Who will go down as the greater fighter Juan Manuel Marquez or Tito Trinidad?

To me, it's Marquez. Though Tito was also a great fighter in his own right.

Well let's just look at both fighter's greatest victories: Trinidad's "win" over Oscar De La Hoya and Marquez KO of Manny Pacquiao ... We all know Trinidad did not beat DLH, for those who do, quit foolin' yaselves. Marquez all the way. His KO win over Pacquiao is the definition of REDEMPTION, and JUSTICE. After being robbed in the previous fights, he put extra sauce on his already sure fire hall of fame career, wish he would have rode off into the sunset after that >_>

Marquez and it's not even debatable.

The lop sidedness of this poll is surprising

Jmm, and its not really even close.

Not close. Marquez is far greater than Trinidad.

I think JMM will be the Barry Bonds case of boxing. He was already a HOF but took it to another level in the latter stages of his career. I don't know if he'll come out and admit it or he gets caught, but I think the era in which he had memo can potentially tarnish his career similar to Bonds. Having said that, aside from Pacquiao JMM's resume is lacking in terms of quality. He has MAB and Casamayor on his resume but they were both at the twilight of their respective careers. Aside from that there really isn't much that stands out. The fact that some guys (Diaz I, Katsidis, John) gave him hell that you'd expect a great fighter to be able to take care of doesn't help his case either. I think he really missed out by not fighting MAB and Morales @ 126. I think Tito's resume just has more quality between the two, DLH and Vargas being the most notable (albeit one was controversial). I also think his win over an old Whitaker was better than JMM's win over MAB and Casamayor. It wasn't just the wins, but the manner in which he won them. Between the two, I'd give the nod to Tito. Personally, it's difficult to give JMM credit for his KO over Pacquiao knowing the circumstances, it would be akin to not having an asterisk over Bonds name in the record books.

Just think how awesome Tito would be if had steroids?

To answer this you have to take several factors into consideration. I am not referring to anyone in particular, but I know there are many posters here who are in their early 20's, which means that they did not see Trinidad during his prime. I saw him in his prime and, to be honest, early on I was not his fan even though I'm from Puerto Rico. I became his fan on December 2, 2000, the night he and Vargas gave boxing fans one of the best fights you will ever see. If you witnessed Trinidad in his prime you thought he would never lose. Although his style was different, he had that aura of invincibility that Roy Jones had. To me, Trinidad's resume from 1999-2001 is better than the resumes of fighters who have been around for decades. With that being said, Márquez is also a great boxer, technically superior to Trinidad, and the fact that he has remained relevant in his 40's is commendable. Trinidad was the more dominant fighter of the two, so I choose him, but I understand those who pick Márquez because of accomplishments, not nationality.

tito trinidad and i am a jmm fan. just being real.

It should also be noted that JMM never 'retired' or took long lay offs to heal his body. He has been fighting non-stop since 1993. By that I mean he has fought at least once every single year since 1993.

Oh, now think of how TERRIBLE Marquez looked against Floyd, while Cotto took it to Floyd and til this day Floyd acknowledges Cotto as his toughest fight. Let's not get caught up in the Memo-Marquez era. Styles... They make fights. Triangles doe. Again, Marquez is overrated. Chris John doe. So is Cotto.

Trinidad got caught cheating so his previous wins should have an * by them. :D

Tito Trinidad - Born 1973 - Currently 41 years of age - Retired 2005, 2008 Juan Manuel Marquez - Born 1973 - Currently 40 years of age(41 in August) - Still fighting - #3 at Welterweight - #6 P4P. It's a no brainer.

It really doesn't matter whether the poll had it for Tito or Marquez, the fact is that Marquez will end up being seen as greater. He already did then, and still does now. Yea pretty much, I understand people are fans of Tito and I was too. I just think if you look at resume, and performance in the biggest fights of their perspective careers, it's a no brainer. Tito is great, while JMM is an ATG.

It really doesn't matter whether the poll had it for Tito or Marquez, the fact is that Marquez will end up being seen as greater. He already did then, and still does now.

Marquez put the fighter of the decade to bed and tucked him in. Did Tito ever accomplished that?

Also JMM was a much better boxer. Think about this, JMM's performances over Pac really showed mostly when Cotto got totally dominated by Pac. To think a bigger, stronger man in Cotto was knocked out and basically dominated after round 2 made JMM's performances that much more impressive. JMM's boxing was much better than Tito's, I felt that Tito relied on his power way too much and when faced against better boxers, it showed. Like Oscar, Hopkins and Whitaker. JMM really hasn't been outboxed ever, except when he fought Mayweather and he's one of the greatest boxers of all time. There's no shame in being outclassed there. Add longevity and it's a no brainer. That's not taking anything from Tito though, great fighter and champion.

Hmm gimme Marquez.

I would have to say JMM simply because Trinidads best win wasn't actually a win in most people's eyes. Where as JMM accomplished what many thought was impossible knocking out one of the greatest boxers ever in Pac. Much respect for Tito though, his power was scary.