My two favorite fighters but Marquez no doubt about it! Cotto is very good but it takes something else, something special to be great and Marquez has it
as it says in BigStereotype's sig, jmm is the Beethoven of boxing. and well, cotto is not. nothing wrong with that though, cotto's still a great fighter.
correction cotto is a good fighter maybe very good but in no way shape or form is he great...
I should just not even post in the TS's thread because of his post history, but meh...
JMM at this point in time is and most likely will STAY as a greater fighter than Cotto. He has never been knocked out or stopped. He has always been competitive in his fights (only shut out to STILL undefeated Mayweather), didn't have an iron chin, but more than made up for by having terrific counter-punching skills, excellent adaptability, quick recovery when hurt, could still hurt you even if he was wobbly.
Cotto is one of the best fighters of his generation but I think it's safe to say JMM is a league apart based on resumé and skills. A lot of what helps JMM is that he is now in Pacquiao's league because of how consistent he's been against him.
And from a personal standpoint, I'm glad he's now being considered as a greater fighter than either Barrera or Morales, ar at least as equally great as them.
Even if Cotto were to avenge his loss to Pacquiao in brutal fashion, he wouldn't be able to be ahead of Márquez based on skills. Cotto has got skills and a very good resumé...and by avenging his two losses he'd improve his standings with people seeing him in a new light but I just can't see him being ranked ahead of JMM.
Maybe someone who's followed Márquez's career more closley can explain it better than I can.
That's the best post I can make. I'm sorry I don't know more about the subject.
Last edited by TintaBoricua; 12-10-2011, 08:03 PM.
I should just not even post in the TS's thread because of his post history, but meh...
JMM at this point in time is and most likely will STAY as a greater fighter than Cotto. He has never been knocked out or stopped. He has always been competitive in his fights (only shut out to STILL undefeated Mayweather), didn't have an iron chin, but more than made up for by having terrific counter-punching skills, excellent adaptability, quick recovery when hurt, could still hurt you even if he was wobbly.
Cotto is one of the best fighters of his generation but I think it's safe to say JMM is a league apart based on resumé and skills. A lot of what helps JMM is that he is now in Pacquiao's league because of how consistent he's been against him.
And from a personal standpoint, I'm glad he's now being considered as a greater fighter than either Barrera or Morales, ar at least as equally great as them.
Even if Cotto were to avenge his loss to Pacquiao in brutal fashion, I wouldn't be able to be ahead of Márquez based on skills. Cotto has got skills and a very good resumé...and by avenging his two losses he'd improve his standings with people seeing him in a new light but I just can't see him being ranked ahead of JMM.
Maybe someone who's followed Márquez's career more closley can explain it better than I can.
That's the best post I can make. I'm sorry I don't know more about the subject.
Why would you be gald at someone spouting sheer nonsense?
Being considered as great as Barrera and Morales is ok.
Being considered greater than Barrera and Morales would be either ignorance or ******ity. One or the other.
Why would you be gald at someone spouting sheer nonsense?
Being considered as great as Barrera and Morales is ok.
Being considered greater than Barrera and Morales would be either ignorance or ******ity. One or the other.
I feel like I just got schooled. I made a post in the history section a long time ago asking why was it EXACTLY that people would always rank Morales/Barrera a notch above JMM any time people debated which of the three was the greatest.
No one cared to reply. They either thought I was trolling or just very ******/newbie-ish.
I love reading articles/watching fights/studying the history of boxing but I just never got around to dissecting EM and MAB's careers that meticulously.
So, in regards to your post, I'm ignorant (in respects to their careers). I'll have to check their careers.
Last edited by TintaBoricua; 12-10-2011, 08:24 PM.
I feel like I just got schooled. I made a post in the history section a long time ago asking why was it EXACTLY that people would always rank Morales/Barrera a notch above JMM any time people debated which of the three was the greatest.
No one cared to reply. They either thought I was trolling or just very ******/newbie-ish.
I love reading articles/watching fights/studying the history of boxing but I just never got around to dissecting EM and MAB's careers that meticulously.
So, in regards to your post, I'm ignorant (in respects to their careers). I'll have to check their careers.
No one replied? Strange. I must have missed that I would have happily replied.
Erik Morales to me is certainly greater than Marquez. Even with his win over Pacquaio in the 3rd fight. After Marquez' win I'm ok with people saying he's on his level, before that I wasn't.
Before that, it wasn't even argubale.
I mean, his wins over Pacquaio and prime Barrera were utterly better than Marquez' whole career.
Let alone; Zaragoza, McCullogh, Ayala, Jones, Espadas Jr, Chavez, Hernandez etc. Along with his 13 title defences.
Of course his recent performance closes the gap, but still, for me Morales is still greater. His resume is just much better.
As for Barrera, similar kind of thing. Despite me personally ranking Morales higher than Barrera, Barrera's clear win over a prime Morales was better than anything Marquez had ever done prior to his 3rd fight with Pac.
Along with his wins over McKinndey, Hamed, Tapia, Ayala, and the third fight with Morales (I felt Morales won by a point, but obviously there's a strong argument for Barrera, could have gone either way in my book.) and 16 Title defences.
Again, prior to the 3rd Pacquaio fight and even still now to be honest, Barrera's resume is clearly better than Marquez'. Like I said about Morales and have been saying since the Pac fight was signed; If Marquez wants to be remebered on the level of Barrera and Morales then he needs to beat Pacquaio. So, now I am ok with people comparing them. But still, for me, and most, Morales and Barrea are greater, they just have better resumes, simple as that.
Marquez has a good resume, but like Steak said in the other thread, after Pac, his resume is not too strong.
The 2nd Pac fight is very arguable. And despite me feeling that Marquez won I felt it could have gone either way. Which I generally don't put on a fighter's resume despite feeling he won. As opposed to the third fight, which I felt Marquez won clearly, to which I do put on their resume when ranking I.e Johnson UD Pastrano, Whitaker UD Ramirez and Chavez etc.
So other than that; Good wins over Medina, Gainer, Barrera (Past his best but still capable) Casamyor, Diaz x2 and Katsidis. Good resume, but does it compare to Morales' or Barrera's pre Pac 3? Absolutely not.
And even with the Pacquaio win Barrera and Morales' resume are atleast on par, and in most peoples minds aheead of Marquez.
It's very difficult to give a reasonable argument that he's greater than Morales or Barrera.
Tweet
Comment