wtf Marquez ever did to be ranked over Cotto

[Kuyukut]

if you take out pacquiao on marquez' resume... marquez will be unknown.

[FinitoxDinamita]

Its a ****** fkin question and a dumbazz thread

[BoxingIsGreat]

Some good debates, guys. I go with the guys who pick Marquez.

Marquez may not have been super elite or A++ fighter, but his boxing skills, grit, meanness, and heart cannot be questioned. I had Pacman winning their first fight and then Marquez taking the last 3. Although Marquez's chin is somewhat questionable (with multiple knockdowns), he had never been stopped (unless I missed some fights).

Cotto was brutalized by and quit against juiced up Pacman (no disrespect). Same against Margarito (plaster and all). As mentioned by others, in his biggest fights, Cotto came up short in all. Martinez doesn't count for me.

Cotto is a level below Marquez.

[Redd Foxx]

One of the ******est post ever.

Marquez was the king of the lightweight and was a beast in 126-135 pounds.

He was robbed vs John and Norwood too.

And fighting in his 5th division he was very competitive vs Bradley in prime.

You are a jerk and an ignorant.

You love the word "ignorant", but ironically are ignorant to it's meaning. My post got you raging because you always defend Mexican fighters, only because they are Mexican. I don't give a *** where a fighter is from but if you are going to play the Mexico fanboy, spend your time defending real G's like Morales and Barrera. Quez was made to look foolish against Bradley and was a toy for Floyd to play with. Dude is damn lucky Pac ever stepped into his life.

Truthfully, and bickering aside, I like Marquez a lot and have a ton of respect for him but you guys with child-like minds that go into, "must defend my people" mode get zero respect from me. You're just like the obnoxious pro-UK dudes that do the same shyt. This place is full of that noise.

[chrisJS]

if you take out pacquiao on marquez' resume... marquez will be unknown.

Nah. Marquez was considered a HOFer before Pacquaio III. I think big wins over Barrera, Casamayor & Diaz did it. I also don't think it hurt that he had other very good wins over Medina, Katsidis, Salido, Sanchez, Peden, Gervacio etc; probably helps his cause that his skills were always greatly admired and got him to #1 at 126, 130 & 135.

Just a thought.

[Larry the boss]

Marquez accomplished a lot more then Cotto and has a better resume

[chrisJS]

You love the word "ignorant", but ironically are ignorant to it's meaning. My post got you raging because you always defend Mexican fighters, only because they are Mexican. I don't give a *** where a fighter is from but if you are going to play the Mexico fanboy, spend your time defending real G's like Morales and Barrera. Quez was made to look foolish against Bradley and was a toy for Floyd to play with. Dude is damn lucky Pac ever stepped into his life.

Truthfully, and bickering aside, I like Marquez a lot and have a ton of respect for him but you guys with child-like minds that go into, "must defend my people" mode get zero respect from me. You're just like the obnoxious pro-UK dudes that do the same shyt. This place is full of that noise.

That guy is a POS. He only watches Boxing for Mexican fighters. He tried to lie with some "facts" and I keep asking for a comeback but he just rages over my opinion that Carlos Ortiz had a better career than Chavez and Sanchez. An OPINION that's also shared by a lot of historians. But when I ask him to explain why he said Valiant beat Ortiz despite going 0-2 including a lopsided decision and KO and also why he claimed as a fact Chavez unified 130 or why he said Camacho was in his prime and a defending major world champion coming into the Chavez fight. He just foams at the mouth comes back with "ignorant biased racist" and then says Benitez-Palamino was a robbery. A fight in which the judge who gave it to Palamino admitted the sun was in his eyes and that's why his scorecard was so preposterous.

Also, to your argument. Why is a 40-year old Marquez losing a close decision to a naturally much larger and younger man in Bradley is so defining to his career why are Morales' lopsided loss to Zaheer Raheem or Barrera's KO loss and clear cut decision loss to Barrera not? Those same guys got blasted by Pacquaio, including Morales quitting. Marquez' prime years were excellent and his career isn't only recognized because of Pacquaio. He got a bunch of other notable wins. A loss jumping up two divisions (after just moving up 2 in 2 years) and losing to Mayweather shouldn't hurt that much, surely?

[Redd Foxx]

That guy is a POS. He only watches Boxing for Mexican fighters. He tried to lie with some "facts" and I keep asking for a comeback but he just rages over my opinion that Carlos Ortiz had a better career than Chavez and Sanchez. An OPINION that's also shared by a lot of historians. But when I ask him to explain why he said Valiant beat Ortiz despite going 0-2 including a lopsided decision and KO and also why he claimed as a fact Chavez unified 130 or why he said Camacho was in his prime and a defending major world champion coming into the Chavez fight. He just foams at the mouth comes back with "ignorant biased racist" and then says Benitez-Palamino was a robbery. A fight in which the judge who gave it to Palamino admitted the sun was in his eyes and that's why his scorecard was so preposterous.

Also, to your argument. Why is a 40-year old Marquez losing a close decision to a naturally much larger and younger man in Bradley is so defining to his career why are Morales' lopsided loss to Zaheer Raheem or Barrera's KO loss and clear cut decision loss to Barrera not? Those same guys got blasted by Pacquaio, including Morales quitting. Marquez' prime years were excellent and his career isn't only recognized because of Pacquaio. He got a bunch of other notable wins. A loss jumping up two divisions (after just moving up 2 in 2 years) and losing to Mayweather shouldn't hurt that much, surely?

The way he lost to Mayweather does hurt. Robert Guerrero jumped 2 weight classes and looked far better against May (even took some rounds) than Marquez did. Regarding Bradley, people seem to want to give Marquez CREDIT for that fight. As if it was some kind of moral victory. It was a disappointing loss. And, people have this fantasy that he "destroyed" Pac all 4x. For some reason, people can't be honest about the guy.

I'm not against Marquez so I don't want to waste a lot of time arguing against the guy, but I still feel that he's been highly overrated, for the exact reasons I've explained before. People see me criticize fan arguments and think I'm attacking the fighter (AJ, Floyd, Golovkin, Loma, etc). Being anti-hype is different than being against a certain fighter.

[chrisJS]

The way he lost to Mayweather does hurt. Robert Guerrero jumped 2 weight classes and looked far better against May (even took some rounds) than Marquez did. Regarding Bradley, people seem to want to give Marquez CREDIT for that fight. As if it was some kind of moral victory. It was a disappointing loss. And, people have this fantasy that he "destroyed" Pac all 4x. For some reason, people can't be honest about the guy.

I'm not against Marquez so I don't want to waste a lot of time arguing against the guy, but I still feel that he's been highly overrated, for the exact reasons I've explained before. People see me criticize fan arguments and think I'm attacking the fighter (AJ, Floyd, Golovkin, Loma, etc). Being anti-hype is different than being against a certain fighter.

Yeah, but Guerrero had acclimated to the weight with wins against Berto and Aydin and was a big Lightweight. Marquez hadn't fought above 126 until 2007 and had only 3 fights at 130 and then 2 at 135 and then jumped up two weight classes with no interim fights. Way different.

The Bradley fight is whatever. Doesn't add or subtract from him. Much like Hopkins losing to Calzaghe in a close-ish fight for example.

[Mexican_Puppet]

You love the word "ignorant", but ironically are ignorant to it's meaning. My post got you raging because you always defend Mexican fighters, only because they are Mexican. I don't give a *** where a fighter is from but if you are going to play the Mexico fanboy, spend your time defending real G's like Morales and Barrera. Quez was made to look foolish against Bradley and was a toy for Floyd to play with. Dude is damn lucky Pac ever stepped into his life.

Truthfully, and bickering aside, I like Marquez a lot and have a ton of respect for him but you guys with child-like minds that go into, "must defend my people" mode get zero respect from me. You're just like the obnoxious pro-UK dudes that do the same shyt. This place is full of that noise.

You are ignorant, period.

The world.of boxing have great respect to Marquez, why?

Bradley vs Marquez was in the 147 pounds, the 5th division of Juan and the fight was competitive, 115-113 to Bradley.

Imagine Bradley fighting vs Canelo in 154 pounds.

Choco only jump 10 pounds and was murderer by Sor.

Marquez jumped 20 pounds to stay in 147 and was competitive.

You are a crazy guy, Marquez deserves a lot of credit and that is something that you can't change.

I respect big fighters. I'm fan of Rigo. Golovkin. Pacquiao. Floyd. Etc.