The final judgment must wait until after Saturday night, but this series boasts the key elements of a classic
? In pictures: boxing's greatest sagas of all-time
Three is the perfect number in boxing, says Bob Arum and he should know. The 80-year-old promoter has been a Zelig-like figure in the fight game for the best part of 40 years. He has been there, done that, and printed the T-shirt which he then sold on for a tidy profit.
"If you ask me there is nothing better in boxing than a great trilogy," he says. "They give fight fans an opportunity to get to know the fighters through a whole body of work rather than on the basis on just one night, when one of the guys might be a little bit off or the referee has a bad night."
Arum is in the promoter's seat for Saturday's third meeting in Las Vegas between Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel M�rquez. You would expect him to give it the hard sell and he does ("It could be a classic!") but press the old man to name his favourite trilogy and he gives the same answer as even the most casual boxing fan, albeit that his opinion carries a lot more historical heft than most. "Ali-Frazier ? no question about it. The Thrilla in Manila ? again, without question, the greatest fight I have ever seen."
No one would sensibly argue against that, just as there would be little disagreement over what are the necessary ingredients for a great boxing trilogy: two well-matched fighters who have contrasting styles and equally big hearts. Personal animosity is not essential but it usually exists and is always welcomed. A great first fight is essential to whet the appetite for more and if it ends controversially then so much the better. Finally, a wider social narrative that places the two fighters on either side of a divide.
That Ali-Frazier had all of the above places it above all others in any list, but there are other trilogies that have come close. Aficionados swear by the middleweight series just after the second world war between Tony Zale and Rocky Graziano, which saw the pre-fight favourite beaten by his opponent in all three fights ? each of which was an epic, see-sawing contest in its own right. "For three years they lit up the skies in the world of boxing with fireworks. Their fights are still legendary. They weren't fights, they were wars without survivors," wrote the boxing historian Bert Sugar.
More recently, few trilogies have been better than that featuring Marco Antonio Barrera and Erik Morales ? two Mexican fighters whose long-time enmity grew deeper roots after a controversial points decision in favour of Morales at the end of their memorable first fight. In the end, Barrera won the series 2-1, taking a unanimous points victory in the third, and best, of their three meetings.
The final judgment on Pacquiao-M�rquez must wait until after Saturday night but the anticipation is high, and not just among those who, like Arum, have a financial interest in the proceedings. The pair have met twice before, in 2004 and again in 2008, and the fights were 12-round epics. The Filipino won the second fight on a split decision; the first fight was scored a draw. "I think I have already beaten him twice and he knows that," M�rquez said this week.
Pacquiao knows nothing of the sort, or if he does he certainly has not told his trainer, Freddie Roach, who says with a straight face: "Seriously, I believe Manny won both fights."
To prove his point, the Mexican travelled all the way to the Philippines, where he appeared in public wearing a "We were robbed" slogan on his T-shirt. Pacquiao was unimpressed, according to Arum.
"Manny never has feelings about any of his opponents but he really wants to show this guy. He was intense when he fought [Oscar] De La Hoya but there was no personal animosity at all. But here, deep down, there is a great deal of animosity but Manny is such a good politician that he won't show it.
"From M�rquez's point of view, he thinks if he had won those two decisions it would have changed his life for good, and it would have been him and not Manny who would be getting these $25m purses."
The circus-barker contributions of the promoter are part of any pre-fight landscape but not even the best of the bunch can hide the truth of the matter, which is that this trilogy is steeped in mutual admiration. M�rquez might have had a harsh word or three to say about the judges in their first two meetings but he has been very complimentary about his opponent, and his trainer, Nacho Berist�in, was positively effusive as he explained why it was that the Filipino and M�rquez had produced two great fights.
"Manny is such a spectacular fighter. He is always willing to exchange and fight, and with Juan Manuel he has found a guy who is willing to fight with him at his own style and at his own pace," he says, contrasting Pacquiao's more attacking approach with his own fighter's counter-punching style. "One guy, Manny, is trying to make his style work and the other guy trying to make sure that style doesn't work, as well as trying to do his own thing. I just think their styles just match and this fight is going to be the best one of the three."
Roach offers a briefer analysis of what made the first two fights close ? "M�rquez knows how to fight southpaws" ? but, like Berist�in, agrees that the two fighters were made for each other. "They both get ready, they both turn up in shape and they both come to fight. Both of them are very determined people with a lot of heart, and that's why we are having this trilogy."
Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2011/nov/11/manny-pacquiao-juan-manuel-marquez-trilogy
No comments:
Post a Comment