiao would be the worst one. In oppose of their first fight where both fighters took great risk, each subsequent fight the fighters got more cautious and took less risk. That makes for a much less entertaining fight. In the ring between Marquez and Pacquiao, I did not see much that has changed. Pacquiao’s much ballyhooed improved right hand weapon was MIA. The new and more offensive Marquez was also missing, he was his old counter punching self as he was in all three fights. Pacquiao was his old jab-jab-straight left knockout attempt self. Same old, same old. With that, the outcome is the same in each fight; the judges awarding Pacquiao the decision in a very close fight. And of course, Marquez repeats his claim of being robbed after each fight. There is no reason for a fourth fight that benefits Manny Pacquiao. He has already beaten Marquez three out of three. And every time Manny wins, Marquez and his trainer disparages the judges decision. The latest claim is the worst. Nacho Beritains is now saying he wants the judges from the last fight to be banned for judging in boxing. Shouldn’t Marquez win at least one fight against Pacquiao to warrant a fourth fight? The Filipino fans should counter the Mexican fans that showed up in Vegas in huge numbers. The Marquez fans booed and heckled Pacquiao to no end after the scoring didn’t go their way. By the way it sounded, Pacquiao fans were drowned in a sea of Marquez fans by a factor of 32% to 5%. If a fourth fight is being discussed, let the Pacquiao fans show their displeasure at Marquez’s claim of robbery in all three fights. Let the Pacquiao fans show their disdain for Marquez’s demand that the fourth fight should take place in Mexico. And what about Marquez’s trainer Nacho Beristain demanding $25 million dollars to grant Pacquiao a fourth fight. Grant Pacquiao the opportunity to fight Marquez? Is that what I’m hearing? So according to Marquez and Beristain, Marquez is now the cash cow who dictates the terms of a fight against Pacquiao. I will show my disdain by putting Marquez back in his place, a low PPV selling fighter without Manny Pacquiao. I will not pay for a fourth Marquez/Pacquiao fight. Why would I? Present trend shows that a fourth fight between the two combatants will have less action, less punching, and overall it will be less entertaining and more disappointing. The only thing that a fourth fight will be more of is the amount of complaining of robbery from Juan Manuel Marquez and his trainer. Very well said and you can prove it. This is just a case of one fighter failed to impress the judges of his overall performance. Compubox stats is also proving Pacquiao landed and throwing more punches. Pacquiao aggressivenes and overall ring generalship and the stats are all documented. Even if a complaint is filed the outcome will stay the same.

tremendously biased article, terrible The article is only stating FACTS. But in my opinion even if Pac beat Marquez by a wider decision, Marquez and his fans would still cry robbery. It's a no win situation for Pac. Time to move on!

so manny went life and death with a washed up lightweight?

Anything by Don Donatello (fake name by a pinoy writer) is pactard crap

tremendously biased article, terrible

Didn't read, but a 4th fight makes money and if it makes money it makes sense whether we like it or not.

Spam more please.

SAME OLD, SAME OLD, MARQUEZ CAN’T BEAT PACQUIAO, FOURTH FIGHT IS A WASTE OF TIME THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2011 By Don Donatello According to Juan Manuel Marquez he has beaten Manny Pacquiao in all three of their fights. In all three of their meetings Marquez contends that he was robbed of a victory. He also claimed that his loss to Chris John of Indonesia was also a robbery. In Marquez’s lopsided defeat to Floyd Mayweather Jr., Juan and his trainer Nacho Beristain blame the training regimen and Floyd’s weight advantage as the reason why he was so ineffective and therefore lost the fight. For a guy who benefited from bad calls and judgements in the past, Marquez sure does a lot of complaining when the calls don’t go his way. In Marquez’s first fight against Manny Pacquiao, he was the beneficiary of a gift draw from an erroneous scoring by ringside judge Bert Clements. In that fight Marquez was sent to the canvas three times in the first round from Pacquiao’s straight left punch. Judges Guy Jutras and John Stewart correctly gave Pacquiao a 10-6 round in the first round. The experienced judge Bert Clements initially claimed that he did not know that three knockdowns would warrant a 10-6 score under the WBA rules. Bert Clements later admitted that he was wrong and should have awarded Pacquiao a 10-6 round for the first round. In the final scoring, Guy Jutras scored the fight 115-110 for Marquez, judge John Stewart scored it for Pacquiao 115-110. Bert Clements scored it a draw 113-113. If judge Clements had scored the first round correctly, his final scorecard would have been 114-112 for Pacquiao. Thus giving Pacquiao a win by majority decision. But even in the aftermath of Clements announcement of his error, Marquez was the one claiming that he was robbed. In March of 2007, in the 7th round in a fight between Marco Antonio Barrera and Marquez for the WBC Super Featherweight title, Barrera scored with a straight right to knockdown Marquez. The man with the best seat in the house, referee Jay Nady, ruled it a slip. If all the judges in the three fights between Marquez and Pacquiao had scored the fight according to the governing body’s rules, Marquez has not beaten Manny Pacquiao even once. All three fights were won by Manny Pacquiao, according to the official judges at ringside. In each loss that Marquez has suffered at the hand of Pacquiao, Marquez has disagreed with the outcome and claims he should have won all three fights. By the claim of robbery coming from Marquez, one might be led to believe that Marquez fought Pacquiao in Pacquiao’s backyard, the Philippines. All three fights took place in Las Vegas. As of 2008, Mexicans account for 32% of all immigrants living in the USA, Filipinos accounts for 5%. Except for the Godfather movie franchise, the sequel is NEVER better than the original. Manny Pacquiao vs. Juan Manuel Marquez 1st was the best, it had three knockdowns, back and forth action, blood and drama. The second was a lot less of everything, less knockdowns, and less drama. JMM went down once in the 3rd round from a short left as he came in low to throw a body punch to Pacquiao’s left right side. The third fight was less of everything. There were no knockdowns, less action, less punches thrown, and less entertainment value. As one can see, Pacquiao vs Marquez gave you less of what is good with each subsequent fight. One thing that stayed the same in all three fights was the controversial scoring and final score. The other is the the constant claim of robbery from the Marquez camp after each fight. Does Marquez think that he is entitled to win all close rounds? Judges in the US traditionally favor the aggressive fighter who initiates the action when the round is a close one. A possible fourth fight between Marquez and Pacquiao would be the worst one. In oppose of their first fight where both fighters took great risk, each subsequent fight the fighters got more cautious and took less risk. That makes for a much less entertaining fight. In the ring between Marquez and Pacquiao, I did not see much that has changed. Pacquiao’s much ballyhooed improved right hand weapon was MIA. The new and more offensive Marquez was also missing, he was his old counter punching self as he was in all three fights. Pacquiao was his old jab-jab-straight left knockout attempt self. Same old, same old. With that, the outcome is the same in each fight; the judges awarding Pacquiao the decision in a very close fight. And of course, Marquez repeats his claim of being robbed after each fight. There is no reason for a fourth fight that benefits Manny Pacquiao. He has already beaten Marquez three out of three. And every time Manny wins, Marquez and his trainer disparages the judges decision. The latest claim is the worst. Nacho Beritains is now saying he wants the judges from the last fight to be banned for judging in boxing. Shouldn’t Marquez win at least one fight against Pacquiao to warrant a fourth fight? The Filipino fans should counter the Mexican fans that showed up in Vegas in huge numbers. The Marquez fans booed and heckled Pacquiao to no end after the scoring didn’t go their way. By the way it sounded, Pacquiao fans were drowned in a sea of Marquez fans by a factor of 32% to 5%. If a fourth fight is being discussed, let the Pacquiao fans show their displeasure at Marquez’s claim of robbery in all three fights. Let the Pacquiao fans show their disdain for Marquez’s demand that the fourth fight should take place in Mexico. And what about Marquez’s trainer Nacho Beristain demanding $25 million dollars to grant Pacquiao a fourth fight. Grant Pacquiao the opportunity to fight Marquez? Is that what I’m hearing? So according to Marquez and Beristain, Marquez is now the cash cow who dictates the terms of a fight against Pacquiao. I will show my disdain by putting Marquez back in his place, a low PPV selling fighter without Manny Pacquiao. I will not pay for a fourth Marquez/Pacquiao fight. Why would I? Present trend shows that a fourth fight between the two combatants will have less action, less punching, and overall it will be less entertaining and more disappointing. The only thing that a fourth fight will be more of is the amount of complaining of robbery from Juan Manuel Marquez and his trainer. Great article! :fing02: :wave: