Pacquiao vs Marquez 4: How Controversy of 3rd Fight Made 4th Fight Possible
Juan Manuel Marquez's incredible knockout of Manny Pacquiao ended the rivalry between these two competitors on Saturday.
However, this fight wouldn't have even been possible if it wasn't for the controversy surrounding the first three fights.
Pac-Man and Dinamita fought for the first time in 2004 in what was a very close fight.
Pacquiao dropped Marquez three times early in the fight, but Marquez battled back, thanks to his iron-like chin and stamina. The fight ended up being very close, and it ended in a draw.
However, judge Burt Clements admitted to making a mistake when scoring the first round and acknowledged that he cost Pac-Man the WBA and IBF featherweight belts.
Clearly, it wasn't non-awareness that there were three knockdowns. I just screwed up. I feel badly because I dropped the ball, plainly and simply.
However, there is no denying that it was a close fight, but it was a very controversial one.
Obviously, the two fighters needed to clear the air with a second fight, which is why they went at it once again in 2008.
The second bout between these two was also a close one, with Pacquiao finally getting a victory, although it was a split decision.
Once again, it was a close fight, which is why the rivals went at it a third time in November 2011, but that fight ended up being the most controversial yet.
Pacquiao was awarded a majority decision, after which Marquez was furious.
Is there any doubt in your mind that Dinamita won this rivalry?
Marquez was so unpleased with the outcome that he stormed out of the ring after the decision was read and said after the fight that he is considering retirement.
Marquez and Pacquiao simply couldn't end the rivalry that way. This is one of the best rivalries in the sport, and to end it with unfinished business would be ridiculous.
Simply put, the two had to fight again this week, and Marquez finally ended the rivalry with one big punch in the sixth round.
The buck stops here, and this must be the final chapter of the rivalry.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?