Quijano: Styles make fights aphorism holds true again

Monday, November 14, 2011

CLOSELY-fought battles will always be a hotbed for controversy, and so debate will forever rage on whether or not Manny Pacquiao deserved the majority decision win over Juan Manuel Marquez last Sunday.

I’m a rabid Pacman fan as any other. Truth be told, this boxing column probably wouldn’t have come into fruition were it not for his seminal achievements.

Have something to report? Tell us in text, photos or videos.

But for the record, I had Marquez up by one point and I had the first round dead even.

STRATEGY. It was hardly the barnburner that everyone expected and that’s because rather than choosing to duke it out as advertised, Marquez opted to engage on his own terms.

He patiently waited for Manny’s attacks and did what he does best: counter-punch.

In terms of strategy, Freddie Roach himself admitted that Pacquiao erred in moving toward the path of Marquez’s right hand. He should have moved to his own right, away from Marquez’s power punch, and used his right hook more.

But he was clearly the aggressor and took the fight to his nemesis. In the end, the judges clearly favored his belligerence over the clearer, sharper snipes of “Dinamita”.

SCORING. The scoring issue reminds me of Oscar de la Hoya-Shane Mosley 2. The judges all had it for Mosley, but most of the viewers, this writer included, thought the “Golden Boy” rightfully deserved the nod.

It then becomes an issue of perspective. Judges are supposed to have “the best seats in the house”, but they are situated on three separate angles in the ring, ostensibly to provide three separate and independent “looks”.

As I pointed out in a previous column, the appreciation of which fighter wins the round is very subjective.

In the same manner that a person might prefer vanilla over chocolate, one judge can be biased for an aggressive fighter while another might be partial toward counterpunchers who wait and set traps.

Ergo, though I personally cannot fathom how judge Glenn Trowbridge arrived at his 116-112 for Pacman, I have to respect his appreciation of the fight based on his perspective that night.

Barring any shenanigans, it is what it is.

STYLES MAKE FIGHTS. I correctly predicted a decision win for the Pacman, so I’m not complaining. But I disagree with his assessment that he “clearly” won the fight.

If he did, Freddie Roach wouldn’t be admitting they “squeezed it out.”

Irrefutably, Marquez will always be a difficult fight for Manny, style-wise.

In itself, there’s nothing wrong with that. Sugar Ray Leonard had the rangy Tommy Hearns to contend with. Muhammad Ali had the stocky Joe Frazier. “Sugar Ray” Robinson had bruiser Jake LaMotta.

Ergo, it’s no shame to admit having difficulty in beating an opponent.

Moreover, Manny’s insistence on his clear victory was betrayed by his body language at the fight’s denouement and just before the verdict was announced.

BOOING. However, the post-fight booing--if it was directed at Manny--was totally uncalled for. Therein lies the problem if we hold our heroes in such high esteem they are deemed infallible.

I for one, never thought Manny would knock out Marquez easily based solely on their previous two encounters, and so I had scaled down my expectations realistically.

But Manny fought his heart out in that fight, like he always does. Though there were moments wherein he appeared to lose steam, his energy level was regained in the championship rounds.

His superior punch output in that fight was evidence of his work ethic.

We never became enamored of Manny as a fighter because he was winning. Rather, he won our hearts because of the way he fought with such bravery and ferocity.

(to be concluded on Sunday)

QUOTED. “I’m going to try and make this rematch in May of 2012. ‘I’m bound and determined to find a definitive winner once and for all.”—Bob Arum (www.mb.com.ph)

LAST ROUND. It’s on my sis-in-law Atty. Renelda Chanco who celebrates her birthday this week. Cheers!

(jingo_quijano@yahoo.com)