ESPN: What if Pacquiao had KO'd Marquez?

How might the fighters' storied rivalry, and their careers, have been different?

By Kieran Mulvaney | ESPN.com

LAS VEGAS -- If Saturday night's main event at the MGM Grand lasts the distance, Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez will have swapped punches for 48 rounds. And if the final 12 are anything like the first 36, they are likely to be closely fought and to culminate in a close and controversial decision.

It has been the defining rivalry of both men's careers, and yet, by the end of the first round of their first contest in May 2004, it seemed unlikely that it would last another three minutes, let alone extend into three more fights. Pacquiao, fresh off overwhelming Marco Antonio Barrera, tore into Marquez, dropping him three times in the opening frame and leaving at least one observer convinced that the evening's work was done.

"After the first knockdown I thought it was over, after the second one I thought it was over, and after the third one I definitely thought it was over," said Pacquiao's trainer, Freddie Roach. "It didn't come true of course. Marquez showed he was very resilient. He's a very tough guy. He got up from three knockdowns, and the third one was a hard shot."

Importantly, however, the third man in the ring wasn't ready to go home just yet.

"I was looking at [Marquez] close," said Joe Cortez, who was the referee that night. "He was begging me, 'Please don't stop it,' and of course I took that into consideration and I let it continue. Given that it was two flash knockdowns and his eyes looked pretty good to me, I let it go."

But what if Cortez had stopped it? Or what if there had been a three-knockdown rule that mandated he do so? What would have happened then? How might the career paths of both boxers have been different?

For Pacquiao, it's possible that little would have changed. Perhaps he might have defended the 126-pound title he would have taken from Marquez before going on to do what he did anyway -- stepping up to 130 pounds to take on Erik Morales.

The loss in that bout with Morales forced Roach to double down on turning the southpaw Pacquiao into less of a left-hand-happy brawler -- it's stunning to watch the first Marquez fight anew and see how unvaried the Filipino's arsenal was, especially in comparison to his later peak years -- and into a more complete fighter. That led to Pacquiao defeating Morales in a rematch and crushing him in their third contest, and created a springboard from which he launched himself through multiple weight divisions, annihilating Hall of Fame-caliber opponents along the way.

All of that probably would have been as likely to happen if his fight with Marquez had been called after three knockdowns.

The big question is how different things might have been for Marquez. After all, even after his comeback and the disputed draw in the first Pacquiao bout, almost another four years passed before the fighters met again.

"He complains a lot about why we waited so long for the second fight," Roach said, "but he's the one who turned down $750,000 and chose to go to Indonesia and get beat."

After the Pacquiao fight, Marquez made two defenses of his featherweight title, one at the MGM and one at the Mandalay Bay. Needless to say, had he lost that title in a one-round blowout, he probably wouldn't have been making back-to-back appearances on Las Vegas Boulevard in his subsequent outings.

Would he have worked his way back into contention? Would he still have traveled to Indonesia to face Chris John, as he did in March 2006? If so, and if he had lost a points decision in that alternate universe much the same way he did in this reality, what then? It's hard to imagine that a fighter as talented as Marquez wouldn't have resurfaced at some point, but with a one-round stoppage to Pacquiao and a defeat to John in close proximity, would he have been given the same opportunities to defeat Barrera or win epic battles against Joel Casamayor, Juan Diaz and Michael Katsidis? Would the call ever have arrived to face Floyd Mayweather Jr.?

And how much demand would there have been to face Pacquiao again?

"If we didn't have an experienced referee in the first fight," Roach said, "there would have never been a second fight."

But there was an experienced referee on hand, and there was no three-knockdown rule. And so Marquez survived the first round, and the second. Then he turned the tide and completed the first episode of a saga that will reach its fourth, and presumably ultimate, installment Saturday.

"Little did I know that it would turn out to be a helluva fight and I made the right move," said Cortez of his decision to allow the first fight to continue. "It was probably one of the best moves I made in my career."

ESPN: Roach: Expect no Pacquiao-Marquez V

By Kieran Mulvaney | ESPN.com

LAS VEGAS -- Not everybody is completely enamored with the idea of Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez meeting in the ring for a fourth time. Among them, it seems, is Pacquiao's trainer, Freddie Roach.

"I thought Manny won all three fights. I don't need a fourth fight to convince me," he told ESPN.com recently. "But after the last fight, where we got booed so loudly, I think he deserves the rematch and that's why we're here right now."

The reception that greeted Pacquiao's majority decision win last year clearly rankles. Roach mentioned it again Tuesday while talking to a small group of writers at the MGM Grand.

"I thought Manny won the fight," he said. "But the booing was very loud and very vocal. Someone said, 'Why aren't you smiling? You won the fight.' And I said, 'It's very hard to smile when you're being booed that bad.'"

Whatever the outcome may be Saturday night, don't expect a fifth installment of this rivalry.

"It's the last time," Roach said. "We're going to knock him out, end of story."

On that, at least, he and his fighter's opponent agree.

"This is the last fight with Manny," Marquez said Tuesday. "I don't know what will happen in the ring, but this is the last time."

ESPN: In Their Words: Pacquiao-Marquez IV

 Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez preview their fourth meeting on Dec. 8

After three fights as critically acclaimed and hotly contested as the first three between Manny Pacquiao and Juan Manuel Marquez were, the idea of a fourth bout almost needs no introduction or marketing strategy as fans of this rivalry have certainly received their money's worth and know what to expect.

But if there is one thing lacking in this series between two future Hall of Fame fighters, it has been any form of closure after three of the most debated decisions in the history of the sport. The two fighters are so evenly matched and have performed on such an even plane that despite Marquez's owning a record of 0-2-1 against Pacquiao, there are some who believe the 39-year-old Marquez easily could have been awarded victories in all three bouts.

The series between Pacquiao and Marquez will long be remembered for far more than simply controversial decisions on the scorecards, especially considering the first three bouts -- all title fights -- were contested at three different weight classes over a seven-year period throughout different chapters of their respective careers.

ESPN.com recently enlisted HBO to gather the fighters' thoughts ahead of fight No. 4, set for Dec. 8 (HBO PPV, 9 p.m. ET) at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas. In this segment, Pacquiao and Marquez discuss their controversial third meeting.

Juan Manuel Marquez

There is something special about fighting the same opponent four times. It tells me that the first three fights have been good and competitive enough to merit one more fight, and when it is against an elite opponent such as Manny Pacquiao, then it's even more special and more meaningful.

Over the last eight years, Pacquiao and I have fought three times and all the fights have gone the distance. And while people say Pacquiao has knocked me down four times over those 36 rounds, they should say three were in the first round of our first fight, and that he has only scored one knockdown in the next 35 rounds, and none in the last 20 rounds while winning at least 26 of the 36 rounds we have fought over those three fights.

So the question for this fourth fight is: "Do I need to knockout Pacquiao to get the win?"
Well, I will certainly try. I also know that while knocking out a fighter like Pacquiao won't be easy, it's not impossible either.

I know that I have to be intelligent, fast and strong to beat him. But as we have seen in the first three fights, it is not just up to me to win the fights. It is up to three judges who score the fights. There is no doubt in my mind that I won all three previous fights with my skills and smarts in the ring, but the judges have denied me that victory.

There is not much I can do about the judges. I don't pick them and I sure don't know them. I know most have never trained for three months for a fight, and most have never gotten in a ring for 12 rounds with the best fighter in the world, and most have no idea what sacrifices we must make to get in the ring and put on the best fight that we can.

I feel that most people believe that I won our last fight very clearly, but the judges did not see it that way. And by the way, I am not only talking about the judges in my fights. Look at what happened to Pacquiao against Timothy Bradley. I was ringside for that fight and I felt that Pacquiao won it, but the judges took it away from him and that also is not right.

I just want the judges to score the fight in the ring and not what they think is happening in the ring. I don't care about the three previous fights and how they were scored anymore. All I ask is for a fair judgment, and if I lose, I lose. But if I win, I want my hand raised that night in the ring.

Pacquiao continues to be the best in the world and to finally get a win over him will make me very happy. But don't judge my career by these four fights. Take a look at all my 61 fights and then decide where I belong in the history of boxing.

Manny Pacquiao

If you would have told me in 2004 that I would be fighting Juan Manuel Marquez in 2012 -- and for the fourth time -- well, I would not have believed it.
But here we are and for a good reason: Our previous three fights have been great -- great for us and great for our fans.

Unlike my three fights against Erik Morales, which were fought closer together and at the same weight, Juan Manuel and I have battled each other at three different weight classes and always at important points in our careers. There is a certain feeling of destiny in our rivalry. It was meant to be that we fight each other four times.

All of my fights with Marquez are important. He is a legend. Perhaps the best fighter Mexico has ever produced next to Julio Cesar Chavez. But Marquez does not define my career. My career is defined by many significant victories. World titles in eight different weight divisions and knockouts of Oscar De La Hoya, Miguel Cotto, Erik Morales, Marco Antonio Barrera and Ricky Hatton mean as much to my career as my victories over Marquez.

Champions are competitors first and foremost. They want to win. They need to win. I have put everything into this training camp. I know I haven't fought perfect fights against Marquez in the past and my incentive in this one is to fight the fight I should fight this time. If I do that I will not only win again but put away all doubts in the minds of the fans and Marquez on who is the better fighter. I want everyone to know the old Manny Pacquiao is still alive in the ring. Speed and aggression will be my main weapons and if the knockout presents itself to me, I will go for it as many times as it takes.

What does this fourth fight with Marquez mean to me? It means the chance to author the final chapter of a marvelous story and to look forward to writing a new chapter in my ring life.

ESPN: Pride and Pacquiao: Marquez's quest

By Brian Campbell | ESPN.com

If you look closely enough at Juan Manuel Marquez, you'll notice the subtle scars on his face that speak of punishment endured over 61 professional fights.

If you listen to the proud Mexican fighter, you'll also pick up on a different set of scars just below the surface -- an emotional longing for validation that speaks of a legacy incomplete.

When Marquez mentions that his fourth meeting with Manny Pacquiao on Dec. 8 in Las Vegas is the biggest fight of his career, he means it. In his mind, the same politics that allowed him to secure a fourth fight despite an 0-2-1 record against Pacquiao -- in the face of consumer fatigue -- have to be the same that prevented him on three occasions from victories he believes were rightfully his.

That's the beauty of Marquez and his Hall of Fame trainer, Nacho Beristain. The duo doesn't think Marquez was robbed of just one win over Pacquiao. Each believes with every fabric of his soul that Pacquiao, if not an accomplice, was the benefactor of three separate crimes.


Whether it's a case of stubborn pride or a legitimate beef, Marquez doesn't view a fourth fight as a chance to get even with Pacquiao so much as he considers it an opportunity to win the entire rivalry in one fight.

"I think the people [will] remember me for this fourth fight for my career," Marquez told ESPN.com. "It's important to me because the people will know Juan Manuel Marquez always."

It would be ignorant to diminish Marquez's Hall of Fame credentials by suggesting his place in history is necessarily dependent on defeating Pacquiao. But it's how the public will remember Marquez that makes this fight so crucial to him -- while simultaneously keeping the 39-year-old awake at night.

Whether Marquez will admit it or not, there's a difference between being remembered as the perennial runner-up in one of boxing's greatest rivalries and being referred to as an all-time great legend who toppled his archenemy when it mattered most.

Attaching this much meaning to one fight isn't necessarily fair, but the idea has clearly fueled Marquez's rabid stalking of Pacquiao through four weight classes over eight years. The controversial defeats have effectively road-blocked Marquez's path toward his greatest goal of all: becoming the No. 1 pound-for-pound fighter in the sport.

It's that pride in his craftsmanship and quest for superiority among his peers -- worth more to him than money, titles or fame -- that has kept Marquez pressing forward this late in his career.

For his part, Beristain -- still as fiery and quick as ever at 73 -- rejected the notion that a Marquez victory would enhance, if not partially validate, a missing part of their collective résumé. He mentioned the 23 world champions he has trained with the vigor of a knight drawing his sword for battle. The tone of his voice, however, changed quickly to that of a father figure when describing what a Marquez win would mean to him.

"It will be for me a great satisfaction seeing a fighter win that I have known since he was a kid," Beristain told ESPN.com through interpreter Angel Heredia, Marquez's strength coach. "That would demonstrate to the whole world that the pound-for-pound best in the world is Juan Manuel Marquez, and that would make me happy."

Beristain's voice softened: "He is deserving."

Neither Beristain nor Marquez will come out and say it, but there is a dislike in the Marquez camp for Pacquiao that is palpable -- a loathing that centers more on the Filipino star's fame and what he represents than the fighter himself. It's the kind of rueful spite that gets fighter and trainer out of bed each morning.

 "I am a professional boxer, but the last three fights, when we finished the fights, I feel very angry," Marquez said of the Pacquiao bouts. "In the ring we are enemies, and then outside of the ring, maybe friends. ... I don't know." He paused for what seemed like an eternity, as if the sum of the emotional toll from all three fights painfully surfaced at once. "Maybe friends ... but inside the ring is another thing."

Beristain, meanwhile, is generally complimentary of Pacquiao, but often in his own backhanded way.

"In this fight, it's particularly a great honor because Pacquiao is the one that brings the crowd and the money, and therefore that's why he is a great opponent," he said.

Beristain's real grudge, it seems, is more of a misdirected hostility aimed at Pacquiao's ability to have swayed the judges throughout the rivalry with Marquez.

"After [the second fight], I started to think that sometimes the judges lean toward the enterprise's fighter," Beristain said. "I believe that other people in the circle of boxing must think that Las Vegas is a mecca where all the money is built up and all of us that take part in it have an obligation to take care of the money that is put in. The acting of the judges leave a lot of us to [wonder] what is going on.

"The fans are so noble and so faithful. It's sad that the fans [are] still loyal regardless of decisions. It's kind of sad that you still have this black dot in the circle of the sport and the people can see that. Yet the fans still love the sport."

Beristain doesn't pull any punches in explaining exactly how Marquez was denied victories in all three bouts:

Pacquiao-Marquez I (May 8, 2004; featherweight): split draw -- 115-110 Pacquiao, 115-110 Marquez, 113-113

"I believe it was hard for Juan Manuel to get up after the three times he was knocked down [in the first round] and outbox [Pacquiao] throughout the night. [Marquez] gave him a nice boxing classroom. I believe that Marquez won, maybe by one point, and when they told me they gave him a draw, I was real pissed."

Pacquiao-Marquez II (March 15, 2008; super featherweight): split decision for Pacquiao -- 115-112, 114-113, 112-115

"The second one, we won it clearly -- more clearly than the first one. The referee told me in the locker room [before the fight] about head bumps. They were supposed to take a point away from Manny for a head bump. They never took it away. And in the ninth round, again, [Pacquiao] gave him another head bump, and in the 11th round, there was another bump that cut Marquez. The referee never had the guts to take the point. Juan should have had a minimum of two more points because the ref never had the guts to tell the judge to take a point away."

Pacquiao-Marquez III (Nov. 12, 2011; welterweight): majority decision for Pacquiao -- 115-113, 116-112, 114-114

"It would have been very hard for a fan to interpret the technical aspects of the fight, because a fan cannot see what a trainer can see from the corner. But in this last fight, even a kid who is 8 years old can tell that Juan Manuel Marquez won the fight."

In the seven years bookended by the first and third fights with Pacquiao, Marquez built a worthy list of accomplishments consisting of four titles in as many weight classes plus memorable victories over the likes of Orlando Salido, Marco Antonio Barrera, Juan Diaz (twice) and Michael Katsidis.

But you get the impression that none of it matters to Marquez because none of those names is Pacquiao's. In the prideful world of Marquez's Ahab-like obsession with the great whale that got away, no other fight will ever be as important.

The truth is, a Marquez victory Dec. 8 likely won't catapult him to the No. 1 P4P spot he most desires. If anything, it would only complicate the rivalry with Pacquiao, likely necessitating the need for more fights between the two.

But to one fighter and his fatherly trainer entrenched in a relationship more than two decades in the making, it would validate an eight-year crusade to right a wrong. When the only currency that may be more valuable to a man than truth is pride, one victory is all Marquez needs.

Manny Pacquiao is a new man "I'm not running for the higher office. I'm focusing on being a congressman."

By Jeremy Schaap

JEREMY SCHAAP: People still want to know how you feel about losing to Timothy Bradley in a split decision on June 9. Are you over it?

MANNY PACQUIAO: Yes. People know I won the fight. I have nothing to prove.

SCHAAP: What are your thoughts about a rematch? 

MANNY PACQUIAO: I don't think boxing fans want to watch the fight again because it's one-sided fighting.

SCHAAP: So why Juan Manuel Marquez again on Dec. 8? Why a fourth fight?

PACQUIAO: We need the fourth fight because he's always claiming he won the fight, that he didn't really lose. We need the fourth fight to answer all the doubts in his mind. And also in his fans' minds.

SCHAAP: You've fought 36 rounds against Marquez. They've been very close, the three fights. They could've gone any way. You won two, and there's been one draw. What will it take for a different kind of outcome this time == a decisive outcome?

PACQUIAO: I know he knows my style: in and out, in and out. But this time I'll change my style and be more aggressive.

SCHAAP: You'll surprise the guy who has seen you more than anyone else?

PACQUIAO: Yes. He's gonna be surprised that I changed my style.

SCHAAP: A lot of people think he won the fight last year, which you won by majority decision. Your own trainer, Freddie Roach, said because that decision was so controversial, you have to knock him out this time. Do you think you have to knock him out?

PACQUIAO: If he gives me a chance to finish the fight, why not? I mean, I'm not predicting I'm going to knock him out, but I'll do my best and get back the aggressiveness I had when I was 25 or 26 years old.

 SCHAAP: Why have you not been as aggressive recently as you were when you were younger?

PACQUIAO: With experience in boxing, you learn how to be a scientific boxer and how to fight easy.

SCHAAP: Roach has said you've become more religious, and he's concerned that will affect the way you fight. How do you respond to that concern?

PACQUIAO: It doesn't bother my boxing.

SCHAAP: You're the same boxer you were?

PACQUIAO: Yes.

SCHAAP: Why did you become more religious?

PACQUIAO: Because I'm reading the manual to life, which is the Bible, and I learn a lot of things there -- how to obey the law and the commandments of God and how to have eternal life.

SCHAAP: What was your life like before you found God?

PACQUIAO: I'm always praying, but it's not enough. I was drinking, committing adultery, sexual immorality, everything like that. Gambling. Careless words come out of my mouth. The Bible says we'll be judged for everything we do.

SCHAAP: You're a different man?

PACQUIAO: Yes. Whatever happens after our life here in this world, I know where I'm going. I have eternal life.

SCHAAP: And you have recommitted yourself to your marriage?

PACQUIAO: Yes, yes. It's important to be united.

SCHAAP: When you fought Marquez last year, what was the state of your marriage with Jinkee?

PACQUIAO: We're still together, but we have a lot of trials in our life.

SCHAAP: What happened the night of the last Marquez fight?

PACQUIAO: The night of the fight? Nothing. I'm winning, and my wife, she's there supporting me.

SCHAAP: It's been reported that you were late to the fight because you and Jinkee were having a fight.

PACQUIAO: We were not late.

SCHAAP: There was no argument with Jinkee about whether she would accompany you to the fight that night?

PACQUIAO: No, no.

SCHAAP: The people you've surrounded yourself with for a long time, they like to party the way you liked to party. Are the same people with you now?

PACQUIAO: The same people, but they've changed. They stopped drinking. Some of them. They drink, but not that much. I'm trying to convince them -- all of them -- to do what I'm doing.

SCHAAP: What is your favorite Bible verse?

PACQUIAO: In Ezekiel 18, verse 31 and 32, it says: "Rid yourself of all the offenses you have committed and get a new heart and a new spirit & for I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord. Repent and live."

SCHAAP: Why does that mean so much to you?

PACQUIAO: Because God loves us so much. He doesn't want us to die. He takes no pleasure in the death of anyone. That's what he said. I mean, if we don't have God in our life, we're considered dead.

SCHAAP: Can a fighter with religious convictions, someone who truly cares for his fellow man, have a killer instinct in the ring?

PACQUIAO: Boxing is a sport. We allow each other to hit each other, but I'm not treating my opponent like my enemy. We're doing a job to entertain people.

SCHAAP: Will you be a better fighter because of your newfound religious convictions?

PACQUIAO: What I can say is, if God is with you, who can be against you?

SCHAAP: All things are possible.

PACQUIAO: All things are possible with God.

SCHAAP: Even a fight against Floyd Mayweather?

PACQUIAO: I have no comment about him. But I'm praying for him that he will find a way of life. Because our life here in this world is temporary.

SCHAAP: Floyd accused you, essentially, of using steroids and performance-enhancing drugs. What was that like for you, to be accused of that?

PACQUIAO: I'm not angry at him. I like Floyd. This is my brother. In God, in Christ Jesus.

SCHAAP: Will you fight him in 2013?

PACQUIAO: I hope that fight will happen by next year.

SCHAAP: You said that if it doesn't happen by 2013, you don't think it will ever happen.

PACQUIAO: I think so.

SCHAAP: Give me a percentage, if you can, 50 percent, 60percent, 70percent likelihood that there will be a Pacquiao-Mayweather fight in 2013.

PACQUIAO: I'm 100 percent willing to fight him. I already announced that on ESPN. I can agree with the sharing 45/55 for him. Whatever he wants -- the drug testing, he can suggest the rules and regulations. It's up to him.

SCHAAP: Do you think he wants to fight you?

PACQUIAO: It's hard to judge, but we'll see. It's up to him.

SCHAAP: But I'm asking you. This is a fight people have been talking about for years. And you're saying that if it doesn't happen soon, it'll probably never happen. Do you think he's going to agree to the terms that he's already set out, to which you've agreed, and that you will meet in the ring?

PACQUIAO: I cannot say anything about that because I don't know what's in his mind right now.

SCHAAP: If you two were to fight this year, what kind of a fight would it be?

PACQUIAO: It would be good. A big fight. It's gonna be a big fight, and it's what the fans want to see.

SCHAAP: What is there left for you to prove as a fighter?

PACQUIAO: To the boxing fans, I have nothing to prove. But if he wants to fight, if he's going to fight with me, there's another story for, you know, for history in boxing.

SCHAAP: Is it frustrating for you that the fight hasn't been made?

PACQUIAO: What am I going to do? It's okay for me, but the fans want that fight to happen.

SCHAAP: The fans want it more than you want it?

PACQUIAO: No, I want the fight. But what am I gonna do if we don't fight?

SCHAAP: You're 33. You've been fighting a long time. How much longer do you want to do this?

PACQUIAO: It's hard to say -- 36.

SCHAAP: There was a time when you talked about becoming the president of the Philippines. Is that something that still interests you?

PACQUIAO: Not in my mind right now. We don't know. God knows our future. I'm not running for the higher office. What I'm focusing on right now is being a congressman.

SCHAAP: Here you are, arguably the most famous athlete on the planet. One of the great fighters of all time. A champion in eight weight classes. What is there left on your list of the things you want to accomplish?

PACQUIAO: If I could go back in time, I would not skip the 115-118 [weight classes]. No, I am joking. I like giving happiness and enjoyment to the fans.

SCHAAP: What do you think of all the criticism Mayweather is getting now for not fighting you, even from some of his supposed friends like 50 Cent?

PACQUIAO: I have no comment.

SCHAAP: You won't sit here and say he's ducking you?

PACQUIAO: I'm not gonna say bad words.

SCHAAP: Those might be factual words.

PACQUIAO: I'm not gonna say words that can hurt someone. It can hurt their heart.

SCHAAP: He said things that have hurt your heart.

PACQUIAO: It's okay. The more humble you are, the more God will lift you up.

SCHAAP: Here's the last thing, Manny: What do you consider the greatest achievement in your life?

PACQUIAO: When I found God.

SCHAAP: No more drinking?

PACQUIAO: No more drinking. No more gambling. No more girls. Only my wife. And my family. And no more bad words. Obey the commandments of God.

SCHAAP: No more vices?

PACQUIAO: No more.

SCHAAP: It's boring being Manny Pacquiao now?

PACQUIAO: No, I'm happy.

Note:  This story appears in ESPN The Magazine's Dec. 10 Interview issue.

ESPN: Has a pious Pacquiao lost his edge?

Can a fighter maintain his ferocity without walking on the wild side?

By Nigel Collins

Manny Pacquiao walked through the curtains and onto the set of "Jimmy Kimmel Live," smiling and waving to the audience. Last week the fighter made his seventh appearance on the late-night talk show, an event that has become as much a part of Manny's prefight ritual as genuflecting in his corner before the opening bell. Despite his jovial manner, Kimmel had obviously done his homework.

The TV host noted that Pacquiao had given up drinking, gambling and cockfighting prior to the fighter's controversial loss to Timothy Bradley Jr. and asked him if he had returned to his former vices following the defeat. Manny laughed along with the audience but didn't answer the question. Although Kimmel was making a joke, he had cut very close to the bone.

If Pacquiao were a banker, bricklayer or schoolteacher -- anything but a boxer -- his born-again, goody two-shoes reformation would have been the feel-good story the media portrayed in countless cookie-cutter articles. But for a fighter, especially one as ferocious as Pacquiao at his best, such a transformation could be disastrous. Boxers' personalities are usually reflected in the way they fight, and the menacing attack that made Pacquiao so wildly popular isn't a fighting style derived from abstinence.

Fighters are by nature risk-takers who tempt fate every time they duck between the ropes. It is true that life in the fast lane has cut short or ruined many boxers' careers. But it's also true that the majority of great fighters were wild men who embraced a life filled with virtually every vice known to mankind. Even alleged paragons of virtue such as Oscar De La Hoya and Sugar Ray Leonard, who traded on their squeaky images, admitted they cheated on their wives, used cocaine and drank to excess.

That saints do not make the best prizefighters should come as no surprise, so it only stands to reason that good fighters have at least a dollop of the devil in them. There seems to be something akin to Newton's Third Law of Motion at work. The only difference is that instead of each action eliciting an equal and opposite reaction, it's a karmic tradeoff between the wild and tame side of a boxer's psyche.

John L. Sullivan, the first heavyweight champion of the gloved era, was a hopeless alcoholic. Jack Johnson spent most of his time in the company of prostitutes, and Kid McCoy went to prison for shooting his fiancée. Welterweight champion Dixie Kid (Aaron Lister Brown) was a morphine addict, and lightweight champion Lew Jenkins filled his water bottle with whiskey. Joe Louis, whose public image was sanitized throughout his career, had more lovers than fights, used drugs and gambled away a large chunk of his fortune playing golf. Stanley Ketchell, Harry Greb and Mickey Walker were all boozers and serial skirt chasers. Floyd Mayweather Jr. gambles huge amounts of money on sporting events and has served time for physically abusing the mother of two of his children. Even Bible-thumping Evander Holyfield fathered children out of wedlock and has been hauled into court numerous times for failing to pay child support. Then there's Mike Tyson, whose many misdeeds have been so well documented that there's no need to run down his rap sheet yet again.

It's worth noting that all of the fighters mentioned above are either enshrined in the International Boxing Hall of Fame or shoo-ins for induction five years after the end of their careers. This is no accident. Of course, just being a hellraiser doesn't mean you've got what it takes to be a great boxer. The inverse, however, generally applies: Great fighters, more often than not, do more than their share of raising hell.

Fighters aren't created in a vacuum. The nature-nurture tandem plays a highly significant role in the development of their lives, the same way it does in all of us. The majority of prizefighters have emerged from the most deprived circumstances, where violence and hunger are everyday affairs. This survival-of-the-fittest environment is a Petri dish for outlaws of every stripe, including boxers. They come equipped with a what-have-I-got-to-lose mentality and an appetite for danger. They fight hard and party even harder, hungry for the good life as long as it lasts. Some gamble, hoping to duplicate the rush they experience in the ring. Others seek solace from pain both physical and psychological in the bottle or the needle. When you get right down to it, fighters' lives are lived at such a frantic pace and on such an exaggerated scale, is it any wonder that their transgressions are also excessive?

Pacquiao's ascension from a mud-floor nipa hut in the Philippine boondocks to one of the highest-paid athletes in the world is among the most amazing stories in sports history. But we should never forget that the root of his appeal has always been a breathtaking attack that overwhelmed opponents with concussive finality. By the time he stopped Miguel Cotto in 2009, Manny seemed more like an action figure come to life than a mere mortal. Then, with little sign or warning, the ferocity began to wane. Since he brutalized Cotto, all five of Pacquiao's bouts have gone the distance, leaving legions of fans disappointed and wondering what happened.

"I don't think the spark is there anymore," said Ted Lerner, an American writer who has lived in the Philippines for more than 18 years and has known Pacquiao since the start of his pro career. "He's found religion, politics and business, and now has many other interests away from the ring. Clearly that special edge that made Manny a once-in-a-generation phenomenon has faded considerably and will continue to fade if he continues to fight. Even so, Pacquiao still has immense pride and is also motivated by having to carry the hopes of 90 million Filipinos on his shoulders every time he fights. There's no doubt he takes all of this very seriously and wants to perform well. But I think he's fighting now more for the money than for the love of fighting. A lot more. Seven weeks of intense training and massive amounts of promotional hype are not going to change that."

And Lerner has no expectations that Pacquiao will eventually break free of his self-imposed constraints and allow the unbridled version of himself to make a comeback: "I believe the new, clean-living Pacquiao is sincere," Lerner said. "His actions alone -- selling off his bars and poker room, cutting out the late nights at the pool hall, no drinking -- are testament to how serious he is about living a clean life and being religious."

Memories of a poverty-stricken childhood and homeless nights on the streets of Manila were Pacquiao's motivation throughout the bulk of his career. True, he enjoyed his celebrity and everything that came with it, but he also retained the grim determination born of desperation. It served him well for a long time, but eventually the wild child became comfortable enough to move past the fears that had driven him to achieve unimaginable success.

Manny Pacquiao has finally grown up, and boxing is the poorer for it.

ESPN First Take: Mayweather-Pacquiao Saga Continues

Mayweather, Pacquiao Settling Defamation Case

LAS VEGAS -- Floyd Mayweather Jr. and Manny Pacquiao are settling a federal defamation case in Las Vegas, clearing a key hurdle to a long-awaited bout between two top fighters who've traded verbal jabs for years but have never met in the ring.

Terms of the pretrial agreement cited in documents filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Las Vegas are confidential, said Malcolm LaVergne, a lawyer representing Floyd Mayweather Jr.'s father in the case.
LaVergne said documents filed under seal ask U.S. District Judge Larry R. Hicks to dismiss the lawsuit. Documents filed publicly said each side would bear its own attorney fees and costs.

"The matter has been resolved," LaVergne said. "Any alleged terms of the resolution would be strictly confidential. Floyd Mayweather Sr. is very happy that this lengthy case has finally come to a conclusion."
Pacquiao filed the lawsuit in December 2009 seeking unspecified damages based on allegations that Floyd Mayweather Jr. defamed him by suggesting Pacquiao used performance-enhancing substances. Pacquiao denied Mayweather's claim.

In a statement released Tuesday night through the mediator in the case, the Mayweathers said they "wish to make it clear that they never intended to claim that Manny Pacquiao has used or is using any performance-enhancing drugs, nor are they aware of any evidence that Manny Pacquiao has used performance-enhancing drugs."

An attorney for Pacquiao did not immediately respond to messages from The Associated Press.
The direction of the case took a turn against Floyd Mayweather Jr. last week, when the judge issued a ruling ordering him to pay about $114,000 in legal fees and costs for avoiding questioning under oath from Pacquiao's lawyers.

Hicks faulted Mayweather for failure to comply with a court order. But he earlier rejected a bid by Pacquiao lawyers Daniel Petrocelli and David Marroso to end the lawsuit with a more severe sanction -- a default judgment for Pacquiao.

LaVergne said Tuesday he had no information about whether the court settlement means Mayweather and Pacquiao will meet in the ring.

Pacquiao's promoter, Bob Arum of Top Rank Inc., declined comment. His spokesman, Lee Samuels, said the company was not involved in the defamation case.

Nevada State Athletic Commission chief Keith Kizer said he wasn't aware of any talks between the two camps about scheduling a fight. But Kizer said such a fight could set records for the highest purse, gate and number of cable television paid viewers.

A Mayweather-Pacquiao fight might eclipse the Mayweather super welterweight fight against Oscar De La Hoya that drew 17,078 fans to the MGM Grand Garden Arena in May 2007, Kizer said. Paid attendance was $18.4 million.

"Based on my dealings with the boxing public and boxing insiders, the proposed Mayweather-Pacquiao fight has as much interest as any fight I can remember in the last 20 years," Kizer said. "I think this would be our first gate over $20 million."

Pacquiao, 33, also a member of Congress in the Philippines, is 54-4 with two draws in 60 fights. He is due to fight Juan Manuel Marquez on Dec. 8 at the MGM Grand Garden.

Mayweather, 35, who goes by the nickname "Money," was serving two months of a three-month sentence in a Las Vegas jail on a domestic battery conviction when he was named by Forbes magazine this summer as the highest-paid athlete in the world for 2011.

He is undefeated in 43 fights and was guaranteed $32 million for the May 5 bout during which he defeated Miguel Cotto.

ESPN First Take: Manny Pacquiao-Juan Manuel Marquez IV

ESPN: Introducing 'Fixing The Fight Game'

 By Jason Langendorf | ESPN.com

Unbelievable. They did it to us again.

Just when you thought boxing couldn't possibly catch you by surprise one more time, that it couldn't steal another tiny piece of your sporting soul -- or that the overlords of the fight game wouldn't dare continue to sit idly by while it happened -- the sport steps on your foot and cracks you behind the ear. Again.

The verdict in Saturday's Manny Pacquiao-Timothy Bradley Jr. welterweight title bout is just the most recent foul boxing has committed against its fans -- and although Bradley's stupefying split decision victory is one of the more egregious violations of recent vintage, it's not remotely uncommon.

And yet, while many swear that the situation worsens with every passing fight, to say dodgy decisions -- or nearly any of boxing's manifold troubles -- are a new trend would be disingenuous, an act of willfully shrugging off a hundred years and more of history. Even if Pacquiao-Bradley didn't pass your sniff test, if you -- like many -- suspect dirty dealings that tilted the scorecards in Bradley's favor, a single apocryphal outcome is hardly symbolic of a shift in core values of the business of boxing. Before today's self-interested promoters, sanctioning bodies and networks, we had shady "managers," connected bookies and the mob. Ah, progress.

 Many authorities, fans and invested observers have expressed outrage at this latest insult, including trainer and ESPN analyst Teddy Atlas, who has publicly railed against boxing's injustices for years. After watching Saturday's fight, it's hard to argue against his point that the result -- and others like it -- must be attributed to either corruption or incompetence. Are there other possibilities? Would we suffer fewer of these stinkers by adding more judges at ringside, providing them the same TV feed granted to viewers and better defining the criteria for scoring a fight, as some have suggested?

We'd like to find out. In a week that seems as appropriate as any, ESPN.com is launching the granddaddy of all DIY projects in an effort to cure what ails boxing. We call it "Fixing The Fight Game," and we're enlisting experts, insiders and fans to help identify the sources of boxing's worst problems and, most important, to share their ideas and devise strategies for restoring a grand old sport that has fallen into disrepair.

The scorer's table is only where we'll start. FTFG will cover topics ranging from officiating to matchmaking to the messy sanctioning bodies to fighter safety and welfare, an issue we consider to be as important (and currently overlooked) as any other. We expect the project to grow organically, and the hope is that, with your help, we'll cover whatever ground necessary and arrive at actionable solutions to bring boxing -- for too long perceived as a back-alley sport -- into the light.

It's a challenge, we know. Call us hopeless optimists, though -- we don't consider it a quixotic quest. Boxing's troubles are entrenched, and there will be no quick fixes. But an open forum of ideas and a groundswell of support for change is a good place to start if the sport is to have a chance to get off the ropes. By sharing your thoughts in the comments sections of stories covering these issues and with ESPN Boxing on Twitter (using hashtag #FixFightGame), you can help to at least try to make it a fair fight.

ESPN: Controversial bout gates $8.96M

 By Dan Rafael | ESPN.com

Manny Pacquiao's tremendously controversial split-decision loss to Timothy Bradley Jr. in their welterweight title fight on Saturday night at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas generated a live gate of $8,963,180 from 13,229 tickets sold.

Keith Kizer, executive director of the Nevada State Athletic Commission, released the figures on Wednesday.

There were 2,070 unsold tickets for Pacquiao-Bradley and 925 complimentary tickets given away, according to the commission report. Also, the fight generated an additional $249,000 from 4,980 closed circuit tickets sold in Las Vegas.

The gate is the 17th largest in Nevada history. It is sandwiched just behind Floyd Mayweather Jr.'s September 2011 knockout victory against Victor Ortiz ($9 million from 13,364 tickets sold) and just ahead of Pacquiao's lopsided decision win against Shane Mosley in May 2011 ($8,882,600 from 15,422 tickets sold).

Pacquiao has six fights that rank in the top 21 of Nevada all-time gates, including No 3 -- $14,380,300 from 14,468 tickets sold for his career-defining victory against Oscar De La Hoya in December 2008, which sent De La Hoya into retirement.

Figures are still being compiled to determine how many units the Pacquiao-Bradley sold on pay-per-view, although HBO will replay the bout on Saturday night (10 ET).

Bradley was awarded a 147-pound world title in one of the most controversial decisions boxing has seen in years.

Judges Duane Ford and C.J. Ross both scored the fight 115-113 in favor of Bradley while Jerry Roth had it 115-113 for Pacquiao. The scoring from Ford and Ross caused a firestorm worldwide because virtually everybody had Pacquiao clearly winning.

Pacquiao's promoter, Top Rank's Bob Arum, has called for the Nevada attorney general to investigate the scoring. Nevada congressman Harry Reid, whom Pacquiao once campaigned for, has also said there should be an investigation.

ESPN W: Boxing must clean up or die

 By Jane McManus

Manny Pacquiao was robbed. The welterweight wasn't able to knock out opponent Timothy Bradley, and in boxing that means the winner is determined by the scorecards of three all-too-human judges.

Subjectivity is undermining what is left of boxing's (struggles to keep a straight face) integrity. Fighting was once an almost-noble sport, and midcentury cigar-chompers made boxing the NFL of its era. However, boxing has not had that kind of cachet since around the time Mike Tyson dined on Evander Holyfield's ear. And that was well before the emergence of face tattoos.

The sport and its approximately 475 organizing bodies need to figure out how to turn their image around before boxing goes the way of cockfighting and theatrical wrestling.
 
But boxing has an unlikely role model in ... figure skating.

Stop laughing.

Pummeling another person into unconsciousness may not on its face seem to have a lot in common with a sport that involves triple lutzes, Bach and sequins.

But look a little deeper. Both sports have to rely on subjective scoring and, with it, the risk of corruption. Both have had major scandals at the Olympic Games. Roy Jones lost to Korean fighter Park Si-Hun by decision at the 1988 games in Seoul after landing 86 punches to Park's 32, according to The Guardian.

Similarly, ice skating was rocked by a 2002 scandal in the pairs competition. After Canadians Jamie Sale
and David Pelletier took the silver and Yelena Berezhnaya and Anton Sikharulidze of Russia won the gold, some commentators felt the judges had made a mistake. Later, when French judge Marie-Reine Le Gougne broke down and confessed she had been pressured to favor the Russians, the scandal widened. She later recanted the confession, but the damage was done and the IOC awarded both couples gold medals.

After the Jones debacle, Olympic boxing changed to a more objective judging system that focuses on total punches landed, but given all the governing bodies, there is not a singular voice to make things right in the professional ranks.

Figure skating, on the other hand, from the Olympic level on down, was cleaned up. There will always be some way to cheat the system, but figure skating officials have adopted more objective scoring, called the international judging system (IJS). Not everyone endorses the changes -- some judges even retired rather than learn the new rules -- but the sport has moved forward and put accountability at the forefront.

"With IJS, the sport has become more measurable," Mitch Moyer, U.S. Figure Skating senior director of athlete high performance, said in a statement. "The athletes are provided more detailed feedback as to the way their performance was evaluated by the judges. While not a perfect system, the athletes and coaches can take this feedback and make adjustments to improve for the next competition."

Artistry is difficult to measure, and it is not emphasized as much in the new system. Judges instead quantify artistry in ways that can be measured, such as "rhythmic knee action and precision of foot placement."

So it isn't perfect.

Everyone knew what a 6.0 meant, and the new system is just inscrutable enough to open the door to fraudulent scores if judges are anonymous. But isn't an attempt to name the unnamable better than allegedly taking a bunch of boxing judges to dinner in Korea and winding up with a fixed decision?

So what in a boxing ring can be measured and put into an objective system? Punches landed and standing eight-counts would be a natural place to start, and would have delivered Jones his deserved gold medal.

Or boxing, with its alphabet soup of belts, could do nothing, and dive after shrinking payouts as it becomes less and less relevant on the sports landscape. Horse racing, boxing and baseball were three of the most popular sports last century, but only baseball can make that claim now.

Baseball has dealt with scandals of its own, but it isn't the storm that's most important, it's what happens in its wake.

There is no need for boxing to act like it's the 1880s and J.L. Sullivan is still waxing his mustache. As USA Today columnist Christine Brennan noted, if you added a few well-placed sensors to a boxing glove, you could measure the speed and power of each punch. Those could be calculated into the overall score.

Technology can solve some problems that subjective scoring has presented in sports. Some will lament removing the human element, but we're all pretty cool with instant replay at this point, right?

Boxing will learn an old lesson soon enough: evolve or die.

ESPN's First Take on Bradley-Pacquiao Controversy

video credit: YouTube/HollyMartins