Floyd is a fucking idiot. 2:00 on is truly priceless. "UUMMMM...........Im just waitin for da....I mean.....UUMMMM. (End of sentence) You know in certain cases, you know far, in in certain UUMMM domestics violence cases, youf, you have seen pictures. Since I I think, im still waitin to see da pictures. But you gotta realize im ina im ina i do-wa i do-wa, i box for a living. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Floyd Sr. said that because he thinks Manny is on steroids. We all know how steroids/testosterone/EPO and various other supplements can improve a man's efficiency in the ring. Don't try and TWIST the story. Chael Sonnen was on TRT therapy, looks how he "improved" against Anderson Silva and Mosley was on EPO. Basically a Super-human going up against a regular man.
Manny deserves no props, not even Ron Fraizer gives Manny his props. He puts Floyd and Mosley OVER Pacquiao. Pacquiao cherry picks.
@DeadliestArt There's nothing to twist. As you said, he thinks Manny (as we've been seeing him) has been using steroids. So he fears Manny because of how well he's been performing. Nothing to twist, he's just scared of Pacquiao. No other way to interpret it. Can't say he deserves no props and think he's superhuman at the same time... just can't.
Ron Frazier said Manny Pacquiao is "A great fighter"... he's also a "huge Pacquiao fan" by his own admission. So yeah.. sorry you missed that.
Manny is performing great against opponents "cherry picked" for him. Name one fighter Pacquiao has ever called out in a post-fight interview. Manny and Floyd are fighters-- they are afraid of no man. Arum and Roach are afriad because they know AFTER Ortiz, they expected a slow and old Floyd, but he came in looking better than EVER.
Ron Fraiser said Manny hand-picked his opponents, his last 6 opponents didn't take him to the "next-level"; all hand-picked. Cherry PICKER!
@DeadliestArt Lets ride that... Manny performs great against cherry picked opponents... even if they're heavily favored opponents or bigger opponents than himself. Remember Floyd's his own boss... so are you saying Floyd doesn't? Every fight he goes into is cherry-picked because he's his own boss and chooses who he wants to fight and when he fights. Pacman doesn't have that kind of freedom of choice.
Bob Arum cherry picks Manny's opponents to protect his investment. That's why Manny fought David Diaz for the WBC LW strap and not Casamayor for the Ring LW title at 135. It's hard to cherry pick your fights when every similiar opponent that your "God Manny" has to Floyd's--Floyd has more PPV buys.
Arum is afraid to put Manny in against fighters who offer stiff challenges. The Marquez fight is proof why Arum hasn't done it since 2008.
Look up "the Manny Pack supplements" on Google. That's what Pacquiao is taking... look at the ingredients and what they do for the body... that's what he's taking. He doesn't need steroids.. that claim is unfounded and just Mayweather being angry that his training of Hatton for Pacquiao backfired so badly. That's just being a sore loser. If Hatton was over the hill, why would they take him in to train? Doesn't make any sense. Adding it up like that reveals how scared the Mayweather camp is
Scared, really? That's why Roach is asks for every advantageous position for his fighter. And Mayweather aswell as greats before him didn't have to subject fighters to harming themselves in order to win fights. That's why Bob Arum told Sergio Martinez that the only way the fight at 150 would happen is if they fought on the same night as weigh-in's.
Who does that anymore? What's next? Bob Arum wants 15 rounds? That just shows how much bullshit comes from his camp and promoter.
@DeadliestArt Again, nothing else it could mean. Break it down: "I don't want Floyd fighting Pacquiao because [I think he's juicin' and] I'm scared for my son's life. As the juicin' thing is an opinion (and an unfounded one at that)... put it together.
Marquez handled Manny Saturday night. Arum is afraid for his cash cow's well-being. Too bad for Arum that his supposed cash-cow is now exposed. NOBODY but Floyd-haters and goofy Pactards believe Manny still has a chance against Mayweather.
@DeadliestArt Hardly, Marquez survived and defended well... but nowhere near a win; outpointed in almost everyway. Pac landed more punches, landed more power shots, landed more head shots, was the aggressor of the fight (which should be the challenger's job), did more visual damage to his opponent, controlled the pace of the fight, and had greater ring generalship. There's no way in the world that Marquez beat Pacquiao Saturday. Marquez also dirtily stepped on Pac's foot (didn't save him).
You must have been watching the fight with one eye. The punches Manny "landed"-- all three judges would consider a "significant blow", were glancing shots. The 5th round was the best round of the fight and Marquez landed heavily and often BEFORE and AFTER that round.
Most Boxing pundits, including Amir Khan and EVERY Boxer on Twitter scored the fight for Marquez-- actual professional boxers. The majority agrees with me, you just feel fit to disagree because you love Manny.
@DeadliestArt Hardly, both had some glancing shots... but Pacquiao had a number of fast, direct hits. I disagree because Manny outworked Marquez. Everyone expected Pac to KO Marquez, they feel some buyer's remorse for being so wrong. I never did and always felt it was either fighter's fight to win... so think about what that means regarding whether I "love Manny." I call it like I see it... I didn't have a shattered KO expectation. I saw a clear objective win for Pacquiao.
All that is from your prespective-- are you a professional Boxers? You said it yourself a handful a comments back: "Even the legends think Manny and all of his accomplishments are great." --or something to that effect, and I disagree with them. Yet, since they said it, it must be factual, right?
Let's flip that, the MAJORITY of all current Boxers on Twitter who watched the fight thought Marquez won their third outing. ESPN scored it 7-5 Marquez.
@DeadliestArt Wrong, after the dust settles and replays are watched, a number of them changed their tune (seeing the fight with a clear head instead of the KO expectation they initially had... see Amir Kahn). And it's no bias... if you outpoint someone (especially as the champion), you win. It's not about flash or accuracy (this isn't archery or a slam dunk contest)... this is boxing... and Manny simply outworked Marquez. No getting around that. Most are just used to Pac destroying everyone
No, you're wrong. The majority of them say they have rewatched the fight numerous times; with family members, trainers, staff, etc-- and the outcome is still the same. Hell, the majority of the people who thought Marquez won barely gave Pacquiao five rounds. And since it seems you don't do much reading besides reading what you ONLY agree with, not both sides, the majority think Marquez won.
Why else is Arum making a 4th fight if the win wasn't convincing?
@DeadliestArt Pac didn't dominate, but that's the only thing he didn't do. Most experts and fight fans expected domination by Pac (which was foolish). Everything official has Pac as the winner. Buyer's remorse aside... Marquez didn't throw or land as many shots... and his shots (while flashy) weren't effective against Pac (who kept a clean face throughout). Pac, on the other hand, not only outlanded Marquez and showed greater ring generalship than Marquez, he also did more effective damage.
You're right he didn't because he couldn't. Too much offense for little 'ole Manny to take. You basically have to be brick-footed, dried out, almost beaten to death, old or just stand still and put the muffs on to fight Manny. Otherwise, you do not qualify for the Manny Pacquiao sweepstakes.
Plus, I don't understand how it was "foolish"-- his own trainer predicted a 4th round KO, you're calling a "world-class trainer" foolish? How the tables have turned.
@DeadliestArt Marquez knows how Pacquiao fights and can defend against him well (though he's still never... ever... knocked Manny down.. yet alone knocked him out). I'm not calling Roach foolish... just his prediction. No one's too great to make a foolish statement. No tables are turning.
But yeah, the stats don't lie... the judges saw it (and they weren't sitting together and collaborated on a score... they all were at different angles and scored it. Marquez's face backs the stats up.
Marquez lost by one point with a knockdown against him in their second fight, yet he comes into a third fight a few years later and does the SAME thing. Not only does Marquez know how to fight Manny, Manny does not do well against Boxers who actually show him angles and land with deadly accuracy.
You are talking as if judges never made a terrible decision...ever....in Las Vegas, no less. If Marquez didn't win, Arum wouldn't be negotiating a 4th fight. Case closed.
@DeadliestArt Marquez didn't outpunch Manny in this third fight. So no, it's not the same. WIthout the knockdown, Marquez still didn't do anything better that would be measured on the scorecards. He was outpunched and outworked.
I'm also saying it's not just the ringside judges, it's also Letterman and Compubox. Essentially everyone watching the fight to actually score it instead of watching it with fan/media expectations. The people least likely to be biased.
Okay-- perfect. Manny didn't outpunch Marquez, but he won the fight by a point because of the knockdown. Most who watched this fight thought the third fight was CLOSER than the last two and felt Marquez landed harder and with significant force that would turn the tables. It seems the judges were using the "Paul Williams Theory of Judging"-- where volume wins you fights.
Compubox counted alot of shit that shouldn't of been counted to counter Marquez's more damaging shots.
@DeadliestArt A knockdown and a half. Marquez was almost out again as that round ended... and was so dizzy that he went to the wrong corner. That's always more telling than simply guaging hits-landed. Had he knocked Pacquiao down (which he has never done in the entire history that he's fought him), he would've won (even with Pac's higher hit numbers). That didn't happen.
Marquez won the fight for landing the cleaner and more effective shots. Your only argument is Compubox and ring generalship. Most fans believe the former and not the latter. Feel free to refute this as much as you want but fact of the matter is-- Arum does not want Manny in the ring against Floyd. Period.
If Manny's win against Marquez was so convincing, Top Rank would be in talks with Ellerbe about Mayweather vs Pacquiao-- not a 4th fight against Marquez. Case closed.
@DeadliestArt Again, if I hit you once and it's the hardest hit of the fight (and my only hit of the night, so 100% accuracy) as the challenger, do I beat the champion who's visibly uninjured by the punch, who lands 10 more shots than me, swells my face up, has me constantly retreating, and is the aggressor of the fight? Of course not, that's not how boxing is scored and that wouldn't fly by boxing rules. Case closed.
Don't confuse a win with domination, everyone expected a wipeout victory
Durong the rebroadcast of the Pacquiao-Marquez III bout. HBO had a poll in place. 4% thought Manny the fight. The rest were seperated between a draw and Marquez winning-- the highest precentage was in favor of Marquez.
You can argue a Manny win all you want. The Boxing community have spoken. Manny did not win that fight. The majority of the Boxing public know Mayweather would clean house against Manny; Arum knows this to be true, why else is he making a 4th fight?
@DeadliestArt Too bad they aren't judges and watch the fight as normal viewers. When it comes to scorecard wins, you judge by criteria... not by crowd peer pressure or how far below expectation a fighter performed. I don't need to argue with you, the official judgement sides with me... as do the official stats... as does Marquez's face.
A rematch makes great sense for Arum because he handles both fighters ($) and it was still a close enough fight to warrant it. Easy answer, easy question.
Judges have been known to be paid off and are just as crooked as Promoters. I would take a professional Boxers opinion about the sweet science and the intricacies within before I trust any judge's idea of what Boxing is by basing it on some bullshit criteria that benefits who they think it should benefit.
Want an example? Go watch De La Hoya vs Sturm-- Lederman scored it 115-113 for Sturm. However, the judges saw it the other way for De La Hoya-- EVERYONE knows Oscar lost.
@DeadliestArt All well and good, but I disagree and saw Pac winning this fight.. as do others even if the angry are naturally more vocal.
And if you don't hold boxing criteria to their official criteria, how can you say with certainty that anyone wins any fight? Boxing rules are what they are... the judge scoring criteria are what they are. If you think this was violated file a complaint and see how well your arguement stands up outside of message boards.
You and the rest of the delusional 4% of the population who saw Pac winning this fight. Filing a complaint won't do any good because the damage was done. Did anyone overturn the HORRIBLE decision in the Williams-Lara fight? How about De la Hoya-Sturm? OH! How about Hatton-Collazo.
Exactly... these judges know by giving "right" decision to a fighter will squander away one of the biggest, if not the biggest, fight in Boxing history.
@DeadliestArt I wasn't part of the group that voted on that little poll. So that 4% is your own fabrication. They wouldn't allow overturning if something couldn't be overturned. If you don't want to make your case, that's fine. But don't wine afterwards.
What good does it do anyone? Pacquiao still won, Marquez still lost. The outcry of pro-Marquez/Mayweather fans and disappointed others don't change the facts of the fight. That's why it's good to be objective, because sight's 20/20
4% of the poll thought Pacquiao won, by default you are included in that 4%-- how is that a fabrication? I am not so much disappointed in the outcome of Marquez/Pacquiao 3 then I am at the judges who actually score fights incorrectly. There is a big difference between the two.
@DeadliestArt 4% of That poll. Hardly 4% of everybody... and no, I was not included in that. That's a huge fabrication. I never participated in that poll. That 4% is only of those who participated. Note also that 0% of the actual judges there (that do nothing but judge the fight) agree. It wasn't incorrect judging in the slightest. You just need to calm down and try seeing the fight from their perspective. Understand more about how boxing is judged... see how much Pacquiao actually did.
I don't trust any judge in Boxing. They are acustom to giving the wrong fighter the nod. Max Kellerman and Bob Papa scored it a draw, Amir Khan scored it for Marquez-- everyone knows how crooked and inconsistant judging is.
You need to sit down and understand how BAD judging is. Yet, your feeble mind still can't wrap around the fact that despite fair judging, bad judging is what gets remembered FIRST.
Marquez-Pacquiao 3 is the perfect example of bad judging.
@DeadliestArt If you don't trust any judge in boxing, then you've conceeded (likely without even knowing it) that you don't understand how judging in boxing works. The feeble mind is yours.. because you don't understand that criteria varies slightly by judge, but none are more or less valid. You'd know that western judging favors aggressors (Pacquiao) and those who fight that way (because it presents the most risk and it's more exciting). Try Europe for those who favor turtle styles.
4% of the poll thought Pacquiao won, by default you are included in that 4%-- how is that a fabrication? I am not so much disappointed in the outcome of Marquez/Pacquiao 3 then I am at the judges who actually score fights incorrectly. There is a big difference between the two.
How can you tell me that people sitting 50+ feet from the ring can see that Marquez won, but Judges who sit 6 feet from the Boxers themselves can't see who REALLY won the fight? It makes not one bit of sense-- you know better than I do that those judges saw what a Pacquiao loss could for the sport.
Official judgements mean NOTHING when the scoring is complete and utter bullshit. The fans and professionals side with me. Y'know-- the one's that ACTUALLY matter.
@DeadliestArt Then your 'fans and professionals' are twice wrong. They also thought Marquez would be easy work for Marquez (I knew better). Now they're disappointed and want to burn Pac.. that's okay too cause they actually don't matter. The official decision is what I believe to be the right one. The professional.... Officially Professional... Judges.... gave the fight to Pacquiao (none of them said Marquez won). It wasn't even a split decision. Something objective eyes should look into.
The judges were wrong. The outcry of the masses who watched this fight know who won. What shows up in the history books was a terrible decision to keep the light fixiated on a possible Mayweather-Pacquiao showdown in 2012. Even these supposed fans of Pac who drank the kool-aid know good and well that Marquez out-pointed and landed the cleaner, more effective punches-- JM Marquez.
These professional judges you speak of are crooked and should be fired.
@DeadliestArt The judges were right. Pacquiao landed and threw more punches (so he out-worked and outpointed Marquez). Marquez landed slower punches, but less effective (if you look at faces, Marquez had more damage).
Again, if you feel something wrong happened here.. .then make your voice heard somewhere that makes a difference. Pouting here just comes off as a sore loser (just like Marquez). That said, Marquez admitted himself that he's a sore loser... that should tell you something.
You must be new to the Boxing scene. You apparently don't understand how this sport works. Regardless of what is seen. It's a rare occurence than a fight is overturned, unless you have the pull to make it happen-- see Hopkins vs Dawson for a perfect example.
Williams vs Lara was never overturned, neither was De La Hoya vs Sturm. Lastly, now you are taking into a consideration what a Boxer thinks, but when Boxers scored it for Marquez-- they knew nothing, right?
@DeadliestArt Hardly new to the boxing scene, you seem new though if you don't understand how US judges tend to score boxing matches... especially those considered to be close... yet alone between the challenger and a defending champion. All of the stats side with Pacquiao. I even watched round 1 in slow motion to compare Pac's hits landed numbers with compubox's... they weren't wrong. Pacquiao simply outlanded Marquez and was more effective in damaging Marquez. He also outworked him.
No, you are VERY new if you side with crooked judging. I disagree with one of the three judges who socred it 116-112-- simply blasphemous. 115-113 is a fair act of judging, as is the 114-114.
And punch stats have told tales about how fights who land the most didn't win the fight compared to who threw the most. See Mayweather vs De La Hoya for prime examples. Compubox scored punches that didn't even land flush for Pacquiao-- it's a misconception.
@DeadliestArt Hardly, there were a considerable number of close rounds in that fight that a judge could honeslty score for either fighter. If the majority of those "in-air" rounds are given to the champ (if by nothing but default/king of the hill mentality), then Pac could've won by a margin like that one. Not my choice, but hardly unfair. Both fighters threw shots on/off-point. Didn't change anything. I even compared Pac's round 1 hits landed to Compubox's in slow mo, they weren't wrong.
Compubox scored shots for Manny that were glancing blows or landed on the glove. I'm not saying Manny didn't land on Marquez, but the clean and effective shots were landed by Marquez, not Manny. Why else do the pro's consider Marquez the winner if Manny was the aggressor and controlled the fight? Someone is lying.
They say Haggler beat Leonard, compubox shows Leonard landed and threw more than Haggler. Compubox is now taken seriously since Manny was basically defeated? Ha-Ha!
@DeadliestArt Except it's not just compubox that scored the fight for Pacquiao, it's also the judges who watched the fight with that intent (and not out of audience or fan expectations). It's also seen on their faces. Marquez had more legitimate damage than Pacquiao. He was outpointed... that simple.
I know that's how Mayweather usually wins but you have to accept the fact that Pac can win that way too.
The judges don't even have monitors on their tables like the UFC judges do. This is the EXACT same problem the UFC had with terrible scoring for fights who actually "won" their respective fights. The fact of the matter is that Marquez was a 10 to 1 underdog. Manny had Vegas convinced that this fight would be over before round 5.
No dice. A Marquez win would have broke the bank aswell as squandering the biggest fight in Boxing history, thus far. You fail to see this.
@DeadliestArt They didn't have monitors... sure.. Neither did anyone else there. And neither do many other boxing matches. So no dice indeed. A Marquez win wouldn't have squandered a super fight... it would've put it on hold until the rematch clause for a 4th fight went into effect. You know that was in the contract right? A loss was possible... it just didn't happen.
@zentetsutakama Hypothetical situation: Say I'm fighting for the championship belt... and, as the challenger, I land 1 great hard punch that results in no real visible damage or anything. That's also the only punch I throw in the entire fight (100% accuracy babyyy). The Champion, on the other end: Lands 10 more punches than me (and while not as hard-looking, my face is swollen up) and is always the aggressor of the fight, do I win? Of course not. it doesn't work that way in boxing.. that easy
Sure it works in Boxing. Plenty of fights have gone to the guy who landed the harder shots. Plus, your little analogy isn't 100% accurate because Felix Strum beat the shit out of Oscar and Oscar still won the fight. What about when a fighter throws punches for 2:50 and his opponents lands ONE shot that stands out in your mind and press row or Ledderman gives them round based on ONE punch.
That has happened, you know. Don't act like it hasn't.
@DeadliestArt The only time that works is if it's a hard shot to the person that received the punch. Not the case here. Pac wasn't hurt, he wasn't dizzy, and he wasn't damaged. Marquez, on the other hand, was damaged clearly. This is in addition to the fact that Pacquiao outworked and outlanded Marquez. A lot of those shots were really fast and may seem like they glanced or barely hit, when they indeed did hit flush (if you were paying enough attention). When scored objectively, Pac wins.
Visually if you can't see how a man reacts to a hard shot then you are truly blind. Once again, I'm not denying Marquez wasn't popped a few good times, but those harder shots did not land as often as Marquez's. Regardless of what Compubox says-- numbers can be manipulated. Did you happen to see the 2008 Olympic Boxing Trials in Beijing?
Can you honestly tell me those punches that "supposedly landed" were legitimate against team USA?
Why do you think the UFC had monitors installed for judges? To decrease the chances of shitty decisions like one last Saturday. Boxing has enough corrpution going around that any tool that may increase the accuracy of scoring isn't going to be integrated-- just like the steroid issue. If all major commissions used olympic style drug testing, I gurantee alot of Boxers would turn up dirty... killing all hopes for big fights.
@DeadliestArt That's still pretty steep.. You know how Compubox works right? So you had that, the ring judges, and Letterman... all saying Pac was winning/not losing (not just at the end... but generally as the rounds went by). You're also aware the the judges weren't sitting together right? They were all in different areas of the ring. You also are aware of who the judges were right? There was no bad call here.. just overblown disappointement with Pac's performance. Time to get over it.
I know where the judges sit, but for you to actually believe that compubox is a legitimate source of landing punching is mind boggling. Most of Manny's shots were glancing blows that landed on the glove or on the arms. The punches that Manny did land, Marquez landed harder.
The fact that Manny was given that fight and his fans are using compubox as a legitimate source should get their eyes evaluated. Compubox stats have be refuted by many throughout the years.
You can cycle off PED's in 24 hours. It's been done. Pacquiao can cycle steroids on a Friday and by the end of the fight test clean. The day of the fight is crucial. Mayweather gives credit where credit is due but that doesn't interfere with what he believes--and he believes he can dominate Pacquiao.
And the Comission won't pay for random bloody testing for an independant source. Not only that but they won't shell out the extra dough for their own members to perform the test.
@DeadliestArt The cycle can remove the substance but not the effect on the body which lingers longer. If it were just a 1-day wonder even the olympic style tests couldn't confirm anything. Mayweather's words suggest fear concerning his chances with Pacman... complaining that Pac wants to fight him now (at 34) instead of when he was in his 20s and teens only points to one thing...
It's like all of the boxing coaches, experts, and fighters all give Pacquiao his dues as a great boxer and p4p (could Mayweather succeed at Pac's size... hmm) king... but some fans (because they favor another fighter) don't want to give Pac his props.
They don't give Manny his props because they see the shit Bob Arum is trying to pull. Arum is a racist, homophobe-- he has that old man; "get the hell off my grass" syndrome. In addition, Bob Arum said that Floyd is the greatest fighter since Muhammed Ali--when he was still fighting under Top Rank.
Plus these guys are blinded by this cloak and dagger routine. As if what Pacquiao's done is somehow great when he's nothing more than a paper champion.
@DeadliestArt Like I said = ) Some fans just don't want to give Pac his props. The entire boxing community (the experts, the boxing legends, coaches, trainers, and fighters) respects Pac more than you seem to. May want to find out why... and what it is that they know that you seem not to.
The give Manny his props based on what he's done for the sport of Boxing. I question his legitmacy has an ALL-time Great. If Floyd isn't an ATG then there is no way Manny can be. You understand where I am coming from? I have nothing ill to say about Pacquiao when it comes to the sport-- however, Mayweather is still the bigger draw. All that side, Manny is an overhyped spectacle, once Floyd steamrolls over him, everyone will be saying "Manny Who?"
@DeadliestArt Eh... Pac drew more ppv in his Mosley fight than Floyd did in the Ortiz fight. I think the tide is turning and a sun may be setting there.. Unless he fights a legit name next, his ppv numbers will continue to slip. I don't think anyone in their right mind would question either fighter's place on the ATG list. They've both earned their place on opposite sides. Mayweather has the safer, but masterful defensive style and Pacquiao has the higher risk but masterful offensive style.
@DeadliestArt When hearing accusations against Pac though, ask yourself "which is it?" Is Pacquiao fighting bums or is he this unnatural machine for destroying worthy contenders? Mayweather moved up higher in weight than Pac. And if he's fighting bums then why is steroids or PEDS even suspected? Eventually the dots connect and you realize that Manny is just that good. But then again, so is Floyd. No one would be clamoring for a fight to happen this badly if either fighter was any less.
I question myself all the time, but no Boxer at WW that Manny has faced are considered "worthy". If each fighter came off some grand winning streak or didn't have something happen to them prior to Manny fighting them then I would give Manny more credit. The timeframe in which Manny was given these fights was perfect for him because each fighter was coming off a loss or some that damaged them as a fighter.
Floyd's skills put him at an advantage, not weight manipulation.
@DeadliestArt Mayweather has fought multiple fighters that came directly off a loss... so you may want to keep that in mind before double-standards come into play. You could say the same things you're saying about Pacquiao to Mayweather. Plus, if a fighter truly is a top fighter... one loss is not going to change that. For the record... Ricky Hatton still has a higher undefeated record than Floyd (43-0 before his first loss). How great is he compared to Mayweather/Pacquiao (rhetorical)
Did these fighters Mayweather fought come off a loss directly commit to boosting his notoriety ten-fold? No, after Floyd fought Judah-- a PPV that didn't exceed 400k PPV buys. How is that a double-standard? Oscar, Cotto, Clottey all came off losses-- Margo was suspended for a year, fought a can and lost again.
You see where I am going with this? All of those wins directly influenced Pacquiao's notoriety OVER Mayweather. How is this so?
All of Mayweather's wins--were lackluster to many because Mayweather's style, once again, directly influenced his PPV buyrate. Boring fighter makes for boring bouts makes for low PPV numbers. Until recently Floyd came into his own and SOARED over Manny as PPV-king. Oscar, Hatton, Ortiz, Marquez-- all of which were "supposed to beat" Floyd. However, we knew better.
@DeadliestArt Just like De La Hoya was supposed to beat Pacquiao at the weight he chose for a Mayweather rematch. I don't feel either fighter's wins were lackluster (except Ortiz). A fighter isn't great if he can't come back from a loss... look at Pacquiao or Muhammed Ali. Every fight boosts notoriety... Zab Judah came off a direct loss before facing Floyd and that was a noteworthy fight. The best fighters are the best fighters, whether they take a loss or not. Pac just beat them worse..
@DeadliestArt (contd.) De La Hoya came off a victory before facing Pacman, Hatton off of two, Margarito off of one, Cotto off of two, and Mosley off of a draw. Time waits for no one... how many wins do they need? Gotta fight some time. Clottey came off a split loss but should've presented a style that was difficult for Pacquiao (as he's a turtle fighter a tier or two below Floyd). Personally, I'll hold a fighter higher (most do) when they take risks and put themselves out there (like Pac).
@DeadliestArt (contd. 2) Regarding Margo, that supposed "LONG vacation" was between May and November of the same year.... so sorry, I'm not buying that one.
No, it wasn't. He had his license suspended in the USA by the CSAC for one year because of the illegal hand wraps. However, he did have a fight in Mexico, but like I said-- against a can and in November he fought Pacquiao at Jerry Jones Stadium.
You honestly think being suspended and fighting a can makes you "ready"? He may as well been KTFO again by Mosley. Otherwise, Roach wouldn't have even have Margo the time of day pre-Mosley.
He fought a can for a vacant title setup by the crooked WBC. It's all a ploy to get Pacquiao a belt to further boost his hype. It's like when the IBF let Judah keep his belt in the Mayweather fight even though he lost it to Baldomir--the story is that Baldomir couldn't pay the sanctioning fees.
Either way, two different stories, only one benefitted from it--Manny. Margo's time off was perfect pickens for Manny, otherwise Roach would have NEVER fought Margo.
@DeadliestArt Again, you can say the same thing about Mayweather... on both counts it's pure speculation. The "crooked WBC," fighting a can, sorry... doesn't fly. Even Mayweather admits (recently) that Pacquiao's on another level. Just admit it, Pacquiao's not all hype... he really is one of the best fighters out there and an all-time great. At this point even Floyd Mayweather has admitted that... so much so that Floyd actually feels Pacman is on something. So it's time to let this go.
Name one "can" Floyd has fought since becoming the PPV King. And Manny is all hype, Floyd is an all-together better Boxer and Manny. He has been doing it longer; he has it in his blood. Manny is a dime a dozen, you will see five or six Manny's before you EVER see another Floyd Mayweather.
Floyd Mayweather's skills are unparallel-- Manny has been beat. Floyd has not. Manny maybe one of the best but he doesn't suprass Floyd. If Manny is clean, he needs to take the test. Simple.
@DeadliestArt Again, let it go. Even Mayweather acknowledges that Pacquiao is so good that it doesn't seem natural. He's already agreed to the testing... the problem is that new demands were constantly added... and that dissolved the negotiations. An undefeated record still means nothing. Hatton was undefeated longer... even now (Hatton was 43-0 before losing)... think about that.
That's not to say Floyd isn't a great boxer... but he uses a safer style, so his wins aren't as impressive
Manny's wins aren't that impressive when you are beating guys who aren't fighting on equal ground. Mosley was one loss and draw in the hole coming in against Manny-- Not the same Mosley that fought Margo FACT. Margo was suspended for a year, fought a can then told to come in at 150-- Margo had trouble making 150, the hydroxycut he was taking to "make the weight" is proof.
Floyd ruined Hatton's career, one KO can do that. Ask Cotto.
@DeadliestArt If Hatton stopped winning after the KO, you'd have a point.... however... he only has 2 losses... one of which is from Pacquiao. He went on to win fights after Mayweather. You could argue that Floyd didn't fight the same De La Hoya (while Pac fought a De La Hoya that wanted to rematch Mayweather and was a heavy favorite). In any case, if you don't think Pacman's a great fighter, that's your call... everyone that's objectively astute in boxing knows better than that.
Hatton fought an old ass Juan Lazcano, post-Floyd. A Boxer Floyd called out a LOOOOONG time ago when he was actually revelant. The Malignaggi fight was a gimme-- easy fight for everyone, especially Hatton. If you watch the latter rounds of the Lazcano fight, Hatton almost gets TKO'd AGAIN! How can you tell me the Floyd loss didn't harm him?
The Oscar Floyd fought was HEALTHY, no IV tracks, not dried out and wasted. Pacquiao is not a great fighter. Period, it's a FACT.
@DeadliestArt And Paul Malignaggi? Again, we can do this all day... could say that Hatton fought a broken Castillo and wasn't on his game against Floyd... but still went farther than he did against Pacquiao.
As far as Pacman being a great fighter... again, you're in the very small minority. People that truly know about boxing (such as actual boxers, actual boxing judges, and boxing celebs, all acknowledge Pacquiao as a great fighter). There's no conspiracy here... it's all in your mind.
You can't compare Malignaggi to Castillo-- atleast Malignaggi has both feet in the ring. Hatton's will was broken by Floyd, he was served on a silver platter to Pacquiao.
Manny isn't a great fighter. Juan Manuel Marquez is a GREAT fighter. He chased Pacquiao up to 147 and beat his ass and the judges STILL gave it to Manny. Last night proved Manny is lackluster and has simply no chance against a REAL "great" fighter.
@DeadliestArt Wrong. Marquez was the Challenger... remember what that means. He didn't throw or land as manny blows as Pacquiao, he didn't score any knockdowns, he wasn't the aggressor of the fight, he didn't control the pace or ring generalship... there's nothing he did except put up a decent defense... that doesn't win fights. There's nothing you can point to that offsets that fact.
If you think it does, then it's you who've lost all credibility. Guess that makes Pac better than great.
Manny didn't score any KD's either and Marquez still landed the harder and more significant shots. And what you call aggression is Manny's inability to land anything remotely significant on Marquez that would lead the masses to believe that he convincingly won the fight. Manny looked confused and tired.
Here is what offsets that: 114/114, 115/113-- You want bullshit? 116/112. You have absolutely no credibility. Manny was exposed for fraud that he is--the REAL paper champion.
@DeadliestArt Last thing. Mayweather Sr. explicitly stated that he would tell Floyd NOT to fight Pacquiao because he fears for his son's life. He thinks Pacquiao could literally kill Floyd in the ring. Again, time to give Pacman his props... hard to deny it in the face of all the evidence. Add it up. Even Mayweather complained that Pacquiao wanted to fight him now instead of when Floyd was in his 20s/teens.. as if Pacman was cherry-picking Floyd Mayweather... not much else that could mean.
As for Hatton--Maussa, Colazzo, Jurango, Castillo and Floyd. All of which, with the exception of Castillo, were solid opponents for Hatton. Manny, as I described above, caught fighters that were in way, shape or form ready to participate. What about Roach and Mosley? "Too strong, too powerful--come down to 141". Hell, Roach had Cotto come down to 145--why not 147? ESPN said Margo had a LONG vacation before fighting Manny, that didn't throw him off? Really?
You're so myopic about Pac that you're now making JM a better counter puncher simply because he was successful against Pac.
Where the hell was this counter-punching when Floyd took him apart for 12 rounds, including a KD? With just a little boxing, JMM neutralized Pac's left hand.
But Pac exposure has a bright side. Arum will not be able to play the media by falsely claiming that FMJ is looking to derail the fight. He's already mentioned a rematch.
The fight will never happen with Pacquiao and for Floyd his the best tactician fighter in around the world, but his not the P4P king till he fight Manny and win. So far we know Floyd is scared.
@DeadliestArt He has the advantages outside of handling and delivering flurries/punches in bunches. Pacman excels at those above Mayweather... if Mayweather fights Pacman's fight (trying to be offensive or 'waiting out' a Pacquiao punch combination, it's likely that Floyd will lose.
If he sticks to the gameplan (using his range to keep Pac at bay) and avoids getting cornered and facing flurries, Floyd can win on points. The fight with Ortiz really showed Floyd's strengths and weaknesses.
Pacman doesn't excel at anything over than being an overly hyped product. He's Ricky Hatton 2.0-- he supposed excelled in areas Mayweather wasn't good in; such as: fighting in the pocket, strength and power. He was going to "rush Mayweather", etc. Mayweather handled him.
Pacquiao's Boxing intelligence is severely hyped. Mayweather was learning what Pacquiao knows now when he was 14 years old. Mayweather is lightyears beyond Pacquiao in the Boxing department.
@DeadliestArt And if anything, Pacquiao's boxing IQ is underrated. You may think he's a wild swinger or some other trendy ignorance like that... but that's an amateur's view. I was personally never impressed with Hatton... sorry if you were (but even if you were, he's only lost twice... Pacquiao being the most devastating... and Mayweather trained Hatton for that fight too... think about that). No one who's faced Pacquiao in the ring say the nonsense you're saying. Study boxing some more
Underrated? Really? How? Name one fighter Pacquiao had to "figure out" and actually work in to beat? Don't say Miguel Cotto-- nothing Pacquiao did hasn't already been done by Judah or Corely. Arum/Roach puts Pacquiao in every advantageous position. The fight was practically over before the first bell rung.
How is Pacquiao not a wild swinger? Nothing he threw against Marquez had "control" or "technicality" on it. Pacquiao threw shots to land wherever.
@DeadliestArt If you don't know or see the difference between pre-Marquez Pacquiao & post-Marquez Pacquiao... you seriously need to give his fights closer study. Concerning Marquez, they continuously figured out each other (unlike Mayweather's opponents that Pacman seems to have an easier time destroying). Pacquiao ultimately won against Marquez and In their second fight, not only did he stun Marquez a lot, he also knocked him down (almost twice) & made him walk to the wrong boxing corner.
Really? I see the difference in Pre and Post-Marquez... the difference is wait four years to rematch a man who literally beat him to the punch and made him look back, more so the second time than the first. Did I mention Marquez won more rounds and that Pacquiao's own people in the Phillippines thought he had lost?
Post-Marquez equates to easier fights that don't jeporadize one's earning potential. Diaz at 135, Mosley, Clottey, Margo, now Marquez seven years later. Nice.
@DeadliestArt Pac and Marquez beat eachother to the punch... those knockdowns and stuns Pac gave Marquez generally came from beating Marquez to the punch. I guess we won't talk about Mayweather's pick of Marquez then... which was after Pacquiao fought him twice (and brought him to a weight he'd never been in.. at all). What does that say about Mayweather? At least De La Hoya wanted that weight he fought Pac in for his rematch with Mayweather (that never happened).
Floyd fought De La Hoya, Mosley and Hatton when they were in a better position, not to where they are practically useless-- you know, how Pacquiao likes them; old and harmless.
Mosley was 0-1-1 before Pacquiao fought him; before that, Roach wanted Mosley to drop down to 141. Floyd destroyed Hatton's career, Cotto was mentally damaged--never the same, he was beaten up by Clottey, whom he also fought. Clottey was fodder, Paul Williams wouldn't drop to 147 to fight him. Really?
@DeadliestArt Pac against De La Hoya, he came off a win. Mosley came off a draw (but destroyed Margarito. Hatton came off of two wins (and Mayweather was his only loss). So that doesn't mean anything if Mayweather's victory over them was significant... it wouldn't make that big of a difference.
Mosley came off a loss and a draw. Roach picks these "names" on a bad day, Arum offers them what they need--money. They get basically beat up for a paycheck all to have their name embroided on Pacquiao's resume as if it's something to admire. A geniune paper tiger who craves belts but no REAL challenge.
Marquez, Raheem, Guzman, Mayweather-- three men Pacquiao has or had avoided. Can you guess which three?
Look who Hatton fought-- Juan Lazcano; who ALMOST TKO'd him in the latter rounds in Manchester, England. Afterwards he goes up against Paulie Malignaggi. Really? Oscar was healthy at 154, he came in feeling good, so good that they didn't even weigh neither man. However, Floyd is known to come in a pound over the maximum limit. Sources say Floyd was 151-152 on fight night.
Mosley beat Margo, challenged Mayweather--Mayweather accepted and WON! Mosley is a REAL WW, remember?
(.cont) -- can you honestly say his Boxing IQ is equal or greater to Mayweather's or better than Marquez? When you can beat on bodies without a pulse, you can look as good as you want. You can style your ass off. That is not 'in-ring IQ', that is a one-sided beating on a man who is only there to collect a paycheck.
Margo, Clottey, Mosley = Fighting for paychecks, not to win. BIG DIFFERENCE. How does any of that showcase your REAL talent against a REAL opponent?
Pacquiao combo's are very repeitive and rudimentary. Floyd would disect Pacquiao and there would be nothing Freddie Roach or Manny Pacquiao can do to stop it. Pacquiao cannot stop that right-hand lead. Floyd isn't simply a "punching-bag"-- opponents Pacquiao is acustom to. No pulse Boxers. However, I respect your opinion, but as far "weaknesses" go-- Pacquiao has more holes in his game than he cares to know. As so Floyd, but Pacquiao doesn't have the IQ to expose them.
@DeadliestArt He's a punching bag when flurries come. Mayweather will block/deflect a lot of them... but he'll always wait or try to clinch. And correction: Pacquiao's combos are no more repetitive or rudimentary than Mayweather's 1-sting jab, lead hook, and right hand. Pacquiao excells at getting inside off of isolated attacks like that. Facing a blitz, Mayweather backs up and waits things out. Pac's speed could make that his advantage on the scorecards. Ortiz showed this (among others).
These "flurries" look spectacular against fighters with no type of upperbody movement, bobbing or weaving. And it's not because of Pac-man. Do you not understand that these fighters are tailor made for his style of Boxing? NOTHING Pac-man has in his arsenal is anything Mayweather hasn't already seen or fought against. Pac-man has fights against mostly ONE type of Boxer--plodding brawlers. One fighter comes close to Mayweather-- Marquez, the only man to out-box your Pacman.
@DeadliestArt The same could be said of Mayweather concerning fighters who swing at him wide instead of down the center where the connection rate is higher. Ortiz was able to get inside and turtle up Mayweather with only a couple of slow-ish punches. Pacquiao would do considerably better than that. Ortiz also made Mayweather miss a lot but didn't have the speed to capitalize on it (or beat him to the punch)... Pacquiao has both. Note also, Hatton's undefeated record was higher than Floyd's.
What fighter has came in and swung on Floyd "wildly"? Angel Manfreddy? Emmanuel Burton? Genaro Hernandez? Jesus Chavez? Give me some names, bro'. Floyd corners fighters who cannot overcome his Boxing skills. Pacquiao coming down the center is a target! Not to say Floyd doesn't have holes in his game, however, Pacquiao has MORE. Pacquiao doesn't possess any form of IQ that would allow him to figure out Mayweather's style, short of swinging until something lands. IQ? Really?
When you target and land there, not wild. When Pac knocked down Marquez, he got the chin. Cotto, got the chin. Hatton, got the chin. Mosley, got the chin. Those aren't flukes. Fighting Margarito, he got the whole face... including the chin. Look at what boxers actually say about the man before you try throwing away his skills as "wild." Neither Mosley or Tyson (for example) would bet on a Pac/Floyd fight. Tyson even said Floyd would be crazy to fight Pac after one of his long layoffs.
Pacquiao doesn't target for the sake of accuracy. He has a general direct he wishes to throw a punch and if it lands, so be it, it not--try again until it does. Why do you think he doesn't crave Boxers like Marquez? Boxers with styles similiar to Marquez provide too much of an effort for a Boxer like Pacquiao. His in-ring comprehension would be too confusing for him and he would start making amateur mistakes.
@DeadliestArt If that's what you think, that's fine and I'd just say study those fights some more. But it's pretty obvious to me when Pac targets the face or targets the body. Wild swings they are not. Styles make fights, and counter punchers will always be an issue for offensive fighters/vice versa for defensive ones. The problem is.. Floyd's not really a counter-puncher. He's an interceptor, dodger, and turtle artist (I honestly mean that in an honorific way) that's weak @ punch combos.
I don't have to study anything to understand that Pacquiao's style differs against fighters who move and punch to those who just stand there and are willing to take a hit. Pacquiao-Marquez 2 is the most I have ever seen Pacquiao active, both punching and moving. Against Mosley was merely cat and mouse. Pac's legs were "tight", I guess that means he's okay aslong as you stand still and allow him to land cleanly.
@DeadliestArt Your first five words told me all I need to know. Mayweather was also very active (for him) against Ortiz. During which time, he revealed how bad his direct offense is. Staying strictly defensive is where he can beat Pacman. If he fought Pacquiao more offensively like he did Ortiz, he would likely lose. I don't take anything away from either fighter. Pacquiao's advantage is his all-day offense and footwork while Mayweather's advantage is his range and phillie shell defense.
Dude... Mayweather's defense/offense was WORSE against Zab Judah. Mayweather was technically knocked down by Judah's Hook. Floyd's shots were extremely significant in the Ortiz fight, he landed the right-hand lead early and often. When has Floyd ever started a fight landed the right hand right off the bat? If that "proves" anything, it's that Floyd's offensive is just as dangerous as his offense coming off his defensive stance.
@DeadliestArt Mayweather's hand was hurt in that fight though right? (that's me actually defending Mayweather if you're not aware that I'm being objective) I've also noted (and since called) those 1-stinger jabs. It's one in a surprisingly small list of point-scoring offensive techniques that Mayweather incorporates effectively. One time in the Ortiz fight, Mayweather let his hands fly.. and it was bad. He missed with practically all of them (which hit air or arm/glove). Could've got caught
A small list? Floyd uses what works and uses it effectively. Is it because Mayweather doesn't whirl and twirl his arms in a helicopter motion, he somehow loses ground to Pacquiao due to being less offensive than he? In addition, further decreases his chances of actually defeating Pacquiao if he were to throw with him? Really? Did you not watch the Mosley fight? The one-time in the fight Floyd gets cracked, he smothers and FIGHTS BACK!
@DeadliestArt All those fighters I listed that Floyd Mayweather fought had been beaten before and/or 'had no chin.' The right hand, etc. that you mentioned, I don't consider those offensive, they're defensive used primarily to intercept and stop a fighter from coming in. He typically baits offensive attacks and then picks opponents apart that way. That would be harder to do against someone like Pacquiao.
Castillo had no chin? Baldomir had no chin--his only KO losses came against Canelo and some dude named Paulo Alejandro Sanchez. Not even Vernon Forrest could KO Baldomir. However, Chavez, N'Dou, Hernandez, Sosa, Corely--no chins? REALLY?!
Floyd's right-hand is more than a deterrent. When Floyd "gets off first" and lands-- that's called an OFFENSIVE punch. Those right-hands Floyd landed on Mosley while he was still measuring up, those are OFFENSIVE.
None of the fighters of Floyd's career were broken nor had weak chins (excluding Hatton). You said that to justify your claim that I couldn't have one or the other when Pacquiao had both types of fighters on his resume.
When he throws the jabs offensively and not to defensively intercept, he's hit and miss. He's at his best catching them while they're coming at him openly.
@DeadliestArt Oh on the contrary... if he tries being really offensive... that's a one way ticket to a loss against Pacman. Mayweather likely knows better than that... but he didn't against Ortiz (luckily Ortiz didn't capitalize on that... but may have in later rounds). And Mosley did get through (going down the middle... how about that?) and Mayweather would've fell had he not grabbed Mosley's arm. But he bounced back and won that fight clean. Pacquiao knocked Mosley down & made him run.
Dude, the only REAL Boxer that showed serious offense against Pacquiao was JM Marquez. Barrera and Morales were dead in the water-- their offensive doesn't even COMPARE to Marquez. So, yeah-- I know what happens when you are offensive against Mayweather. You beat him to the punch, counter his blind piston-like attacks, fight to twelve rounds and lose by decision, even though you won more rounds overall.
@DeadliestArt Fighters are going to look more offensive when the other isn't fighting back. If Manny delivers an output that puts Mayweather in turtle mode most of the night, then Pac stands a good chance of winning on points. I don't think Pac could beat him to the punch reliably unless Mayweather becomes heavily offensive. That said, if Pac is patient enough, he won't eat as many right hands either (with his triangle guard)... he might be able to even just walk inside to nullify the jab.
"Fighters are going to look more offensive when the other isn't fighting back."-- THANK YOU! Clottey, Margo, Mosley. ALL THREE DIDN'T THROW DICK! And yes, "IF" Manny can put Floyd into "Turtle Mode"-- guess what, it won't happen. Manny can throw, Floyd will counter and Manny will be forced to Box instead of get off like he is acustom to against punching bags.
A patient Pacquiao is a "Boxing Pacquiao" and Boxing is not what Manny can do against Floyd. Enter Right-hand Lead.
@DeadliestArt Hence Pacquiao not having to be as offensive as he's been before (but the stamina is there). And as far as Mayweather's turtle mode... he turtled against Ortiz... so it would happen with Pacquiao too...
How is Pacquiao going to be offensive against a great offensive and defensive tactician like Floyd? Floyd can turn either one on or off at will. Pacquiao only has one gear-- go straight and punch. Lately it's been go straight and punch someone who won't punch you back. So like you said: "Fighters are going to look more offensive when the other isn't fighting back."
Pacquiao cannot afford to stay overly offensive all fight. Looks like there is a dilemma at the Wild Card Gym.
Stop comparing the Mosley that fought Floyd to the Mosley that Pacquiao fought. Two very different Mosley's. As far as Ortiz, Ortiz couldn't capitalize on anything regardless. He was too busy trying not to get hit whilst fending off attacks with his own style of Boxing--the jumping headbutt.
And Pacquiao wouldn't have time to catch on in order to provide a necessary defense that would capitalize Floyd's terrific technique. Not even Roach knows how to win.
@DeadliestArt Actually they've been imitating Floyd's style casually for fun for a while now and even publically mentioned (while calling out Mayweather) that they've come up with some ways to get through that defense.
Too bad for them-- imitating Floyd's style isn't fighting Floyd. They can play around all they want-- it's still not Floyd. Instead of Roach training Manny to fight his fight, he actually ATTEMPTS to challenge Floyd's style. Laughable on all levels. Roach knows nothing of Floyd's style, he couldn't even train Oscar to beat Floyd nor penetrate his defenses.
@DeadliestArt And it's still not Pacquiao. And I'm not sure you remember, but Oscar lost in a split decision... split decision. So he knew some things... but just wasn't able to "pull the trigger" as he'd later say. As far as the Pac/Mayweather fight, Floyd makes demands, then adds more demands to those demands. Can't just treat it like a normal boxing commission fight like he had been before Hatton (the fighter Mayweather trained to beat Pacquiao) got knocked out... noo, insults then hoops
A split decision that was decided by the amount of punches thrown, not landed. According to Harold Letterman, a fight should be determined by ring generalship and the one who pushes the fight-- nevermind who lands more throughout the fight. On the other hand, Letterman has said MANY A TIMES, a Boxer who lands the "harder and cleaner shots" wins the round. Contradicting, a blatantly disregarding ring generalship and punches thrown to punches actually landed.
@DeadliestArt If you want to talk harder and cleaner shots, then Pac definitely did more damage to Marquez than Marquez did to Pacquiao. Pac never hit the canvas in either fight... at any time. And he never got so dazzed he didn't know which corner to go to. Marquez is guilty of both of those things.
Harold Letterman isn't a competent enough to know when he is bias and when he is scoring correctly. He's as bias as Lampley and Merchant. Pac may have never hit the canvas but he fought to a draw that was never overturned--and knocked Maruqez down three times and only win by one point. Let me guess, the second fight was judges error again?
Even Pac's own people in the Phillippines thought Pacquiao lost the second fight.
@DeadliestArt Close fights have split opinions... that goes for anywhere. I have no idea why you feel the Phillippines are so special to highlight that. That goes for judges too.
The Phillippines have split opinions about Pacquiao? Really? When the pride of your country loses and your own country says: "Yea', he lost." That is saying ALOT, especially how dedicated and supportive his people are. How can one not highlight that? if Mayweather won a fight but his Uncle Roger claims Floyd lost-- that wouldn't mean anything to you, honestly?
@DeadliestArt Says more when America thinks Mayweather's a chicken/fraud/sucker punching #2 to Manny Pacquiao. In all that overgeneralizing, did you see those double standards again?
America doesn't like Mayweather because he's an asshole. Generally, America doesn't side with narcassitic assholes-- I for one, couldn't careless because I spend $54.99 to see Floyd Box, not for what he does outside of the ring.
Double standards exist everywhere, however one is more prevalent to a certain fighter than the other.
@DeadliestArt Then you should understand why Pacquiao's not as willing to jump through hoops dreampt up by such a man. The actual accusation has nothing to do with it... and he's been taking blood/urine tests (and passing them) as the boxing commission regulates. Those caught using weren't caught with the olympic style testing.
He's not willing to jump through hoops but he's still allowing himself to make money off this man? Really? And the comissions regulation isn't as good as you believe it to be. The NSAC even admits to wanting a stricter testing format for fighters. As far as OSDT-- most fighters AGREE with it and do not see a problem, just Pacquiao.
@DeadliestArt He's suing Mayweather for his steroids accusation (for which Mayweather was a no-show... because as we all know.. he made it up). That should tell you where Pac's mind is at on that issue and hoop that Mayweather set up. Different things get on different people's nerves. The factors are there in the actions taken. And yes, FACTORS. And again, the blood testing is not the only issue... there's also the purse split.
A wrongful accusation is slander. And Mayweather never said Pacquiao was using any type of steroid. His uncle and father were the first to make such accusations. Mayweather simply enforced what was said by demand random blood testing. The only hoops I see are the ones that Arum and Roach put up to make shit up in order to keep Pacquiao away from Floyd. Arum, Ariza, Koncz and Roach have contradicted, back-pedalled and made shit up since the first negotiation.
@DeadliestArt No Mayweather said it too, he said that if he'd done the same thing but moved up to heavyweight, people would say he's 'on something.' They're all accusing Pac of that... and it started when Pac knocked out their fighter, Hatton.
They have a right to be suspicious of something. Barry Bonds had never tested positive for PEDs when he was smacking those home run's out of the park. That is until someone in the sports media opened their mouth about "steroids" then everyone piled on the steroid wagon until it was brought before the supreme court.
Yet the same can't be applied to Pacquiao because he's some messiah, loved by all, right?
@DeadliestArt It can be, & Manny agreed to testing right after the fight & the day after the fight (times in which such drugs evidence would still be in the system even if the drug itself was gone). And again, Mayweather can send that through boxing commission channels to make happen. He also never had a probem with Pacquiao before & only got this idea after his fighter Hatton got KO'd. He even said Pac's "one of the best fighters out there." So if Mayweather himself is giving Pac props...
Added to what demand? He has always said Olympic Style Drug Testing to the day of the fight. Floyd even agreed to 14-days of no testing leading up to the fight. Did Arum, Roach and Manny agree? NO! So now the demand of testing on the day of the fight stands and has ALWAYS STOOD since then.
What does Manny do? He decides the demand for 14-days still stood in there second negotiation attempt. New negoatiation, new demands. Floyd agreed to gloves and ring size. Now what?
@DeadliestArt They agreed to the 14 day testing, then Mayweather changed his position to "day of the fight." Then it became about who would do the test (as Manny's training schedule is always Philipines first, America later). Then it became all about the purse split... Mayweather wanted 100 million gauranteed. That's what : )
Arum and company never agreed to 14-day testing in the first negotiation. Mayweather offered, but they declined. The 14-day cut off was brought to the table in the second negotiation. The original cut off was longer than 14-days. And Mayweather's $100mill gurantee was WAAAAY after the cut off mumbo-jumbo. Go back and reread the OFFICIAL timeline before you start making up stuff.
@DeadliestArt So when did the "up to the fight" stipulation come in? Also, keep in mind that the blood test stipulation was new at this point (no Mayweather fighter had yet done it) and naturally that would be something not to accept (especially after Mayweather's racist rant and derogatory accusation... for which he's being sued). And no, I'm not making that up.
Floyd enforced Olympic style blood testing after the Marquez fight if I'm not mistaken. And racism has nothing to do with this conversation, so leave that out.
@DeadliestArt Mayweather put it in there... he called Pacquiao a "little yellow midget" In addition to that, talking about how after he won he'd have him cook 'sushi rolls' and 'rice.' He also said Pacquiao's negatively 'not natural." How oblidging should you be to the outside-of-boxing-commission demands of such a man?
This has been flagged as spam show
Floyd is a fucking idiot. 2:00 on is truly priceless. "UUMMMM...........Im just waitin for da....I mean.....UUMMMM. (End of sentence) You know in certain cases, you know far, in in certain UUMMM domestics violence cases, youf, you have seen pictures. Since I I think, im still waitin to see da pictures. But you gotta realize im ina im ina i do-wa i do-wa, i box for a living. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
iateastamp 2 weeks ago
Take that ring off dude! lol what a joke
kkma1453 1 month ago
Floyd Sr. said that because he thinks Manny is on steroids. We all know how steroids/testosterone/EPO and various other supplements can improve a man's efficiency in the ring. Don't try and TWIST the story. Chael Sonnen was on TRT therapy, looks how he "improved" against Anderson Silva and Mosley was on EPO. Basically a Super-human going up against a regular man.
Manny deserves no props, not even Ron Fraizer gives Manny his props. He puts Floyd and Mosley OVER Pacquiao. Pacquiao cherry picks.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt There's nothing to twist. As you said, he thinks Manny (as we've been seeing him) has been using steroids. So he fears Manny because of how well he's been performing. Nothing to twist, he's just scared of Pacquiao. No other way to interpret it. Can't say he deserves no props and think he's superhuman at the same time... just can't.
Ron Frazier said Manny Pacquiao is "A great fighter"... he's also a "huge Pacquiao fan" by his own admission. So yeah.. sorry you missed that.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Manny is performing great against opponents "cherry picked" for him. Name one fighter Pacquiao has ever called out in a post-fight interview. Manny and Floyd are fighters-- they are afraid of no man. Arum and Roach are afriad because they know AFTER Ortiz, they expected a slow and old Floyd, but he came in looking better than EVER.
Ron Fraiser said Manny hand-picked his opponents, his last 6 opponents didn't take him to the "next-level"; all hand-picked. Cherry PICKER!
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Lets ride that... Manny performs great against cherry picked opponents... even if they're heavily favored opponents or bigger opponents than himself. Remember Floyd's his own boss... so are you saying Floyd doesn't? Every fight he goes into is cherry-picked because he's his own boss and chooses who he wants to fight and when he fights. Pacman doesn't have that kind of freedom of choice.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Bob Arum cherry picks Manny's opponents to protect his investment. That's why Manny fought David Diaz for the WBC LW strap and not Casamayor for the Ring LW title at 135. It's hard to cherry pick your fights when every similiar opponent that your "God Manny" has to Floyd's--Floyd has more PPV buys.
Arum is afraid to put Manny in against fighters who offer stiff challenges. The Marquez fight is proof why Arum hasn't done it since 2008.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
Look up "the Manny Pack supplements" on Google. That's what Pacquiao is taking... look at the ingredients and what they do for the body... that's what he's taking. He doesn't need steroids.. that claim is unfounded and just Mayweather being angry that his training of Hatton for Pacquiao backfired so badly. That's just being a sore loser. If Hatton was over the hill, why would they take him in to train? Doesn't make any sense. Adding it up like that reveals how scared the Mayweather camp is
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Scared, really? That's why Roach is asks for every advantageous position for his fighter. And Mayweather aswell as greats before him didn't have to subject fighters to harming themselves in order to win fights. That's why Bob Arum told Sergio Martinez that the only way the fight at 150 would happen is if they fought on the same night as weigh-in's.
Who does that anymore? What's next? Bob Arum wants 15 rounds? That just shows how much bullshit comes from his camp and promoter.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Again, nothing else it could mean. Break it down: "I don't want Floyd fighting Pacquiao because [I think he's juicin' and] I'm scared for my son's life. As the juicin' thing is an opinion (and an unfounded one at that)... put it together.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Marquez handled Manny Saturday night. Arum is afraid for his cash cow's well-being. Too bad for Arum that his supposed cash-cow is now exposed. NOBODY but Floyd-haters and goofy Pactards believe Manny still has a chance against Mayweather.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Hardly, Marquez survived and defended well... but nowhere near a win; outpointed in almost everyway. Pac landed more punches, landed more power shots, landed more head shots, was the aggressor of the fight (which should be the challenger's job), did more visual damage to his opponent, controlled the pace of the fight, and had greater ring generalship. There's no way in the world that Marquez beat Pacquiao Saturday. Marquez also dirtily stepped on Pac's foot (didn't save him).
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
You must have been watching the fight with one eye. The punches Manny "landed"-- all three judges would consider a "significant blow", were glancing shots. The 5th round was the best round of the fight and Marquez landed heavily and often BEFORE and AFTER that round.
Most Boxing pundits, including Amir Khan and EVERY Boxer on Twitter scored the fight for Marquez-- actual professional boxers. The majority agrees with me, you just feel fit to disagree because you love Manny.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Hardly, both had some glancing shots... but Pacquiao had a number of fast, direct hits. I disagree because Manny outworked Marquez. Everyone expected Pac to KO Marquez, they feel some buyer's remorse for being so wrong. I never did and always felt it was either fighter's fight to win... so think about what that means regarding whether I "love Manny." I call it like I see it... I didn't have a shattered KO expectation. I saw a clear objective win for Pacquiao.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
All that is from your prespective-- are you a professional Boxers? You said it yourself a handful a comments back: "Even the legends think Manny and all of his accomplishments are great." --or something to that effect, and I disagree with them. Yet, since they said it, it must be factual, right?
Let's flip that, the MAJORITY of all current Boxers on Twitter who watched the fight thought Marquez won their third outing. ESPN scored it 7-5 Marquez.
Your bias is for Manny.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Wrong, after the dust settles and replays are watched, a number of them changed their tune (seeing the fight with a clear head instead of the KO expectation they initially had... see Amir Kahn). And it's no bias... if you outpoint someone (especially as the champion), you win. It's not about flash or accuracy (this isn't archery or a slam dunk contest)... this is boxing... and Manny simply outworked Marquez. No getting around that. Most are just used to Pac destroying everyone
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
No, you're wrong. The majority of them say they have rewatched the fight numerous times; with family members, trainers, staff, etc-- and the outcome is still the same. Hell, the majority of the people who thought Marquez won barely gave Pacquiao five rounds. And since it seems you don't do much reading besides reading what you ONLY agree with, not both sides, the majority think Marquez won.
Why else is Arum making a 4th fight if the win wasn't convincing?
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Pac didn't dominate, but that's the only thing he didn't do. Most experts and fight fans expected domination by Pac (which was foolish). Everything official has Pac as the winner. Buyer's remorse aside... Marquez didn't throw or land as many shots... and his shots (while flashy) weren't effective against Pac (who kept a clean face throughout). Pac, on the other hand, not only outlanded Marquez and showed greater ring generalship than Marquez, he also did more effective damage.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
You're right he didn't because he couldn't. Too much offense for little 'ole Manny to take. You basically have to be brick-footed, dried out, almost beaten to death, old or just stand still and put the muffs on to fight Manny. Otherwise, you do not qualify for the Manny Pacquiao sweepstakes.
Plus, I don't understand how it was "foolish"-- his own trainer predicted a 4th round KO, you're calling a "world-class trainer" foolish? How the tables have turned.
Compubox lied.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Marquez knows how Pacquiao fights and can defend against him well (though he's still never... ever... knocked Manny down.. yet alone knocked him out). I'm not calling Roach foolish... just his prediction. No one's too great to make a foolish statement. No tables are turning.
But yeah, the stats don't lie... the judges saw it (and they weren't sitting together and collaborated on a score... they all were at different angles and scored it. Marquez's face backs the stats up.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Marquez lost by one point with a knockdown against him in their second fight, yet he comes into a third fight a few years later and does the SAME thing. Not only does Marquez know how to fight Manny, Manny does not do well against Boxers who actually show him angles and land with deadly accuracy.
You are talking as if judges never made a terrible decision...ever....in Las Vegas, no less. If Marquez didn't win, Arum wouldn't be negotiating a 4th fight. Case closed.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Marquez didn't outpunch Manny in this third fight. So no, it's not the same. WIthout the knockdown, Marquez still didn't do anything better that would be measured on the scorecards. He was outpunched and outworked.
I'm also saying it's not just the ringside judges, it's also Letterman and Compubox. Essentially everyone watching the fight to actually score it instead of watching it with fan/media expectations. The people least likely to be biased.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Okay-- perfect. Manny didn't outpunch Marquez, but he won the fight by a point because of the knockdown. Most who watched this fight thought the third fight was CLOSER than the last two and felt Marquez landed harder and with significant force that would turn the tables. It seems the judges were using the "Paul Williams Theory of Judging"-- where volume wins you fights.
Compubox counted alot of shit that shouldn't of been counted to counter Marquez's more damaging shots.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt A knockdown and a half. Marquez was almost out again as that round ended... and was so dizzy that he went to the wrong corner. That's always more telling than simply guaging hits-landed. Had he knocked Pacquiao down (which he has never done in the entire history that he's fought him), he would've won (even with Pac's higher hit numbers). That didn't happen.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Marquez won the fight for landing the cleaner and more effective shots. Your only argument is Compubox and ring generalship. Most fans believe the former and not the latter. Feel free to refute this as much as you want but fact of the matter is-- Arum does not want Manny in the ring against Floyd. Period.
If Manny's win against Marquez was so convincing, Top Rank would be in talks with Ellerbe about Mayweather vs Pacquiao-- not a 4th fight against Marquez. Case closed.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Again, if I hit you once and it's the hardest hit of the fight (and my only hit of the night, so 100% accuracy) as the challenger, do I beat the champion who's visibly uninjured by the punch, who lands 10 more shots than me, swells my face up, has me constantly retreating, and is the aggressor of the fight? Of course not, that's not how boxing is scored and that wouldn't fly by boxing rules. Case closed.
Don't confuse a win with domination, everyone expected a wipeout victory
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Durong the rebroadcast of the Pacquiao-Marquez III bout. HBO had a poll in place. 4% thought Manny the fight. The rest were seperated between a draw and Marquez winning-- the highest precentage was in favor of Marquez.
You can argue a Manny win all you want. The Boxing community have spoken. Manny did not win that fight. The majority of the Boxing public know Mayweather would clean house against Manny; Arum knows this to be true, why else is he making a 4th fight?
Answer that
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Too bad they aren't judges and watch the fight as normal viewers. When it comes to scorecard wins, you judge by criteria... not by crowd peer pressure or how far below expectation a fighter performed. I don't need to argue with you, the official judgement sides with me... as do the official stats... as does Marquez's face.
A rematch makes great sense for Arum because he handles both fighters ($) and it was still a close enough fight to warrant it. Easy answer, easy question.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Judges have been known to be paid off and are just as crooked as Promoters. I would take a professional Boxers opinion about the sweet science and the intricacies within before I trust any judge's idea of what Boxing is by basing it on some bullshit criteria that benefits who they think it should benefit.
Want an example? Go watch De La Hoya vs Sturm-- Lederman scored it 115-113 for Sturm. However, the judges saw it the other way for De La Hoya-- EVERYONE knows Oscar lost.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt All well and good, but I disagree and saw Pac winning this fight.. as do others even if the angry are naturally more vocal.
And if you don't hold boxing criteria to their official criteria, how can you say with certainty that anyone wins any fight? Boxing rules are what they are... the judge scoring criteria are what they are. If you think this was violated file a complaint and see how well your arguement stands up outside of message boards.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
You and the rest of the delusional 4% of the population who saw Pac winning this fight. Filing a complaint won't do any good because the damage was done. Did anyone overturn the HORRIBLE decision in the Williams-Lara fight? How about De la Hoya-Sturm? OH! How about Hatton-Collazo.
Exactly... these judges know by giving "right" decision to a fighter will squander away one of the biggest, if not the biggest, fight in Boxing history.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt I wasn't part of the group that voted on that little poll. So that 4% is your own fabrication. They wouldn't allow overturning if something couldn't be overturned. If you don't want to make your case, that's fine. But don't wine afterwards.
What good does it do anyone? Pacquiao still won, Marquez still lost. The outcry of pro-Marquez/Mayweather fans and disappointed others don't change the facts of the fight. That's why it's good to be objective, because sight's 20/20
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
4% of the poll thought Pacquiao won, by default you are included in that 4%-- how is that a fabrication? I am not so much disappointed in the outcome of Marquez/Pacquiao 3 then I am at the judges who actually score fights incorrectly. There is a big difference between the two.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt 4% of That poll. Hardly 4% of everybody... and no, I was not included in that. That's a huge fabrication. I never participated in that poll. That 4% is only of those who participated. Note also that 0% of the actual judges there (that do nothing but judge the fight) agree. It wasn't incorrect judging in the slightest. You just need to calm down and try seeing the fight from their perspective. Understand more about how boxing is judged... see how much Pacquiao actually did.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
I don't trust any judge in Boxing. They are acustom to giving the wrong fighter the nod. Max Kellerman and Bob Papa scored it a draw, Amir Khan scored it for Marquez-- everyone knows how crooked and inconsistant judging is.
You need to sit down and understand how BAD judging is. Yet, your feeble mind still can't wrap around the fact that despite fair judging, bad judging is what gets remembered FIRST.
Marquez-Pacquiao 3 is the perfect example of bad judging.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt If you don't trust any judge in boxing, then you've conceeded (likely without even knowing it) that you don't understand how judging in boxing works. The feeble mind is yours.. because you don't understand that criteria varies slightly by judge, but none are more or less valid. You'd know that western judging favors aggressors (Pacquiao) and those who fight that way (because it presents the most risk and it's more exciting). Try Europe for those who favor turtle styles.
zentetsutakama 2 months ago
@zentetsutakama
4% of the poll thought Pacquiao won, by default you are included in that 4%-- how is that a fabrication? I am not so much disappointed in the outcome of Marquez/Pacquiao 3 then I am at the judges who actually score fights incorrectly. There is a big difference between the two.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
How can you tell me that people sitting 50+ feet from the ring can see that Marquez won, but Judges who sit 6 feet from the Boxers themselves can't see who REALLY won the fight? It makes not one bit of sense-- you know better than I do that those judges saw what a Pacquiao loss could for the sport.
Official judgements mean NOTHING when the scoring is complete and utter bullshit. The fans and professionals side with me. Y'know-- the one's that ACTUALLY matter.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Then your 'fans and professionals' are twice wrong. They also thought Marquez would be easy work for Marquez (I knew better). Now they're disappointed and want to burn Pac.. that's okay too cause they actually don't matter. The official decision is what I believe to be the right one. The professional.... Officially Professional... Judges.... gave the fight to Pacquiao (none of them said Marquez won). It wasn't even a split decision. Something objective eyes should look into.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
The judges were wrong. The outcry of the masses who watched this fight know who won. What shows up in the history books was a terrible decision to keep the light fixiated on a possible Mayweather-Pacquiao showdown in 2012. Even these supposed fans of Pac who drank the kool-aid know good and well that Marquez out-pointed and landed the cleaner, more effective punches-- JM Marquez.
These professional judges you speak of are crooked and should be fired.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt The judges were right. Pacquiao landed and threw more punches (so he out-worked and outpointed Marquez). Marquez landed slower punches, but less effective (if you look at faces, Marquez had more damage).
Again, if you feel something wrong happened here.. .then make your voice heard somewhere that makes a difference. Pouting here just comes off as a sore loser (just like Marquez). That said, Marquez admitted himself that he's a sore loser... that should tell you something.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
You must be new to the Boxing scene. You apparently don't understand how this sport works. Regardless of what is seen. It's a rare occurence than a fight is overturned, unless you have the pull to make it happen-- see Hopkins vs Dawson for a perfect example.
Williams vs Lara was never overturned, neither was De La Hoya vs Sturm. Lastly, now you are taking into a consideration what a Boxer thinks, but when Boxers scored it for Marquez-- they knew nothing, right?
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Hardly new to the boxing scene, you seem new though if you don't understand how US judges tend to score boxing matches... especially those considered to be close... yet alone between the challenger and a defending champion. All of the stats side with Pacquiao. I even watched round 1 in slow motion to compare Pac's hits landed numbers with compubox's... they weren't wrong. Pacquiao simply outlanded Marquez and was more effective in damaging Marquez. He also outworked him.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
No, you are VERY new if you side with crooked judging. I disagree with one of the three judges who socred it 116-112-- simply blasphemous. 115-113 is a fair act of judging, as is the 114-114.
And punch stats have told tales about how fights who land the most didn't win the fight compared to who threw the most. See Mayweather vs De La Hoya for prime examples. Compubox scored punches that didn't even land flush for Pacquiao-- it's a misconception.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Hardly, there were a considerable number of close rounds in that fight that a judge could honeslty score for either fighter. If the majority of those "in-air" rounds are given to the champ (if by nothing but default/king of the hill mentality), then Pac could've won by a margin like that one. Not my choice, but hardly unfair. Both fighters threw shots on/off-point. Didn't change anything. I even compared Pac's round 1 hits landed to Compubox's in slow mo, they weren't wrong.
zentetsutakama 2 months ago
Comment removed
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Compubox scored shots for Manny that were glancing blows or landed on the glove. I'm not saying Manny didn't land on Marquez, but the clean and effective shots were landed by Marquez, not Manny. Why else do the pro's consider Marquez the winner if Manny was the aggressor and controlled the fight? Someone is lying.
They say Haggler beat Leonard, compubox shows Leonard landed and threw more than Haggler. Compubox is now taken seriously since Manny was basically defeated? Ha-Ha!
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Except it's not just compubox that scored the fight for Pacquiao, it's also the judges who watched the fight with that intent (and not out of audience or fan expectations). It's also seen on their faces. Marquez had more legitimate damage than Pacquiao. He was outpointed... that simple.
I know that's how Mayweather usually wins but you have to accept the fact that Pac can win that way too.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
The judges don't even have monitors on their tables like the UFC judges do. This is the EXACT same problem the UFC had with terrible scoring for fights who actually "won" their respective fights. The fact of the matter is that Marquez was a 10 to 1 underdog. Manny had Vegas convinced that this fight would be over before round 5.
No dice. A Marquez win would have broke the bank aswell as squandering the biggest fight in Boxing history, thus far. You fail to see this.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt They didn't have monitors... sure.. Neither did anyone else there. And neither do many other boxing matches. So no dice indeed. A Marquez win wouldn't have squandered a super fight... it would've put it on hold until the rematch clause for a 4th fight went into effect. You know that was in the contract right? A loss was possible... it just didn't happen.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama Hypothetical situation: Say I'm fighting for the championship belt... and, as the challenger, I land 1 great hard punch that results in no real visible damage or anything. That's also the only punch I throw in the entire fight (100% accuracy babyyy). The Champion, on the other end: Lands 10 more punches than me (and while not as hard-looking, my face is swollen up) and is always the aggressor of the fight, do I win? Of course not. it doesn't work that way in boxing.. that easy
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Sure it works in Boxing. Plenty of fights have gone to the guy who landed the harder shots. Plus, your little analogy isn't 100% accurate because Felix Strum beat the shit out of Oscar and Oscar still won the fight. What about when a fighter throws punches for 2:50 and his opponents lands ONE shot that stands out in your mind and press row or Ledderman gives them round based on ONE punch.
That has happened, you know. Don't act like it hasn't.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt The only time that works is if it's a hard shot to the person that received the punch. Not the case here. Pac wasn't hurt, he wasn't dizzy, and he wasn't damaged. Marquez, on the other hand, was damaged clearly. This is in addition to the fact that Pacquiao outworked and outlanded Marquez. A lot of those shots were really fast and may seem like they glanced or barely hit, when they indeed did hit flush (if you were paying enough attention). When scored objectively, Pac wins.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Visually if you can't see how a man reacts to a hard shot then you are truly blind. Once again, I'm not denying Marquez wasn't popped a few good times, but those harder shots did not land as often as Marquez's. Regardless of what Compubox says-- numbers can be manipulated. Did you happen to see the 2008 Olympic Boxing Trials in Beijing?
Can you honestly tell me those punches that "supposedly landed" were legitimate against team USA?
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Why do you think the UFC had monitors installed for judges? To decrease the chances of shitty decisions like one last Saturday. Boxing has enough corrpution going around that any tool that may increase the accuracy of scoring isn't going to be integrated-- just like the steroid issue. If all major commissions used olympic style drug testing, I gurantee alot of Boxers would turn up dirty... killing all hopes for big fights.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt That's still pretty steep.. You know how Compubox works right? So you had that, the ring judges, and Letterman... all saying Pac was winning/not losing (not just at the end... but generally as the rounds went by). You're also aware the the judges weren't sitting together right? They were all in different areas of the ring. You also are aware of who the judges were right? There was no bad call here.. just overblown disappointement with Pac's performance. Time to get over it.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
I know where the judges sit, but for you to actually believe that compubox is a legitimate source of landing punching is mind boggling. Most of Manny's shots were glancing blows that landed on the glove or on the arms. The punches that Manny did land, Marquez landed harder.
The fact that Manny was given that fight and his fans are using compubox as a legitimate source should get their eyes evaluated. Compubox stats have be refuted by many throughout the years.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
In any case nice discussion. It's okay that you favor Mayweather... but there's no need to bash Pacquiao's achievements because of it. pce dude
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
You can cycle off PED's in 24 hours. It's been done. Pacquiao can cycle steroids on a Friday and by the end of the fight test clean. The day of the fight is crucial. Mayweather gives credit where credit is due but that doesn't interfere with what he believes--and he believes he can dominate Pacquiao.
And the Comission won't pay for random bloody testing for an independant source. Not only that but they won't shell out the extra dough for their own members to perform the test.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt The cycle can remove the substance but not the effect on the body which lingers longer. If it were just a 1-day wonder even the olympic style tests couldn't confirm anything. Mayweather's words suggest fear concerning his chances with Pacman... complaining that Pac wants to fight him now (at 34) instead of when he was in his 20s and teens only points to one thing...
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
It's like all of the boxing coaches, experts, and fighters all give Pacquiao his dues as a great boxer and p4p (could Mayweather succeed at Pac's size... hmm) king... but some fans (because they favor another fighter) don't want to give Pac his props.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
They don't give Manny his props because they see the shit Bob Arum is trying to pull. Arum is a racist, homophobe-- he has that old man; "get the hell off my grass" syndrome. In addition, Bob Arum said that Floyd is the greatest fighter since Muhammed Ali--when he was still fighting under Top Rank.
Plus these guys are blinded by this cloak and dagger routine. As if what Pacquiao's done is somehow great when he's nothing more than a paper champion.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Like I said = ) Some fans just don't want to give Pac his props. The entire boxing community (the experts, the boxing legends, coaches, trainers, and fighters) respects Pac more than you seem to. May want to find out why... and what it is that they know that you seem not to.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
The give Manny his props based on what he's done for the sport of Boxing. I question his legitmacy has an ALL-time Great. If Floyd isn't an ATG then there is no way Manny can be. You understand where I am coming from? I have nothing ill to say about Pacquiao when it comes to the sport-- however, Mayweather is still the bigger draw. All that side, Manny is an overhyped spectacle, once Floyd steamrolls over him, everyone will be saying "Manny Who?"
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Eh... Pac drew more ppv in his Mosley fight than Floyd did in the Ortiz fight. I think the tide is turning and a sun may be setting there.. Unless he fights a legit name next, his ppv numbers will continue to slip. I don't think anyone in their right mind would question either fighter's place on the ATG list. They've both earned their place on opposite sides. Mayweather has the safer, but masterful defensive style and Pacquiao has the higher risk but masterful offensive style.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt When hearing accusations against Pac though, ask yourself "which is it?" Is Pacquiao fighting bums or is he this unnatural machine for destroying worthy contenders? Mayweather moved up higher in weight than Pac. And if he's fighting bums then why is steroids or PEDS even suspected? Eventually the dots connect and you realize that Manny is just that good. But then again, so is Floyd. No one would be clamoring for a fight to happen this badly if either fighter was any less.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
I question myself all the time, but no Boxer at WW that Manny has faced are considered "worthy". If each fighter came off some grand winning streak or didn't have something happen to them prior to Manny fighting them then I would give Manny more credit. The timeframe in which Manny was given these fights was perfect for him because each fighter was coming off a loss or some that damaged them as a fighter.
Floyd's skills put him at an advantage, not weight manipulation.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Mayweather has fought multiple fighters that came directly off a loss... so you may want to keep that in mind before double-standards come into play. You could say the same things you're saying about Pacquiao to Mayweather. Plus, if a fighter truly is a top fighter... one loss is not going to change that. For the record... Ricky Hatton still has a higher undefeated record than Floyd (43-0 before his first loss). How great is he compared to Mayweather/Pacquiao (rhetorical)
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Did these fighters Mayweather fought come off a loss directly commit to boosting his notoriety ten-fold? No, after Floyd fought Judah-- a PPV that didn't exceed 400k PPV buys. How is that a double-standard? Oscar, Cotto, Clottey all came off losses-- Margo was suspended for a year, fought a can and lost again.
You see where I am going with this? All of those wins directly influenced Pacquiao's notoriety OVER Mayweather. How is this so?
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
(cont.)
All of Mayweather's wins--were lackluster to many because Mayweather's style, once again, directly influenced his PPV buyrate. Boring fighter makes for boring bouts makes for low PPV numbers. Until recently Floyd came into his own and SOARED over Manny as PPV-king. Oscar, Hatton, Ortiz, Marquez-- all of which were "supposed to beat" Floyd. However, we knew better.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Just like De La Hoya was supposed to beat Pacquiao at the weight he chose for a Mayweather rematch. I don't feel either fighter's wins were lackluster (except Ortiz). A fighter isn't great if he can't come back from a loss... look at Pacquiao or Muhammed Ali. Every fight boosts notoriety... Zab Judah came off a direct loss before facing Floyd and that was a noteworthy fight. The best fighters are the best fighters, whether they take a loss or not. Pac just beat them worse..
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt (contd.) De La Hoya came off a victory before facing Pacman, Hatton off of two, Margarito off of one, Cotto off of two, and Mosley off of a draw. Time waits for no one... how many wins do they need? Gotta fight some time. Clottey came off a split loss but should've presented a style that was difficult for Pacquiao (as he's a turtle fighter a tier or two below Floyd). Personally, I'll hold a fighter higher (most do) when they take risks and put themselves out there (like Pac).
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt (contd. 2) Regarding Margo, that supposed "LONG vacation" was between May and November of the same year.... so sorry, I'm not buying that one.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
No, it wasn't. He had his license suspended in the USA by the CSAC for one year because of the illegal hand wraps. However, he did have a fight in Mexico, but like I said-- against a can and in November he fought Pacquiao at Jerry Jones Stadium.
You honestly think being suspended and fighting a can makes you "ready"? He may as well been KTFO again by Mosley. Otherwise, Roach wouldn't have even have Margo the time of day pre-Mosley.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt He fought Roberto Garcia in May 2010. So yes he was. It's not like he spent that time on the couch getting fat.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
He fought a can for a vacant title setup by the crooked WBC. It's all a ploy to get Pacquiao a belt to further boost his hype. It's like when the IBF let Judah keep his belt in the Mayweather fight even though he lost it to Baldomir--the story is that Baldomir couldn't pay the sanctioning fees.
Either way, two different stories, only one benefitted from it--Manny. Margo's time off was perfect pickens for Manny, otherwise Roach would have NEVER fought Margo.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Again, you can say the same thing about Mayweather... on both counts it's pure speculation. The "crooked WBC," fighting a can, sorry... doesn't fly. Even Mayweather admits (recently) that Pacquiao's on another level. Just admit it, Pacquiao's not all hype... he really is one of the best fighters out there and an all-time great. At this point even Floyd Mayweather has admitted that... so much so that Floyd actually feels Pacman is on something. So it's time to let this go.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Name one "can" Floyd has fought since becoming the PPV King. And Manny is all hype, Floyd is an all-together better Boxer and Manny. He has been doing it longer; he has it in his blood. Manny is a dime a dozen, you will see five or six Manny's before you EVER see another Floyd Mayweather.
Floyd Mayweather's skills are unparallel-- Manny has been beat. Floyd has not. Manny maybe one of the best but he doesn't suprass Floyd. If Manny is clean, he needs to take the test. Simple.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Again, let it go. Even Mayweather acknowledges that Pacquiao is so good that it doesn't seem natural. He's already agreed to the testing... the problem is that new demands were constantly added... and that dissolved the negotiations. An undefeated record still means nothing. Hatton was undefeated longer... even now (Hatton was 43-0 before losing)... think about that.
That's not to say Floyd isn't a great boxer... but he uses a safer style, so his wins aren't as impressive
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Manny's wins aren't that impressive when you are beating guys who aren't fighting on equal ground. Mosley was one loss and draw in the hole coming in against Manny-- Not the same Mosley that fought Margo FACT. Margo was suspended for a year, fought a can then told to come in at 150-- Margo had trouble making 150, the hydroxycut he was taking to "make the weight" is proof.
Floyd ruined Hatton's career, one KO can do that. Ask Cotto.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt If Hatton stopped winning after the KO, you'd have a point.... however... he only has 2 losses... one of which is from Pacquiao. He went on to win fights after Mayweather. You could argue that Floyd didn't fight the same De La Hoya (while Pac fought a De La Hoya that wanted to rematch Mayweather and was a heavy favorite). In any case, if you don't think Pacman's a great fighter, that's your call... everyone that's objectively astute in boxing knows better than that.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Hatton fought an old ass Juan Lazcano, post-Floyd. A Boxer Floyd called out a LOOOOONG time ago when he was actually revelant. The Malignaggi fight was a gimme-- easy fight for everyone, especially Hatton. If you watch the latter rounds of the Lazcano fight, Hatton almost gets TKO'd AGAIN! How can you tell me the Floyd loss didn't harm him?
The Oscar Floyd fought was HEALTHY, no IV tracks, not dried out and wasted. Pacquiao is not a great fighter. Period, it's a FACT.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt And Paul Malignaggi? Again, we can do this all day... could say that Hatton fought a broken Castillo and wasn't on his game against Floyd... but still went farther than he did against Pacquiao.
As far as Pacman being a great fighter... again, you're in the very small minority. People that truly know about boxing (such as actual boxers, actual boxing judges, and boxing celebs, all acknowledge Pacquiao as a great fighter). There's no conspiracy here... it's all in your mind.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
You can't compare Malignaggi to Castillo-- atleast Malignaggi has both feet in the ring. Hatton's will was broken by Floyd, he was served on a silver platter to Pacquiao.
Manny isn't a great fighter. Juan Manuel Marquez is a GREAT fighter. He chased Pacquiao up to 147 and beat his ass and the judges STILL gave it to Manny. Last night proved Manny is lackluster and has simply no chance against a REAL "great" fighter.
You have lost all credibility.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Wrong. Marquez was the Challenger... remember what that means. He didn't throw or land as manny blows as Pacquiao, he didn't score any knockdowns, he wasn't the aggressor of the fight, he didn't control the pace or ring generalship... there's nothing he did except put up a decent defense... that doesn't win fights. There's nothing you can point to that offsets that fact.
If you think it does, then it's you who've lost all credibility. Guess that makes Pac better than great.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Manny didn't score any KD's either and Marquez still landed the harder and more significant shots. And what you call aggression is Manny's inability to land anything remotely significant on Marquez that would lead the masses to believe that he convincingly won the fight. Manny looked confused and tired.
Here is what offsets that: 114/114, 115/113-- You want bullshit? 116/112. You have absolutely no credibility. Manny was exposed for fraud that he is--the REAL paper champion.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
@DeadliestArt Last thing. Mayweather Sr. explicitly stated that he would tell Floyd NOT to fight Pacquiao because he fears for his son's life. He thinks Pacquiao could literally kill Floyd in the ring. Again, time to give Pacman his props... hard to deny it in the face of all the evidence. Add it up. Even Mayweather complained that Pacquiao wanted to fight him now instead of when Floyd was in his 20s/teens.. as if Pacman was cherry-picking Floyd Mayweather... not much else that could mean.
zentetsutakama 3 months ago
@zentetsutakama
(cont. #2)
As for Hatton--Maussa, Colazzo, Jurango, Castillo and Floyd. All of which, with the exception of Castillo, were solid opponents for Hatton. Manny, as I described above, caught fighters that were in way, shape or form ready to participate. What about Roach and Mosley? "Too strong, too powerful--come down to 141". Hell, Roach had Cotto come down to 145--why not 147? ESPN said Margo had a LONG vacation before fighting Manny, that didn't throw him off? Really?
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
You're so myopic about Pac that you're now making JM a better counter puncher simply because he was successful against Pac.
Where the hell was this counter-punching when Floyd took him apart for 12 rounds, including a KD? With just a little boxing, JMM neutralized Pac's left hand.
But Pac exposure has a bright side. Arum will not be able to play the media by falsely claiming that FMJ is looking to derail the fight. He's already mentioned a rematch.
DeadliestArt 3 months ago
The fight will never happen with Pacquiao and for Floyd his the best tactician fighter in around the world, but his not the P4P king till he fight Manny and win. So far we know Floyd is scared.
countooten 4 months ago
@countooten
Pacquiao is only the #1 P4P because Mayweather retired.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt And now that Mayweather's back, Pacquiao is still #1. He has to beat Pacquiao (if no one else does).
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Floyd can go on to defeat Amir Khan, Sergio Martinez and nobody else-- he will overcome Pacquiao very "padded" record.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt He has the advantages outside of handling and delivering flurries/punches in bunches. Pacman excels at those above Mayweather... if Mayweather fights Pacman's fight (trying to be offensive or 'waiting out' a Pacquiao punch combination, it's likely that Floyd will lose.
If he sticks to the gameplan (using his range to keep Pac at bay) and avoids getting cornered and facing flurries, Floyd can win on points. The fight with Ortiz really showed Floyd's strengths and weaknesses.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Pacman doesn't excel at anything over than being an overly hyped product. He's Ricky Hatton 2.0-- he supposed excelled in areas Mayweather wasn't good in; such as: fighting in the pocket, strength and power. He was going to "rush Mayweather", etc. Mayweather handled him.
Pacquiao's Boxing intelligence is severely hyped. Mayweather was learning what Pacquiao knows now when he was 14 years old. Mayweather is lightyears beyond Pacquiao in the Boxing department.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
Comment removed
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt And if anything, Pacquiao's boxing IQ is underrated. You may think he's a wild swinger or some other trendy ignorance like that... but that's an amateur's view. I was personally never impressed with Hatton... sorry if you were (but even if you were, he's only lost twice... Pacquiao being the most devastating... and Mayweather trained Hatton for that fight too... think about that). No one who's faced Pacquiao in the ring say the nonsense you're saying. Study boxing some more
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Underrated? Really? How? Name one fighter Pacquiao had to "figure out" and actually work in to beat? Don't say Miguel Cotto-- nothing Pacquiao did hasn't already been done by Judah or Corely. Arum/Roach puts Pacquiao in every advantageous position. The fight was practically over before the first bell rung.
How is Pacquiao not a wild swinger? Nothing he threw against Marquez had "control" or "technicality" on it. Pacquiao threw shots to land wherever.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt If you don't know or see the difference between pre-Marquez Pacquiao & post-Marquez Pacquiao... you seriously need to give his fights closer study. Concerning Marquez, they continuously figured out each other (unlike Mayweather's opponents that Pacman seems to have an easier time destroying). Pacquiao ultimately won against Marquez and In their second fight, not only did he stun Marquez a lot, he also knocked him down (almost twice) & made him walk to the wrong boxing corner.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Really? I see the difference in Pre and Post-Marquez... the difference is wait four years to rematch a man who literally beat him to the punch and made him look back, more so the second time than the first. Did I mention Marquez won more rounds and that Pacquiao's own people in the Phillippines thought he had lost?
Post-Marquez equates to easier fights that don't jeporadize one's earning potential. Diaz at 135, Mosley, Clottey, Margo, now Marquez seven years later. Nice.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Pac and Marquez beat eachother to the punch... those knockdowns and stuns Pac gave Marquez generally came from beating Marquez to the punch. I guess we won't talk about Mayweather's pick of Marquez then... which was after Pacquiao fought him twice (and brought him to a weight he'd never been in.. at all). What does that say about Mayweather? At least De La Hoya wanted that weight he fought Pac in for his rematch with Mayweather (that never happened).
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Floyd fought De La Hoya, Mosley and Hatton when they were in a better position, not to where they are practically useless-- you know, how Pacquiao likes them; old and harmless.
Mosley was 0-1-1 before Pacquiao fought him; before that, Roach wanted Mosley to drop down to 141. Floyd destroyed Hatton's career, Cotto was mentally damaged--never the same, he was beaten up by Clottey, whom he also fought. Clottey was fodder, Paul Williams wouldn't drop to 147 to fight him. Really?
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Pac against De La Hoya, he came off a win. Mosley came off a draw (but destroyed Margarito. Hatton came off of two wins (and Mayweather was his only loss). So that doesn't mean anything if Mayweather's victory over them was significant... it wouldn't make that big of a difference.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Mosley came off a loss and a draw. Roach picks these "names" on a bad day, Arum offers them what they need--money. They get basically beat up for a paycheck all to have their name embroided on Pacquiao's resume as if it's something to admire. A geniune paper tiger who craves belts but no REAL challenge.
Marquez, Raheem, Guzman, Mayweather-- three men Pacquiao has or had avoided. Can you guess which three?
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Look who Hatton fought-- Juan Lazcano; who ALMOST TKO'd him in the latter rounds in Manchester, England. Afterwards he goes up against Paulie Malignaggi. Really? Oscar was healthy at 154, he came in feeling good, so good that they didn't even weigh neither man. However, Floyd is known to come in a pound over the maximum limit. Sources say Floyd was 151-152 on fight night.
Mosley beat Margo, challenged Mayweather--Mayweather accepted and WON! Mosley is a REAL WW, remember?
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
(.cont) -- can you honestly say his Boxing IQ is equal or greater to Mayweather's or better than Marquez? When you can beat on bodies without a pulse, you can look as good as you want. You can style your ass off. That is not 'in-ring IQ', that is a one-sided beating on a man who is only there to collect a paycheck.
Margo, Clottey, Mosley = Fighting for paychecks, not to win. BIG DIFFERENCE. How does any of that showcase your REAL talent against a REAL opponent?
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Pacquiao combo's are very repeitive and rudimentary. Floyd would disect Pacquiao and there would be nothing Freddie Roach or Manny Pacquiao can do to stop it. Pacquiao cannot stop that right-hand lead. Floyd isn't simply a "punching-bag"-- opponents Pacquiao is acustom to. No pulse Boxers. However, I respect your opinion, but as far "weaknesses" go-- Pacquiao has more holes in his game than he cares to know. As so Floyd, but Pacquiao doesn't have the IQ to expose them.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt He's a punching bag when flurries come. Mayweather will block/deflect a lot of them... but he'll always wait or try to clinch. And correction: Pacquiao's combos are no more repetitive or rudimentary than Mayweather's 1-sting jab, lead hook, and right hand. Pacquiao excells at getting inside off of isolated attacks like that. Facing a blitz, Mayweather backs up and waits things out. Pac's speed could make that his advantage on the scorecards. Ortiz showed this (among others).
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
These "flurries" look spectacular against fighters with no type of upperbody movement, bobbing or weaving. And it's not because of Pac-man. Do you not understand that these fighters are tailor made for his style of Boxing? NOTHING Pac-man has in his arsenal is anything Mayweather hasn't already seen or fought against. Pac-man has fights against mostly ONE type of Boxer--plodding brawlers. One fighter comes close to Mayweather-- Marquez, the only man to out-box your Pacman.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt The same could be said of Mayweather concerning fighters who swing at him wide instead of down the center where the connection rate is higher. Ortiz was able to get inside and turtle up Mayweather with only a couple of slow-ish punches. Pacquiao would do considerably better than that. Ortiz also made Mayweather miss a lot but didn't have the speed to capitalize on it (or beat him to the punch)... Pacquiao has both. Note also, Hatton's undefeated record was higher than Floyd's.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
What fighter has came in and swung on Floyd "wildly"? Angel Manfreddy? Emmanuel Burton? Genaro Hernandez? Jesus Chavez? Give me some names, bro'. Floyd corners fighters who cannot overcome his Boxing skills. Pacquiao coming down the center is a target! Not to say Floyd doesn't have holes in his game, however, Pacquiao has MORE. Pacquiao doesn't possess any form of IQ that would allow him to figure out Mayweather's style, short of swinging until something lands. IQ? Really?
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
When you target and land there, not wild. When Pac knocked down Marquez, he got the chin. Cotto, got the chin. Hatton, got the chin. Mosley, got the chin. Those aren't flukes. Fighting Margarito, he got the whole face... including the chin. Look at what boxers actually say about the man before you try throwing away his skills as "wild." Neither Mosley or Tyson (for example) would bet on a Pac/Floyd fight. Tyson even said Floyd would be crazy to fight Pac after one of his long layoffs.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Pacquiao doesn't target for the sake of accuracy. He has a general direct he wishes to throw a punch and if it lands, so be it, it not--try again until it does. Why do you think he doesn't crave Boxers like Marquez? Boxers with styles similiar to Marquez provide too much of an effort for a Boxer like Pacquiao. His in-ring comprehension would be too confusing for him and he would start making amateur mistakes.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt If that's what you think, that's fine and I'd just say study those fights some more. But it's pretty obvious to me when Pac targets the face or targets the body. Wild swings they are not. Styles make fights, and counter punchers will always be an issue for offensive fighters/vice versa for defensive ones. The problem is.. Floyd's not really a counter-puncher. He's an interceptor, dodger, and turtle artist (I honestly mean that in an honorific way) that's weak @ punch combos.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
I don't have to study anything to understand that Pacquiao's style differs against fighters who move and punch to those who just stand there and are willing to take a hit. Pacquiao-Marquez 2 is the most I have ever seen Pacquiao active, both punching and moving. Against Mosley was merely cat and mouse. Pac's legs were "tight", I guess that means he's okay aslong as you stand still and allow him to land cleanly.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Your first five words told me all I need to know. Mayweather was also very active (for him) against Ortiz. During which time, he revealed how bad his direct offense is. Staying strictly defensive is where he can beat Pacman. If he fought Pacquiao more offensively like he did Ortiz, he would likely lose. I don't take anything away from either fighter. Pacquiao's advantage is his all-day offense and footwork while Mayweather's advantage is his range and phillie shell defense.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Dude... Mayweather's defense/offense was WORSE against Zab Judah. Mayweather was technically knocked down by Judah's Hook. Floyd's shots were extremely significant in the Ortiz fight, he landed the right-hand lead early and often. When has Floyd ever started a fight landed the right hand right off the bat? If that "proves" anything, it's that Floyd's offensive is just as dangerous as his offense coming off his defensive stance.
Pacquiao would eat rights all night.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Mayweather's hand was hurt in that fight though right? (that's me actually defending Mayweather if you're not aware that I'm being objective) I've also noted (and since called) those 1-stinger jabs. It's one in a surprisingly small list of point-scoring offensive techniques that Mayweather incorporates effectively. One time in the Ortiz fight, Mayweather let his hands fly.. and it was bad. He missed with practically all of them (which hit air or arm/glove). Could've got caught
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
A small list? Floyd uses what works and uses it effectively. Is it because Mayweather doesn't whirl and twirl his arms in a helicopter motion, he somehow loses ground to Pacquiao due to being less offensive than he? In addition, further decreases his chances of actually defeating Pacquiao if he were to throw with him? Really? Did you not watch the Mosley fight? The one-time in the fight Floyd gets cracked, he smothers and FIGHTS BACK!
Floyd's offense is bad? Really?
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt All those fighters I listed that Floyd Mayweather fought had been beaten before and/or 'had no chin.' The right hand, etc. that you mentioned, I don't consider those offensive, they're defensive used primarily to intercept and stop a fighter from coming in. He typically baits offensive attacks and then picks opponents apart that way. That would be harder to do against someone like Pacquiao.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Castillo had no chin? Baldomir had no chin--his only KO losses came against Canelo and some dude named Paulo Alejandro Sanchez. Not even Vernon Forrest could KO Baldomir. However, Chavez, N'Dou, Hernandez, Sosa, Corely--no chins? REALLY?!
Floyd's right-hand is more than a deterrent. When Floyd "gets off first" and lands-- that's called an OFFENSIVE punch. Those right-hands Floyd landed on Mosley while he was still measuring up, those are OFFENSIVE.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt They either were broken fighters (apparently a loss, especially a KO one is broken) or had no chin... as you said. One or the other.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
None of the fighters of Floyd's career were broken nor had weak chins (excluding Hatton). You said that to justify your claim that I couldn't have one or the other when Pacquiao had both types of fighters on his resume.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
When he throws the jabs offensively and not to defensively intercept, he's hit and miss. He's at his best catching them while they're coming at him openly.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Oh on the contrary... if he tries being really offensive... that's a one way ticket to a loss against Pacman. Mayweather likely knows better than that... but he didn't against Ortiz (luckily Ortiz didn't capitalize on that... but may have in later rounds). And Mosley did get through (going down the middle... how about that?) and Mayweather would've fell had he not grabbed Mosley's arm. But he bounced back and won that fight clean. Pacquiao knocked Mosley down & made him run.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Dude, the only REAL Boxer that showed serious offense against Pacquiao was JM Marquez. Barrera and Morales were dead in the water-- their offensive doesn't even COMPARE to Marquez. So, yeah-- I know what happens when you are offensive against Mayweather. You beat him to the punch, counter his blind piston-like attacks, fight to twelve rounds and lose by decision, even though you won more rounds overall.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Fighters are going to look more offensive when the other isn't fighting back. If Manny delivers an output that puts Mayweather in turtle mode most of the night, then Pac stands a good chance of winning on points. I don't think Pac could beat him to the punch reliably unless Mayweather becomes heavily offensive. That said, if Pac is patient enough, he won't eat as many right hands either (with his triangle guard)... he might be able to even just walk inside to nullify the jab.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
"Fighters are going to look more offensive when the other isn't fighting back."-- THANK YOU! Clottey, Margo, Mosley. ALL THREE DIDN'T THROW DICK! And yes, "IF" Manny can put Floyd into "Turtle Mode"-- guess what, it won't happen. Manny can throw, Floyd will counter and Manny will be forced to Box instead of get off like he is acustom to against punching bags.
A patient Pacquiao is a "Boxing Pacquiao" and Boxing is not what Manny can do against Floyd. Enter Right-hand Lead.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Hence Pacquiao not having to be as offensive as he's been before (but the stamina is there). And as far as Mayweather's turtle mode... he turtled against Ortiz... so it would happen with Pacquiao too...
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
How is Pacquiao going to be offensive against a great offensive and defensive tactician like Floyd? Floyd can turn either one on or off at will. Pacquiao only has one gear-- go straight and punch. Lately it's been go straight and punch someone who won't punch you back. So like you said: "Fighters are going to look more offensive when the other isn't fighting back."
Pacquiao cannot afford to stay overly offensive all fight. Looks like there is a dilemma at the Wild Card Gym.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Stop comparing the Mosley that fought Floyd to the Mosley that Pacquiao fought. Two very different Mosley's. As far as Ortiz, Ortiz couldn't capitalize on anything regardless. He was too busy trying not to get hit whilst fending off attacks with his own style of Boxing--the jumping headbutt.
And Pacquiao wouldn't have time to catch on in order to provide a necessary defense that would capitalize Floyd's terrific technique. Not even Roach knows how to win.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Actually they've been imitating Floyd's style casually for fun for a while now and even publically mentioned (while calling out Mayweather) that they've come up with some ways to get through that defense.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Too bad for them-- imitating Floyd's style isn't fighting Floyd. They can play around all they want-- it's still not Floyd. Instead of Roach training Manny to fight his fight, he actually ATTEMPTS to challenge Floyd's style. Laughable on all levels. Roach knows nothing of Floyd's style, he couldn't even train Oscar to beat Floyd nor penetrate his defenses.
BTW, Floyd called Pacquiao out. Twice.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt And it's still not Pacquiao. And I'm not sure you remember, but Oscar lost in a split decision... split decision. So he knew some things... but just wasn't able to "pull the trigger" as he'd later say. As far as the Pac/Mayweather fight, Floyd makes demands, then adds more demands to those demands. Can't just treat it like a normal boxing commission fight like he had been before Hatton (the fighter Mayweather trained to beat Pacquiao) got knocked out... noo, insults then hoops
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
A split decision that was decided by the amount of punches thrown, not landed. According to Harold Letterman, a fight should be determined by ring generalship and the one who pushes the fight-- nevermind who lands more throughout the fight. On the other hand, Letterman has said MANY A TIMES, a Boxer who lands the "harder and cleaner shots" wins the round. Contradicting, a blatantly disregarding ring generalship and punches thrown to punches actually landed.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt If you want to talk harder and cleaner shots, then Pac definitely did more damage to Marquez than Marquez did to Pacquiao. Pac never hit the canvas in either fight... at any time. And he never got so dazzed he didn't know which corner to go to. Marquez is guilty of both of those things.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Harold Letterman isn't a competent enough to know when he is bias and when he is scoring correctly. He's as bias as Lampley and Merchant. Pac may have never hit the canvas but he fought to a draw that was never overturned--and knocked Maruqez down three times and only win by one point. Let me guess, the second fight was judges error again?
Even Pac's own people in the Phillippines thought Pacquiao lost the second fight.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Close fights have split opinions... that goes for anywhere. I have no idea why you feel the Phillippines are so special to highlight that. That goes for judges too.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
The Phillippines have split opinions about Pacquiao? Really? When the pride of your country loses and your own country says: "Yea', he lost." That is saying ALOT, especially how dedicated and supportive his people are. How can one not highlight that? if Mayweather won a fight but his Uncle Roger claims Floyd lost-- that wouldn't mean anything to you, honestly?
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Says more when America thinks Mayweather's a chicken/fraud/sucker punching #2 to Manny Pacquiao. In all that overgeneralizing, did you see those double standards again?
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
America doesn't like Mayweather because he's an asshole. Generally, America doesn't side with narcassitic assholes-- I for one, couldn't careless because I spend $54.99 to see Floyd Box, not for what he does outside of the ring.
Double standards exist everywhere, however one is more prevalent to a certain fighter than the other.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Then you should understand why Pacquiao's not as willing to jump through hoops dreampt up by such a man. The actual accusation has nothing to do with it... and he's been taking blood/urine tests (and passing them) as the boxing commission regulates. Those caught using weren't caught with the olympic style testing.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
He's not willing to jump through hoops but he's still allowing himself to make money off this man? Really? And the comissions regulation isn't as good as you believe it to be. The NSAC even admits to wanting a stricter testing format for fighters. As far as OSDT-- most fighters AGREE with it and do not see a problem, just Pacquiao.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt He's suing Mayweather for his steroids accusation (for which Mayweather was a no-show... because as we all know.. he made it up). That should tell you where Pac's mind is at on that issue and hoop that Mayweather set up. Different things get on different people's nerves. The factors are there in the actions taken. And yes, FACTORS. And again, the blood testing is not the only issue... there's also the purse split.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
A wrongful accusation is slander. And Mayweather never said Pacquiao was using any type of steroid. His uncle and father were the first to make such accusations. Mayweather simply enforced what was said by demand random blood testing. The only hoops I see are the ones that Arum and Roach put up to make shit up in order to keep Pacquiao away from Floyd. Arum, Ariza, Koncz and Roach have contradicted, back-pedalled and made shit up since the first negotiation.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt No Mayweather said it too, he said that if he'd done the same thing but moved up to heavyweight, people would say he's 'on something.' They're all accusing Pac of that... and it started when Pac knocked out their fighter, Hatton.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
They have a right to be suspicious of something. Barry Bonds had never tested positive for PEDs when he was smacking those home run's out of the park. That is until someone in the sports media opened their mouth about "steroids" then everyone piled on the steroid wagon until it was brought before the supreme court.
Yet the same can't be applied to Pacquiao because he's some messiah, loved by all, right?
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt It can be, & Manny agreed to testing right after the fight & the day after the fight (times in which such drugs evidence would still be in the system even if the drug itself was gone). And again, Mayweather can send that through boxing commission channels to make happen. He also never had a probem with Pacquiao before & only got this idea after his fighter Hatton got KO'd. He even said Pac's "one of the best fighters out there." So if Mayweather himself is giving Pac props...
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Added to what demand? He has always said Olympic Style Drug Testing to the day of the fight. Floyd even agreed to 14-days of no testing leading up to the fight. Did Arum, Roach and Manny agree? NO! So now the demand of testing on the day of the fight stands and has ALWAYS STOOD since then.
What does Manny do? He decides the demand for 14-days still stood in there second negotiation attempt. New negoatiation, new demands. Floyd agreed to gloves and ring size. Now what?
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt They agreed to the 14 day testing, then Mayweather changed his position to "day of the fight." Then it became about who would do the test (as Manny's training schedule is always Philipines first, America later). Then it became all about the purse split... Mayweather wanted 100 million gauranteed. That's what : )
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Arum and company never agreed to 14-day testing in the first negotiation. Mayweather offered, but they declined. The 14-day cut off was brought to the table in the second negotiation. The original cut off was longer than 14-days. And Mayweather's $100mill gurantee was WAAAAY after the cut off mumbo-jumbo. Go back and reread the OFFICIAL timeline before you start making up stuff.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt So when did the "up to the fight" stipulation come in? Also, keep in mind that the blood test stipulation was new at this point (no Mayweather fighter had yet done it) and naturally that would be something not to accept (especially after Mayweather's racist rant and derogatory accusation... for which he's being sued). And no, I'm not making that up.
zentetsutakama 4 months ago
@zentetsutakama
Floyd enforced Olympic style blood testing after the Marquez fight if I'm not mistaken. And racism has nothing to do with this conversation, so leave that out.
DeadliestArt 4 months ago
@DeadliestArt Mayweather put it in there... he called Pacquiao a "little yellow midget" In addition to that, talking about how after he won he'd have him cook 'sushi rolls' and 'rice.' He also said Pacquiao's negatively 'not natural." How oblidging should you be to the outside-of-boxing-commission demands of such a man?
zentetsutakama 4 months ago