Vazquez is Marquez' Daddy in the Series,

[MACAQUEINBLACK]

Marquez did not outclass him for most of the rounds they fought.

You wanna talk about perseverance as your yardstick, then don't leave out the fact that Rafa was a bantam for pretty much all of his career who moved up to challenge the naturally bigger Vazquez.

And still won.

It isn't perserverance alone I'm referring to.

I was about to address the bold when I refreshed to catch any new posts,



My take is that if we're going to praise these closely fought bouts as much for the dramatic qualities of catharsis and human fighting spirit they're now linked to as for the exhibitions of technique and skills, then surely how we determine a victor has to transcend statistics to a degree at least (and the stats actually say that Vazquez won the third fight on the cards, FWIW - I think it was a close fight, you certainly can't make the argument that Vazquez was being dominated).


Vazquez was perceived to be the lesser boxer, but boxed with Marquez for 25 rounds and had an answer for everything Marquez threw at him in the rematch and the rubber-match. Physically, I feel they were evenly matched, I don't read much into Rafa's moving up in weight, they don't look far apart in size in the ring to me.



Marquez can win the argument of who has the greater career ledger,

I'm just looking for who was Greater in the World of Vazquez-Marquez here.

The substance doesn't matter. The cards do.

Marquez won the third fight. You can fall in love with Izzy's valor as much as you want, but he still lost.

I can understand how Izzy may have won more people over with his style. But he lost and Marquez is the superior fighter which was proven over the trilogy.

Don't be bitchy. I hate that kind of crap in the bold.


Besides,

factually, Izzy won the third fight.

And he also finished it beating Marquez up. You can fall in love with Marquez' pretty style all you like, but Vazquez was lighting him up and beating his ass down in that 12th round.

So nothing was proved re. Marquez' superiority. Not in this trilogy, at least.


And of course the substance matters in a series like this. See above. It transcends mere statistics, and if it doesn't, then your guy loses in any case, because he officially lost 2 out of 3 fights.



It's not even purely some macho, heroic thing I'm vibing off, because I also believe Vazquez proved himself nearer to Marquez' class as a boxer than was assumed. His style isn't as classically beautiful, but he isn't the League below either. These were great boxing matches, nobody was putting their chin out to dry just for the hell of it, when blows were landed, it wasn't because of a disregard for defence (except in moments like the 4th round of III, when Marquez stormed in thinking he had Vazquez, hahahaha), it was the two great offensive arsenals just overwhelming each-others' defence. If Izzy couldn't hang with Marquez as a boxer, then he simply wouldn't have done anything in these fights, because they represented boxing at its apotheosis.

[MACAQUEINBLACK]

If we're saying substance doesn't matter, and only names and stats do, then I guess Joe Calzaghe's beatdown of Roy means something.


SMH at that remark.

[savorduhflavor]

Marquez did not outclass him for most of the rounds they fought.





It isn't perserverance alone I'm referring to.

I was about to address the bold when I refreshed to catch any new posts,



My take is that if we're going to praise these closely fought bouts as much for the dramatic qualities of catharsis and human fighting spirit they're now linked to as for the exhibitions of technique and skills, then surely how we determine a victor has to transcend statistics to a degree at least (and the stats actually say that Vazquez won the third fight on the cards, FWIW - I think it was a close fight, you certainly can't make the argument that Vazquez was being dominated).


Vazquez was perceived to be the lesser boxer, but boxed with Marquez for 25 rounds and had an answer for everything Marquez threw at him in the rematch and the rubber-match. Physically, I feel they were evenly matched, I don't read much into Rafa's moving up in weight, they don't look far apart in size in the ring to me.



Marquez can win the argument of who has the greater career ledger,

I'm just looking for who was Greater in the World of Vazquez-Marquez here.




Don't be bitchy. I hate that kind of crap in the bold.


Besides,

factually, Izzy won the third fight.

And he also finished it beating Marquez up. You can fall in love with Marquez' pretty style all you like, but Vazquez was lighting him up and beating his ass down in that 12th round.

So nothing was proved re. Marquez' superiority. Not in this trilogy, at least.


And of course the substance matters in a series like this. See above. It transcends mere statistics, and if it doesn't, then your guy loses in any case, because he officially lost 2 out of 3 fights.



It's not even purely some macho, heroic thing I'm vibing off, because I also believe Vazquez proved himself nearer to Marquez' class as a boxer than was assumed. His style isn't as classically beautiful, but he isn't the League below either. These were great boxing matches, nobody was putting their chin out to dry just for the hell of it, when blows were landed, it wasn't because of a disregard for defence (except in moments like the 4th round of III, when Marquez stormed in thinking he had Vazquez, hahahaha), it was the two great offensive arsenals just overwhelming each-others' defence. If Izzy couldn't hang with Marquez as a boxer, then he simply wouldn't have done anything in these fights, because they represented boxing at its apotheosis.

One round. Sounds like DLH/Quartey all over again.

But really, I'm definitely selling Izzy short. I just vehemently believe that he won the 3rd fight and should have gotten the glory that came with it. And I'm not even a huge Marquez fan, but threads like this are the reason that fight bugs me so much.

As much as you are saying we really shouldn't make it out like Marquez dominated, which is correct, he didn't, but this thread is making it seem like Vazquez deserves all the glory and I disagree with that because I felt that Marquez certainly got the better of the trilogy.

[MACAQUEINBLACK]

One round. Sounds like DLH/Quartey all over again.

But really, I'm definitely selling Izzy short. I just vehemently believe that he won the 3rd fight and should have gotten the glory that came with it. And I'm not even a huge Marquez fan, but threads like this are the reason that fight bugs me so much.

As much as you are saying we really shouldn't make it out like Marquez dominated, which is correct, he didn't, but this thread is making it seem like Vazquez deserves all the glory and I disagree with that because I felt that Marquez certainly got the better of the trilogy.

I said previously that the Glory overall is undoubtably shared.

I just feel -- like you, but the other way around -- that one of these guys got the better of the trilogy, stole the slightly greater share of it.

And fight III was not an 11-0 whitewash going into the 12th. You don't just magically come on in the 12th. Some groundwork has to have been done prior to that.



What bugs me the same way as the bold bugs you is the notion that Vazquez is inherently that much inferior to Marquez as a boxer. I don't believe that, I think it's overstated.

Marquez engaged in 3 boxing matches with Izzy and came up against someone who could at least hang with him in that Arena. Izzy wasn't relying on just power and strength and size, he boxed and was competetive doing it, he didn't disregard a jab or defence. As such, Marquez was involved in 3 boxing matches that also are known as epic fights, both guys giving hits and taking hits and thinking in between.

It's the idea that Marquez was "outclassing" Vazquez for most of 25 rounds that sits wrong with me, and I've seen that POV touted (this thread is, in part, a reaction to that). If all that kept Vazquez competetive was raw power, maybe, but I don't see that at all.


From my perspective, they were close fights in which Vazquez made up for any degree of technical disparity with big intangibles, not strength and size.

[savorduhflavor]

I said previously that the Glory overall is undoubtably shared.

I just feel -- like you, but the other way around -- that one of these guys got the better of the trilogy, stole the slightly greater share of it.

And fight III was not an 11-0 whitewash going into the 12th. You don't just magically come on in the 12th. Some groundwork has to have been done prior to that.



What bugs me the same way as the bold bugs you is the notion that Vazquez is inherently that much inferior to Marquez as a boxer. I don't believe that, I think it's overstated.

Marquez engaged in 3 boxing matches with Izzy and came up against someone who could at least hang with him in that Arena. Izzy wasn't relying on just power and strength and size, he boxed and was competetive doing it, he didn't disregard a jab or defence. As such, Marquez was involved in 3 boxing matches that also are known as epic fights, both guys giving hits and taking hits and thinking in between.

It's the idea that Marquez was "outclassing" Vazquez for most of 25 rounds that sits wrong with me, and I've seen that POV touted (this thread is, in part, a reaction to that). If all that kept Vazquez competetive was raw power, maybe, but I don't see that at all.


From my perspective, they were close fights in which Vazquez made up for any degree of technical disparity with big intangibles, not strength and size.

I don't think that Marquez dominated Izzy. I have never thought or said that. About any of the 3 fights.

I look at it kind of how I look at Cotto/Mosley. Close, great fight, I just feel that there was a clear winner and get annoyed when people try and make a case for Mosley.

You probably feel the same way but the opposite.

[MACAQUEINBLACK]

I don't think that Marquez dominated Izzy. I have never thought or said that. About any of the 3 fights.

I look at it kind of how I look at Cotto/Mosley. Close, great fight, I just feel that there was a clear winner and get annoyed when people try and make a case for Mosley.

You probably feel the same way but the opposite.

My card, after the 12th, I'd call III a draw.

From that perspective, the 12th round, the way the fight finished, with Marquez so close to being done, Vazquez hitting him at will, is significant to me in who ultimately came out on top.

But I can rewatch that fight, and I will, and be openminded to seeing the scoring differently.




Incidentally...I thought Cotto beat Mosley, too, and clearly.

[S.G.]

I really find it difficult to crown any boxer another's daddy when he was KO'd by his 'son' in three rounds in their last outing.

We often saw Rafael taking the predatory role in the series, with Vazquez being more a valiant underdog figure despite the fact that it was actually Rafael who was moving up in weight to pursue bigger and tougher challenges having already amassed a record, imo, worthy of historic recognition at bantamweight.

He beat him decisively two times out of four, and the third fight is subject to debate. Personally I scored it in favour of Rafael; I felt that despite Vazquez's big finish and the way he kind of out-machismo'd Rafa he was just out-scored over the course of the fight. And for the record I don't think the 4th fight should be completely written off, Marquez avoided the level of wear and tear Izzy picked up for a reason and just had more adaptive ability.

[MACAQUEINBLACK]

I really find it difficult to crown any boxer another's daddy when he was KO'd by his 'son' in three rounds in their last outing.

Please.


While my title may be a little bit (counter) rhetorical - with all due respect, fuck that fight. It's worthless. Actually look at the Vazquez on the way to the ring, look at the skin around his eyes. Would you see merit in a 5th, too? By the time Vazquez' scar-tissue is sufficiently healed enough to make it a fair fight, if ever, both guys could be past it.


I think Vazquez had Marquez' number overall, yes, I do. And I feel like I want more compelling arguments to the contrary than just Marquez' perceived technical preeminence over Vazquez.

The third fight was close, rounds were competetive and fearsome, and it finished with Vazquez beating Marquez down. Not just winning the round emphatically, but kicking his ass at the last. You might think that Marquez clearly outscored Vazquez, but not everyone agrees - you have to acknowledge the ferocious competetiveness of the rounds, and you also have to give full acknowledgement of what Vazquez was doing to Marquez by the end of it. I don't think there's a case for calling that fight a schooling or a domination or whatever prior to the 12th.

Marquez avoided the level of wear and tear Izzy picked up for a reason and just had more adaptive ability.

I already acknowledged this, and Marquez' greater overall career accomplishments, but I don't think it's especially germane to their personal rivalry. Marquez isn't the only guy to inflict wear and tear on Vazquez, and they put plenty of hurt on each other.

Also, the body's resistance to punishment varies in a bunch of ways from individual to individual, and some fighters are naturally more prone to certain types of injury than others.


The 'predatory role' ebbed and flowed between the pair, and I don't put the same stock in the move up in weight that you guys do, because IMO Marquez and Vazquez were physical equals.

[jrosales13]

Rafa with the better resume is the greater fighter out of the two

The way I saw the trilogy is 1-1-1.... So I wouldn't say anybody had the upper hand in the trilogy.

I think both took a lot of years out of each other.

[Dick Buffman]

I'm too in love with Rafa's pretty style to be objective about this.

As far as I'm concerned, he's god's gift to boxing so whatever.