Pedroza vs. Pacquiao at Feather...

[dempseyfire]

Taylor won no fewer than nine rounds from Chavez, WEAPON, and Taylor is a heavily-mythologised fighter. The ONLY attributes he shared with Pacquiao were handspeed and grit.

Taylor was unable to hurt Chavez, but kept him at bay for the wide majority of the fight. That weighs heavily with me. Pacquiao could hurt him and would not find him as difficult to hit as youre making out.

If you can find and drop Marquez four times, youre going to land a lot of punches against Chavez...and not Taylors shoe-shiners either. Chavez would have to contend with being hurt early and fairly significantly in any fight between 130-140. I think hed recover to win rounds, but not the bout.

It's not about him being difficult to hit, Taylor had faster hands than Pacquiao and he hardly hurt him, buzzed him a bit yes but Chavez would be able to see Pac's punches at least as well as he saw Taylor's which takes something off them, he certainly wouldn't be standing straight up with his head on a pedestal like Manny's most recent opponents.

Marquez is a straight-up fighter who's been dropped by Katsidis and stunned by Juan Diaz, Pacquiao dropping him repeatedly isn't as special as you make out, even Barrera did it. Marquez' defensive ability is predicated more on timing than Chavez' and Julio had a better beard than Marquez.

Chavez was pounding Taylor's organs into dust that whole fight, he just wasn't getting as much credit as Taylor from the judges and commentators because his shots weren't immediately pretty and dazzling, they just crushed Meldrick from the inside-out.

I respect your opinion on this matter because you at least see it as competitive, I simply disagree with you on the outcome.

Taylor was not NEARLY as hard a puncher as Pacquao, so why is the fact that he didn't badly hurt JCC even in this discussion?
He'd be able to see Pac's punches better? Not at all, Manny comes from crazy angles and is a southpaw to boot. Whitaker had both of those attributes and practically nailed Chavez at will.
Marquez has only bee getting hit the last few years at 35 years old and older.
The Marquez who fought Pac the first time was great defensively and Pac hit him more than he'd ever been hit. Far better defense than Chavez ever had, who yes had decent subtle defense but still defense was arguably his greatest liability along with lack of speed.

[Goodnight, Irene]

The Chavez that fought Edwin Rosario would deal with Pacquiao’s speed and power, take him apart and come out victorious. The Pacquiao that drew with Marquez and lost to Morales would lose a 15 round decision to Pedroza.

So basically youre gonna pick Chavez's shining performance and point out the only two fights Pacquiaos struggled in in the last ten years? Okay

[Aftermath]

I could have picked from a long list of Chavez’ shining performances to point out that Chavez would have dealt with Pacquiao’s speed and power. I just chose Rosario for the sake of space and time.

Pacquiao lost to Morales and was outboxed most of the rounds by Marquez with a broken nose in their draw. In the featherweight division Eusebio Peroza would have taken a decision from Pacquiao. Salvador Sanchez, Azumaz Nelson, Willie Pep and Sandy Sadler probably would have done the same.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Pacquiao also clearly won that fight (and Im a Marquez fan), and battered Marquez as no one else ever has. He also took two from three from Morales and twice stopped him. As with the triple-knockdown and broken nose of Marquez, thats ground no one else broke.

Really, I could write all day about guys who took pummelings from Pacquiao no one elre achieved --- Marquez, Morales, Barrera, Cotto, De La Hoya, Hatton, Margarito...he may be bested by Pedroza at Feather (I question it), but Chavez between 130-140? I dont think so.

[Aftermath]

I do.

Knocking out a washed up Morales who began losing fights before the Pacquiao rematch doesn’t guarantee a win against Chavez. There’s no way Pacquiao won more rounds against Marquez when they drew. Chavez takes it at 130-140. He was way more consistent and more solid all around.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Way more consistent? Dont be absurd. You cant get, "way more consistent," than losing one fight between 1999 & 2011.

Since when were fights decided purely by rounds won? Even as a Marquez fan, Ive come to resent the, "Marquez won more collective rounds," point, because its such a limited view of events.

Every weakness Chavez had runs directly into a Pacquiao strength.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Way more consistent? Dont be absurd. You cant get, "way more consistent," than losing one fight between 1999 & 2011.

Since when were fights decided purely by rounds won? Even as a Marquez fan, Ive come to resent the, "Marquez won more collective rounds," point, because its such a limited view of events.

Every weakness Chavez had runs directly into a Pacquiao strength.

I've always agreed with that and to be honest I'm questioning my pick of Pedroza. Eusebio never saw anything like Manny. And it damn sure is an eyeopener when those bombs start heading your way.

[Aftermath]

Way more consistent? Dont be absurd. You cant get, "way more consistent," than losing one fight between 1999 & 2011.

Since when were fights decided purely by rounds won? Even as a Marquez fan, Ive come to resent the, "Marquez won more collective rounds," point, because its such a limited view of events.

Every weakness Chavez had runs directly into a Pacquiao strength.

You don’t be absurd.

If a washed up Morales could beat Pacquiao, so would Chavez. If Marquez could take more rounds from Pacquiao, Chavez would have greater success over the full 12 rounds. Chavez was a more complete fighter then Marquez. In his prime, Chavez took apart every style he was presented with.

Pacquiao’s weaknesses exposed against a washed up Morales and the way his face gets bloodied and bruised by lesser fighters would play expertly into Chavez’ strengths.

[Goodnight, Irene]

I smell an under-current of bias...

[SaadOffTheDeck]

LOL at Morales being washed up. If that was washed up, he is the GOAT.

[dempseyfire]

Way more consistent? Dont be absurd. You cant get, "way more consistent," than losing one fight between 1999 & 2011.

Since when were fights decided purely by rounds won? Even as a Marquez fan, Ive come to resent the, "Marquez won more collective rounds," point, because its such a limited view of events.

Every weakness Chavez had runs directly into a Pacquiao strength.

You don’t be absurd.

If a washed up Morales could beat Pacquiao, so would Chavez. If Marquez could take more rounds from Pacquiao, Chavez would have greater success over the full 12 rounds. Chavez was a more complete fighter then Marquez. In his prime, Chavez took apart every style he was presented with.

Pacquiao’s weaknesses exposed against a washed up Morales and the way his face gets bloodied and bruised by lesser fighters would play expertly into Chavez’ strengths.

I don't think he "took apart" Taylor, as he needed a last second, controversial stoppage to save that fight. Ditto with Whitaker (and while JCC was slightly past his best by 93, so was Pernell).

Marquez is definitely a better boxer than Chavez and at 130 I wouldn't count out JMM to win that fight as well.

[Crease]

Pacquaio by late TKO.

[Aftermath]

Now I’m even more certain that Chavez would beat Pacquiao.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Now I’m even more certain that Chavez would beat Pacquiao.

That makes a lot of sense, considering this fight is at 130, and if Chavez & Marquez fought any LESS like one another theyd be in different sports

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Now I’m even more certain that Chavez would beat Pacquiao.

You ever see Chavez fight at 144?

[Goodnight, Irene]

Whatd you think of yesterdays fight, Saad. I think they flat robbed Marquez.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I had marquez winning 116-113, it was pretty tough to score but Juan controlled the ring and manny didn't have a dominant moment or any clear rounds. I thought there were 3 clear Marquez rounds and nine close ones. I'm going to fall short of calling it a robbery but I thought Marquez won. At least I don't have to argue in CS anymore about how Marquez can't possibly compete over 140 pounds like the weight would ever matter against manny.

[dempseyfire]

I had a feeling after Saturday night this thread would be resurrected. I thought Marquez got shafted, but that fight really shows nothing about putting a prime Pac vs Pedroza or JCC at 126-130 lbs.

And regarding the fight, Manny, as shown, would have trouble with Marquez anyday of the week, but judging off his last two fights, Pacquao is now officially past his best. His timing is slipping and he's more flat-footed than he ever was. Both fighters last night were not what they once were, but as history has shown time and time again, when both guys are past it the more technical boxer always has the edge.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Marquez won that fight, & it's huge for his historical placing, IMO.

[dempseyfire]

I'm not sure it's "huge" but it certainly helps him.

[Goodnight, Irene]

To jump up this high in weight and best Pacquiao, to me, yeah, it represents a significant leap forward in his legacy.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

It certainly didn't hurt him, I wouldn't call it huge. Weight was never a factor in this fight. It's the same two guys. But getting a leg up on the trilogy was big, puts him in the vicinity of Morales.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Since the loss to Morales six long years ago, Pacquiao has literally kicked the sh!t out of every foe save Marquez. How many ROUNDS has Pacquiao lost since Morales I?

Morales II & III, Barrera II, Diaz, De La Hoya, Hatton, Cotto, Clottey, Margarito, Mosley...cmon. The guys a monster. What Marquez has done to him...history will elevate him above contemporary countrymen Morales & Barrera, IMO.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Hatton was the only one in that group I thought would be competitive, I actually picked Ricky to win. I'm not brushing it aside, I just don't get huge from it. He had already done it twice, people that weren't caught up in a couple pounds expected it to happen again. Maybe it's because I wasn't at all surprised. A lot of people already rated him ahead of Erik & Marco, I am not one of them. But the argument can certainly be made.

[Counter-puncher]

What Marquez has done to him...history will elevate him above contemporary countrymen Morales & Barrera, IMO.

i am pondering this question and i think it's an argument with significant merit.