Why is no-one complaining about Manny-Marquez?

First topic message reminder :

2 years ago Floyd came out of retirement to beat the 2nd or 3rd (can't fully remember) ranked p4p fighter, dominated and didn't receive credit. Many claimed Marquez was over the hill.

Now Manny is fighting him and people seemed to have accepted it.

Should Manny win will/should he be credited?

Very well said milkyboy, some sense at last, agree with you entirely.

Fists of Fury wrote:Very well said milkyboy, some sense at last, agree with you entirely.

bit of a rant mate, but really there's no pleasing people. Mayweather and Pacquaio are terrific fighters and both have put themselves out there and tested themselves. Like everyone else i wish the they'd cut the crap and fight each other... as tcribb said earlier, until they do we'll always be bitching about their alternative opponents!

A fully justified rant, so no qualms with that one!

milkyboy wrote: the hateboys are getting a bit tiresome for me. There is some serious revisionist history going on here.

There's more money fighting established stars, and of course they're often getting on a bit because its their successful longevity that's made them names. Fight an unbeaten up and comer and you get slated for taking on an unproved nobody. Or as mayweather has just done, a young fresh, chinny nobody.

Since the last fight with jmm, pacquiao's fought diaz (1 defeat) for the lightweight belt, de la hoya, (aging but who, unless my memory fails me, was clear favourite for the fight), hatton (1 defeat to mayweather), cotto (1 defeat against a guy with plaster in his gloves), Clottey (3 defeats: 1 dq he was winning, 1 he got injured in, and 1 disputed split decision), marg (big super middle, considered a beast prior to shock defeat to mosley), mosley i'm not going to defend because he'd clearly seen better days. Now, with limited other options, he's back fighting the one guy that people think he didn't get the better of... but getting bitched about because he's now too old.

Yes, he got some of these at the right time, and yes the quality of opponent has tailed off a little, but really the only huge fight out there is fmj. Every management team picks opponents on a risk reward basis. But when you look at the guys manny has fought over the years at the range of weights its pitiful to pick him up on it.

Clearly manny should have stayed at super feather for ever and not fought any of the above... maybe he could have chased chris john for a fight in indonesia so he could beat the man who beat the man... that might have proved his worth...

But no, the cheating little scumbag has to go up another 4 weight divisions and beat up the aging glamour boys. Shocking career, brazenly skipping through the flyweight to super middle divisions. Manny Pacaquiao, an embarrassment to boxing. Don't know how i never saw this before.

Lets not dress it up as something it isn't. Manny is a great fighter, but his fights a LW and above have been a case of some very good match making, nothing more, nothing less. He still had to win the fights, but lets be honest he had all the cards stacked in his favour and bar DLH (who people we not aware of being so weight drained he could barely walk) he was expected to win them all.

It is one-sided statements like your own that cause people to create equally extreme statements for the other side. A little perspective is needed.

When you're top 2 in the sport anything can be seen as good matchmaking.

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

Lets not dress it up as something it isn't. Manny is a great fighter, but his fights a LW and above have been a case of some very good match making, nothing more, nothing less. He still had to win the fights, but lets be honest he had all the cards stacked in his favour and bar DLH (who people we not aware of being so weight drained he could barely walk) he was expected to win them all.

It is one-sided statements like your own that cause people to create equally extreme statements for the other side. A little perspective is needed.

Oh and Hatton and Cotto who were both favourites at the time of the fight. Hatton more than Cotto but that was down to Pac's showing against Hatton.

Hatton was unbeaten at his best weight - his loss had come when he stepped up.

We are lucky that we have two fighters that are fighting in our lifetime that are both great fighters (Floyd and Pac), yes it is annoying they won't fight each other but there is so much disrespectful stuff spoken from fans of either aimed at the other.

Huw, yep, it's easy for people to write off the wins over Hatton and Cotto in hindsight, the fact of the matter is they were very dangerous fights that people expected him to lose, and were before people were quite as aware of his brilliance which he highlighted in those fights.

Lumbering has always been a bit anti-Pacquaio, so I'd take those comments with a pinch of salt.

Just accept that FMJ and MP are beating the best of the rest, and that until they fight each other they haven't faced their ultimate test. Simple as that, I'd say.

Scottrf wrote:When you're top 2 in the sport anything can be seen as good matchmaking.

Not really. Fighting Cotto at 147 for his title, or Marg at 154 for the vacant title would be a start. Not picking one of the worst champs in Diaz for a 135lb title etc...

Fists of Fury wrote:Huw, yep, it's easy for people to write off the wins over Hatton and Cotto in hindsight, the fact of the matter is they were very dangerous fights that people expected him to lose, and were before people were quite as aware of his brilliance which he highlighted in those fights.

Lumbering has always been a bit anti-Pacquaio, so I'd take those comments with a pinch of salt.

Just accept that FMJ and MP are beating the best of the rest, and that until they fight each other they haven't faced their ultimate test. Simple as that, I'd say.

Because I have an opinion on Manny I am anti-Pacquaio?? In that case, you fancy him.

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

Scottrf wrote:When you're top 2 in the sport anything can be seen as good matchmaking.

Not really. Fighting Cotto at 147 for his title, or Marg at 154 for the vacant title would be a start. Not picking one of the worst champs in Diaz for a 135lb title etc...

Well, I remember what was thought at the time, that Pacquiao might not be able to go above SFW, and Diaz might be a tough fight because of the weight. Can't be bothered with the catchweight agenda stuff.

Scottrf wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

Scottrf wrote:When you're top 2 in the sport anything can be seen as good matchmaking.

Not really. Fighting Cotto at 147 for his title, or Marg at 154 for the vacant title would be a start. Not picking one of the worst champs in Diaz for a 135lb title etc...

Well, I remember what was thought at the time, that Pacquiao might not be able to go above SFW, and Diaz might be a tough fight because of the weight. Can't be bothered with the catchweight agenda stuff.

I remember buying a boxing mag just before the fight, the headline?? 'Four gone conclusion'. It would appear that most thought Manny would win with ease.

As PBF has highlighted, Manny was the huge betting favourite in the Cotto and Hatton fights.

'Four gone conclusion'

=========
I'm sure a man of your intelligence would pick this up, but that is in reference to his attempts at picking up a title at a 4th weight.

Can anyone find a fight in recent years for either Floyd or Manny in which they have not been wide betting favourites. Did it not occur to you that this is perhaps a reflection of how good they are than how poor their opponents are. Suspect until they fight each other the same will continue to be said because they are a singificant step in front of the chasing pack.

rowley wrote:Can anyone find a fight in recent years for either Floyd or Manny in which they have not been wide betting favourites. Did it not occur to you that this is perhaps a reflection of how good they are than how poor their opponents are. Suspect until they fight each other the same will continue to be said because they are a singificant step in front of the chasing pack.

Yet the Pacquiao fans are trying to insult everyone's intelligence by making things up like he was the underdog when he clearly wasn't.

Rowley the likes of Clottey, Margarito and Mosley have not been credible opponents for Pacquiao...That is three in a row.

Mayweather last 6 opponents have been considered credible that is the big difference between the two...You can clearly see one team cherry picking.

You cant dispute what Pacquiao did below lightweight. The arguments trying to suggest Barrera, Morales and Marquez were all shot or cherry picked is just a sign of clear bias.

Lightweight and above there have been some poor fights. Mosely and Clottey in particular stand out as being weak fights to take on the circumstances. Hatton and Cotto were more than credible. Nobody knew De la Hoya was going to struggle with the weight and make such a mess of it as he did so I blame De la Hoya more for that. In that fight Oscar was a handy favourite starting off. The Margarito fight wasnt great but the weight advantage he held gave it more legitimacy.

I dont have a problem with the Marquez fight given the options out there and as rowley says, the betting odds are a reflection of how much better Pacquaio is more than anything else. Marquez is still ranked as the best at lightweight and the third best fighter in the world by the Ring. His fom has been solid of late and the two have history. I dont think this fight is nearly as poor as people are making out even though I think the reality is Pacquaio just has too much at this stage for Marquez. If there were a wealth of other options out there I might agree that Marquez was unneccessary but there are not.

Havent seen anyone on here claim Pacquiao as being perfect, only one well known individual defended the Mosley fight for instance and the general feeling over Clottey and Margarito fights was unenthusiastic. Some of the negativity towards him is unjustified though and the reality is at the moment only really Mayweather can rival him at a common weight.

Fists of Fury wrote:PBF I have spoken nicely to you about your behaviour before, and it clearly hasn't worked, so let me put it more plainly...for the sanity of us all shut up. I'm removing all of your comments calling people wums, and don't want to see it again.

Slightly harsh... Scott was telling him to kill himself. One rule for one etc...

Yet I was talking boxing then get attacked by Scott...nothing mentioned about the behaviour of Scott.

You'll notice that comment has gone, also.

Not your place to comment on what the moderators see fit as against the house rules, Jack.

The problem I have is that on the one hand people are saying that the weight for the Marquez fight shouldn't have any substantial bearing on the outcome, yet Pacquiao himself was quite happy to impose a few pounds' grace on both Margarito and Cotto. Either that couple of pounds makes a difference or it doesn't, but to be so contradictory is what grates with a lot of people.



From lightweight and above Pacquiao's wins have been impressive, but something of a mixed bag. Diaz was a weak champion and nothing More. Oscar was favourite until people realised he'd apparently died two weeks before the fight. Hatton was a devastating win, as was Cotto. Margarito and Mosley were poor choices. Margarito shouldn't have even had his licence and Mosley had been shown up in his previous fight.



What makes things worse from a fan's perspective is the hypocrisy, more than any other single factor.



Marquez was 'finished business' until he's not far off forty. No-one wanted to see the fight according to Arum et al, yet now it's a 'classic'? gimme a break! Mosley seemingly discovered the fountain of youth despite being shut out by Mayweather. Cotto and Margarito-both title fights with the limit set below the divisional maximum.



Oh, I forgot about Clottey. That speaks volumes. He was a big, solid guy but at the time there were better options out there. Arum of course was too busy putting countdown clocks on his website to goad Mayweather to bother perhaps negotiating that fight.



We're told a half dozen different reasons why Pacquiao doesn't want to give blood, all of which seem to have been conveniently forgotten now because it suits Pacquiao and his team.



I have no problem with stipulations and contractual obligations and taking the higher-paying fights so long as those involved show some integrity, but that is one thing which has been sorely lacking.



And before people accuse me of hating Pacquiao; I think Mayweather is just as much to blame for their fight breaking down, but right now people seem to be clamouring to fill the vacancy on Pacquiao's balls that is usually filled by D4.

Fists- More of the old BBC 606 old pals act then.

BALTIMORA wrote:The problem I have is that on the one hand people are saying that the weight for the Marquez fight shouldn't have any substantial bearing on the outcome, yet Pacquiao himself was quite happy to impose a few pounds' grace on both Margarito and Cotto. Either that couple of pounds makes a difference or it doesn't, but to be so contradictory is what grates with a lot of people.

On the contrary, I've been consistent. I don't think the weight has an effect, the choices of his team have no reflection on me. Why are boxing fans always asking for fewer divisions if 2 pounds is so important?

prettyboykev wrote:Fists- More of the old BBC 606 old pals act then.

As you'll see above, I removed all comments breaking the house rules. PBF was reprimanded because he is in consistent breach of them, and has had several warnings in the past. Scott was messaged separately regarding his comments.

I shouldn't have to explain that to you, as it isn't your place to comment on the actions of the moderation team, but I have done on this occasion to dismiss this ridiculous notion.

Now, back on topic gents.

The genius of PBF wrote:

rowley wrote:Can anyone find a fight in recent years for either Floyd or Manny in which they have not been wide betting favourites. Did it not occur to you that this is perhaps a reflection of how good they are than how poor their opponents are. Suspect until they fight each other the same will continue to be said because they are a singificant step in front of the chasing pack.

Yet the Pacquiao fans are trying to insult everyone's intelligence by making things up like he was the underdog when he clearly wasn't.

Rowley the likes of Clottey, Margarito and Mosley have not been credible opponents for Pacquiao...That is three in a row.

Mayweather last 6 opponents have been considered credible that is the big difference between the two...You can clearly see one team cherry picking.

And what do you call insisting on keeping up the pretence of actually being PBF even though you've already been owned and exposed by a simple IP check?

And as poor as Manny's weight-stips have been, its no worse the PBF forcing a 144lb catchweight for JMM rather than a competitive 140 before ignoring it anyway and coming in at 146.

Try extacting your nose from PBF's backside and accept neither fighter is innocent in this whole affair and both, while modern greats, have the occasional asterix on their CV.

Fists of Fury wrote:You'll notice that comment has gone, also.

Not your place to comment on what the moderators see fit as against the house rules, Jack.

Of course I can question the moderation team, as long as it is done in the right way. I was merely highlighting the fact that you singled out 1 poster when the exchange clearly involved 2. This is not a dictatorship so I fail to see why you are getting so defensive over a comment that was neither offensive nor provocative. Perhaps you realised you were in the wrong?

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:You'll notice that comment has gone, also.

Not your place to comment on what the moderators see fit as against the house rules, Jack.

Of course I can question the moderation team, as long as it is done in the right way. I was merely highlighting the fact that you singled out 1 poster when the exchange clearly involved 2. This is not a dictatorship so I fail to see why you are getting so defensive over a comment that was neither offensive nor provocative. Perhaps you realised you were in the wrong?

Let it be Jack im not bothered

Scottrf wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:The problem I have is that on the one hand people are saying that the weight for the Marquez fight shouldn't have any substantial bearing on the outcome, yet Pacquiao himself was quite happy to impose a few pounds' grace on both Margarito and Cotto. Either that couple of pounds makes a difference or it doesn't, but to be so contradictory is what grates with a lot of people.

On the contrary, I've been consistent. I don't think the weight has an effect, the choices of his team have no reflection on me. Why are boxing fans always asking for fewer divisions if 2 pounds is so important?

It's the cyclical argument, and one which you've yet to answer satisfactorily: If those few pounds are so irrelevant why did Pacquiao need the stipulations so badly, and why does he need a limit of 144 against Marquez when he could easily make 140? I think there ARE too many weight divisions, particularly at the lower end of the scale. That doesn't alter the fact that Pacquiao picks and chooses whether he's too big or too small to fight at a given weight.

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

Of course I can question the moderation team, as long as it is done in the right way.

Which would be by PM, ultimately this whining about the moderation is getting really tired. If folk don't like it they don't have to use the forum, there is always the option of going to Eastside and having some 12 year old threatening to bust a cap in yo' ass whatever that means.

Fists of Fury wrote:

prettyboykev wrote:Fists- More of the old BBC 606 old pals act then.

As you'll see above, I removed all comments breaking the house rules. PBF was reprimanded because he is in consistent breach of them, and has had several warnings in the past. Scott was messaged separately regarding his comments.

I shouldn't have to explain that to you, as it isn't your place to comment on the actions of the moderation team, but I have done on this occasion to dismiss this ridiculous notion.

Now, back on topic gents.

Both were just as guilty so the notion isn't really that ridiculous.

Like you said back to topic. I think it's a good match up. Marquez might just have enough left in the tank to beat Pacquiao. I would have rather seen the fight at 140lbs and given the fact Ariza said he has to almost force feed Pacquiao to make 147lbs I find it strange they need a catchweight. But a catchweight it is. Personally I'm looking forward to it.

BALTIMORA wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:The problem I have is that on the one hand people are saying that the weight for the Marquez fight shouldn't have any substantial bearing on the outcome, yet Pacquiao himself was quite happy to impose a few pounds' grace on both Margarito and Cotto. Either that couple of pounds makes a difference or it doesn't, but to be so contradictory is what grates with a lot of people.

On the contrary, I've been consistent. I don't think the weight has an effect, the choices of his team have no reflection on me. Why are boxing fans always asking for fewer divisions if 2 pounds is so important?

It's the cyclical argument, and one which you've yet to answer satisfactorily: If those few pounds are so irrelevant why did Pacquiao need the stipulations so badly, and why does he need a limit of 144 against Marquez when he could easily make 140? I think there ARE too many weight divisions, particularly at the lower end of the scale. That doesn't alter the fact that Pacquiao picks and chooses whether he's too big or too small to fight at a given weight.

I've answered it satisfactorily, it's about control and ego. Same as coming into the ring first. No P4P #1 jumps around for another boxer.

Pacquiao wanted $10M for every pound Mayweather came in over weight. Sounds like he thinks it's important. In a titfor-tat way, this was also the reason Mayweather demanded random blood testing. Which was more unreasonable?

Pacquiao's matchmaking over the last few years has been circus like. When was the last time anyone was genuinely excited by an upcoming Pacquiao fight?

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:You'll notice that comment has gone, also.

Not your place to comment on what the moderators see fit as against the house rules, Jack.

Of course I can question the moderation team, as long as it is done in the right way. I was merely highlighting the fact that you singled out 1 poster when the exchange clearly involved 2. This is not a dictatorship so I fail to see why you are getting so defensive over a comment that was neither offensive nor provocative. Perhaps you realised you were in the wrong?

I don't think it's unreasonable to treat 2 different posters marginally different. I think you're being a bit harsh of Fists. It was PBF that started throwing his toys out the pram with WUM comments first as soon as Scott highlighted the fact he's been exposed previously. PBF is simply D4's anti-thesis and, having been reprimanded and banned on previous occassions, hardly warrants lenient treatment. Scott merely vented the frustrations the majority of members have with posters such as PBF and their blatant and ignorant agendas which they refuse to hold their hands up to.

rowley wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

Of course I can question the moderation team, as long as it is done in the right way.

Which would be by PM, ultimately this whining about the moderation is getting really tired. If folk don't like it they don't have to use the forum, there is always the option of going to Eastside and having some 12 year old threatening to bust a cap in yo' ass whatever that means.

I think it means they want to give you a thick ear Rowley.

The genius of PBF wrote:

rowley wrote:Can anyone find a fight in recent years for either Floyd or Manny in which they have not been wide betting favourites. Did it not occur to you that this is perhaps a reflection of how good they are than how poor their opponents are. Suspect until they fight each other the same will continue to be said because they are a singificant step in front of the chasing pack.

Yet the Pacquiao fans are trying to insult everyone's intelligence by making things up like he was the underdog when he clearly wasn't.

Rowley the likes of Clottey, Margarito and Mosley have not been credible opponents for Pacquiao...That is three in a row.

Mayweather last 6 opponents have been considered credible that is the big difference between the two...You can clearly see one team cherry picking.

So Mosley is credible for Floyd but not for Manny? What about Marqeuz, take it it's the same with him?

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Pacquiao wanted $10M for every pound Mayweather came in over weight. Sounds like he thinks it's important. In a titfor-tat way, this was also the reason Mayweather demanded random blood testing. Which was more unreasonable?

Pacquiao's matchmaking over the last few years has been circus like. When was the last time anyone was genuinely excited by an upcoming Pacquiao fight?

Bearing in mind Pac has zero history of drug abuse yet PBF has recent history of setting a weight-stip then ignoring it and coming in over-weight to take the advantage I think they are both as relevant as eachother. Though 't!t-for-tat' is undoubtedly the most accurate summation of it all!

BALTIMORA wrote:The problem I have is that on the one hand people are saying that the weight for the Marquez fight shouldn't have any substantial bearing on the outcome, yet Pacquiao himself was quite happy to impose a few pounds' grace on both Margarito and Cotto. Either that couple of pounds makes a difference or it doesn't, but to be so contradictory is what grates with a lot of people.



From lightweight and above Pacquiao's wins have been impressive, but something of a mixed bag. Diaz was a weak champion and nothing More. Oscar was favourite until people realised he'd apparently died two weeks before the fight. Hatton was a devastating win, as was Cotto. Margarito and Mosley were poor choices. Margarito shouldn't have even had his licence and Mosley had been shown up in his previous fight.



What makes things worse from a fan's perspective is the hypocrisy, more than any other single factor.



Marquez was 'finished business' until he's not far off forty. No-one wanted to see the fight according to Arum et al, yet now it's a 'classic'? gimme a break! Mosley seemingly discovered the fountain of youth despite being shut out by Mayweather. Cotto and Margarito-both title fights with the limit set below the divisional maximum.



Oh, I forgot about Clottey. That speaks volumes. He was a big, solid guy but at the time there were better options out there. Arum of course was too busy putting countdown clocks on his website to goad Mayweather to bother perhaps negotiating that fight.



We're told a half dozen different reasons why Pacquiao doesn't want to give blood, all of which seem to have been conveniently forgotten now because it suits Pacquiao and his team.



I have no problem with stipulations and contractual obligations and taking the higher-paying fights so long as those involved show some integrity, but that is one thing which has been sorely lacking.



And before people accuse me of hating Pacquiao; I think Mayweather is just as much to blame for their fight breaking down, but right now people seem to be clamouring to fill the vacancy on Pacquiao's balls that is usually filled by D4.

Out of curiosity, what sort of advantage do you think the catchweight gives Pacquiao in this fight? I have in previous posts outlined the advantage I think it gives him which is primarily convinience that he doesnt have to make a weight limit and de/rehydrate or sweat off a few pounds before a weigh in. History has shown that the two men weight similar amounts on fight night regardless of whether the fight is at 135, 140 or 147. Pacquiao is a little heavier now by a couple of pounds but an 8 week training camp for Marquez should easily allow him to add a couple of pounds of muscle. We know from the physical stats of the two that they are very similar in dimensions with neither being significantly bigger. So what you have is two similar sized guys who generally weigh within a couple of pounds of each other on fight night. Im curious as to what people think major advantage will be because other than keep saying it must be an advantage for Pacquaio they havent really explained why or how great the advantage will be. I think its a small advantage for Pacquiao but unlikely to be significant in the outcome.

The catchweights on Cotto and Margarito in particular were designed to prevent his opponents sizing up on him too much as they were known to pile on enormous weight in between the weigh in and fight when they rehydrated up and were naturally much larger men than Pacquiao who never even weighs in on the welterweight limit. By imposing a catchweight Pacquiao was attempting to control the amount of weight advantage they would hold on fight night. This isnt relevant in this fight because Marquez will not hold a size advantage on him.

The second issue is the so called hypocrisy shown by Pacquaios camp. Yes they have come out with plenty of nonsense in the past which I wouldnt argue with but its no different to a whole host of boxers. The reason Marquez was finished business in the past was because they were trying to sell a different fight. The reality is Marquez is still highly rated. Many of the guys dismissing him voted for him as their 3rd or 4th best fighter pound for pound and the Ring still have him right up there also. His form recently has been good other than the fight with Mayweather. He is old, yes. But not shot. I dont think he is the same fighter as in 2004 or even 2008 but he hasnt fallen off the map and his current rating of the number 1 lightweight and 3rd/4th best fighter overall reflects this. Ortiz that Mayweather fought for example was nowhere near the pound for pound list and at best the 3rd ranked fighter in the division.

As much as there people arguing in favour of Pacquaio here that is usually reserved for a certain individual, I cant help feel there are also a few that are simply happy to stick the boot in to Pacquiao at any opportunity.

For what its worth I think this fight will be one sided as the timing of it favours Pacquaio now clearly at this stage. Marquez is on the downward slope compared to 2004 whereas Pacquiao is a better fighter than then. However I though the Ortiz fight would be one sided aswell for instance and the key point is the top two guys are just better than everyone else now. I thik its unrealistic to expect them t start handing out advantages to their opponents for free just to make things more even for us fans. Mayweather for example didnt even bother to stick to his catchweight agreement with Marquez and was happy to weigh in over and pay the fine. Hardly a shining example of fair play either.

The genius of PBF wrote:

rowley wrote:Can anyone find a fight in recent years for either Floyd or Manny in which they have not been wide betting favourites. Did it not occur to you that this is perhaps a reflection of how good they are than how poor their opponents are. Suspect until they fight each other the same will continue to be said because they are a singificant step in front of the chasing pack.

Yet the Pacquiao fans are trying to insult everyone's intelligence by making things up like he was the underdog when he clearly wasn't.

Rowley the likes of Clottey, Margarito and Mosley have not been credible opponents for Pacquiao...That is three in a row.

Mayweather last 6 opponents have been considered credible that is the big difference between the two...You can clearly see one team cherry picking.

Why are they credible for Mayweather and not Pac?

Out of the last 6 fights 4 have also been in with Pac. Mayweather obviously won those fights as did Pac, I just don't understand your logic here.

Now if Pac hadn't been in with ODLH, Hatton, Mosley (Marquez to come) you would be saying that he is scared to fight them and Mayweather he takes on weaker opposition.

So if these are the best available / most credible fighters then what is the problem?

Scottrf wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:The problem I have is that on the one hand people are saying that the weight for the Marquez fight shouldn't have any substantial bearing on the outcome, yet Pacquiao himself was quite happy to impose a few pounds' grace on both Margarito and Cotto. Either that couple of pounds makes a difference or it doesn't, but to be so contradictory is what grates with a lot of people.

On the contrary, I've been consistent. I don't think the weight has an effect, the choices of his team have no reflection on me. Why are boxing fans always asking for fewer divisions if 2 pounds is so important?

It's the cyclical argument, and one which you've yet to answer satisfactorily: If those few pounds are so irrelevant why did Pacquiao need the stipulations so badly, and why does he need a limit of 144 against Marquez when he could easily make 140? I think there ARE too many weight divisions, particularly at the lower end of the scale. That doesn't alter the fact that Pacquiao picks and chooses whether he's too big or too small to fight at a given weight.

I've answered it satisfactorily, it's about control and ego. Same as coming into the ring first. No P4P #1 jumps around for another boxer.

This is the problem. They both, and quite correctly, believe that they are the best/biggest draw around in world boxing today. Neither wants to yield to the others demands as they think it would make them look second best, something their egos couldn't take. It is a unique situation in boxing that two fighters now competing at/around the same weight could become such massive stars for so long without having faced eachother. A situation that could only have arisen with Pacquiao's rise up the weights and Mayweathers semi-retirement.

huw wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

rowley wrote:Can anyone find a fight in recent years for either Floyd or Manny in which they have not been wide betting favourites. Did it not occur to you that this is perhaps a reflection of how good they are than how poor their opponents are. Suspect until they fight each other the same will continue to be said because they are a singificant step in front of the chasing pack.

Yet the Pacquiao fans are trying to insult everyone's intelligence by making things up like he was the underdog when he clearly wasn't.

Rowley the likes of Clottey, Margarito and Mosley have not been credible opponents for Pacquiao...That is three in a row.

Mayweather last 6 opponents have been considered credible that is the big difference between the two...You can clearly see one team cherry picking.

Why are they credible for Mayweather and not Pac?

Out of the last 6 fights 4 have also been in with Pac. Mayweather obviously won those fights as did Pac, I just don't understand your logic here.

Now if Pac hadn't been in with ODLH, Hatton, Mosley (Marquez to come) you would be saying that he is scared to fight them and Mayweather he takes on weaker opposition.

So if these are the best available / most credible fighters then what is the problem?

The difference is, and it's a big one, Mayweather fought those guys when they were on the up, Paquiao didn't.

The Galveston Giant wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

rowley wrote:Can anyone find a fight in recent years for either Floyd or Manny in which they have not been wide betting favourites. Did it not occur to you that this is perhaps a reflection of how good they are than how poor their opponents are. Suspect until they fight each other the same will continue to be said because they are a singificant step in front of the chasing pack.

Yet the Pacquiao fans are trying to insult everyone's intelligence by making things up like he was the underdog when he clearly wasn't.

Rowley the likes of Clottey, Margarito and Mosley have not been credible opponents for Pacquiao...That is three in a row.

Mayweather last 6 opponents have been considered credible that is the big difference between the two...You can clearly see one team cherry picking.

So Mosley is credible for Floyd but not for Manny? What about Marqeuz, take it it's the same with him?

Mosley was coming off the best wins of his career when facing Floyd Mayweather after smashing Margarito to bits and when Manny faced him he knew Mosley was done...Big difference everyone could see against Mora, Mosley was shot.

The boxing fans wanted to see Mayweather vs Mosley...Pacquiao vs Mosley was ridiculed by most surely you can see this?

Marrquez vs Pacquiao should have happened sooner but he is a credible opponent for Pacquiao as they are both the same size.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

The difference is, and it's a big one, Mayweather fought those guys when they were on the up, Paquiao didn't.

Really:
Floyd
ODLH 2007
Hatton 2007
Marquez 2009
Mosley 2010

Pac
ODLH 2008
Hatton 2009
Marquez 2004 / 2008 / 2011
Mosley 2011

Not one of these was on his way up when either faced them. Hatton was unbeaten before facing Floyd, had still only the one loss when facing Pac and unbeaten at the weight Pac beat him at.

Now ODLH was WAY passed his best before fighting either of these guys (I was a big Oscar fan yet for me he was really done when Sturm beat him but lost on the cards).

Pac had 2 fights with Marquez prior to Floyd facing him.

Mosley was passed his best when either decided to fight him.

huw wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

The difference is, and it's a big one, Mayweather fought those guys when they were on the up, Paquiao didn't.

Really:
Floyd
ODLH 2007
Hatton 2007
Marquez 2009
Mosley 2010

Pac
ODLH 2008
Hatton 2009
Marquez 2004 / 2008 / 2011
Mosley 2011

Not one of these was on his way up when either faced them. Hatton was unbeaten before facing Floyd, had still only the one loss when facing Pac and unbeaten at the weight Pac beat him at.

Now ODLH was WAY passed his best before fighting either of these guys (I was a big Oscar fan yet for me he was really done when Sturm beat him but lost on the cards).

Pac had 2 fights with Marquez prior to Floyd facing him.

Mosley was passed his best when either decided to fight him.

Once Hatton got beat by Floyd Mayweather he was never the same mentally or physically...This is highlighted in the Lazcano fight when he was hurt badly by a light punching lightweight which showed his punch resistance had declined.

De La Hoya was dehydrated at 147 pounds a weight he had not made in years even Roach admits this...at 154 against Mayweather he choose everything ring size, gloves, referee etc.

I have already highlighted the Mosley point.

As you can see Floyd Mayweather fought better versions and deserves more credit.

On Marquez he beat Pacquiao twice only to get robbed by the judges.

Like I said it is no coincedence Pacquiao fights his opponents coming in with poor form.

Mayweather timed the Mosely fight better but in practical terms there wasnt much difference. He was well past his best for both fights.

What Hatton was like mentally for his fight is really just speculation. One can point to the Lazcano fight (where he won almost every round) as a negative but after that he outclassed Malignaggi in a fight where many said he had never looked so good. He also got to face Pacquiao at his preffered weight. So the spin can work both ways.

Oscar was far more a formidable prospect at light middle than the version Pacquaio faced but there was no indication that Oscar would make such a hash of his training camp and leave himself so drained. The fact he was favourite in this fight indicates there were few reservations about him. As it turned out he was little more than a shell but that was not Pacquaios fault who could hardly be expected to jump to light middle from lightweight either.

The genius of PBF wrote:

Once Hatton got beat by Floyd Mayweather he was never the same mentally or physically...This is highlighted in the Lazcano fight when he was hurt badly by a light punching lightweight which showed his punch resistance had declined.

De La Hoya was dehydrated at 147 pounds a weight he had not made in years even Roach admits this...at 154 against Mayweather he choose everything ring size, gloves, referee etc.

I have already highlighted the Mosley point.

As you can see Floyd Mayweather fought better versions and deserves more credit.

On Marquez he beat Pacquiao twice only to get robbed by the judges.

Like I said it is no coincedence Pacquiao fights his opponents coming in with poor form.

PBF, fair play. You obviously have your way of looking at things and I doubt that will change any time soon.

Personally I see both fighters taking on the best available fighters in their weight class whilst avoiding each other. They are the only legitimate threat to each other so any other fight is going to look like a mismatch and arguments can be made either way.

Hindsight also plays a huge part in this debate yet it seems that they both take fights when the risk level isn't what it once would have been.

You obviously have your personal opinion on this yet if I were to turn it I could say:

ODLH - washed up prior to fighting Maywether
Marquez - Made to fight WAY above his weight limit when WAY past his best
Mosley - Mayweather avoided him until he had slowed and started having stamina issues
Hatton - Never really on that level and had himself cherry picked oponents, only beat Tsyzu when he was way past it

Now I personally don't think the above are all true yet a case can be made for all of them too be true.

Excluding Marquez, as Pacquiao fought him both before and soon to be after Mayweather, you cannot make a single case of Manny having fought the better version of their common opposition.

When Mayweather fought them:

ODLH - full of confidence hadn't lost for years and looked good in previous fights.
Hatton - ditto
Marquez - ditto
Mosley - past his best but coming off a great win

When Manny fought them:

ODLH - coming off the Floyd loss and fighting at the wrong weight.
Hatton - coming off the Floyd KO loss
Mosley - coming off a one sided beat down
+
Margarito - coming off a beat-down
Cotto - coming off a beat-down

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:
When Mayweather fought them:

ODLH - full of confidence hadn't lost for years and looked good in previous fights.
Hatton - ditto
Marquez - ditto
Mosley - past his best but coming off a great win

When Manny fought them:

ODLH - coming off the Floyd loss and fighting at the wrong weight.
Hatton - coming off the Floyd KO loss
Mosley - coming off a one sided beat down
+
Margarito - coming off a beat-down
Cotto - coming off a beat-down

ODLH Had lost 2 of previous 4!
Marquez had lost to Pac 2 fights previously
Hatton good win for both
Mosley too old for both

So what you're trying to say is that getting smashed up by Mayweather (barring ODLH) had no effect on those fighters careers? You think Ricky Hatton, Marquez and Mosley's self-belief was the same after getting completely dominated by Mayweather as it was before?

As for ODLH losing a disputed decision to Mosley and losing to Hopkins, big deal. He hardly disgraced himself. Same with Marquez. He wasn't going to lose much sleep losing to Manny in a fight many thought he'd won.

You think the Mosley that struggled against Sergio Mora was as good as the one that smashed up Margacheato?

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:So what you're trying to say is that getting smashed up by Mayweather (barring ODLH) had no effect on those fighters careers? You think Ricky Hatton, Marquez and Mosley's self-belief was the same after getting completely dominated by Mayweather as it was before?

As for ODLH losing a disputed decision to Mosley and losing to Hopkins, big deal. He hardly disgraced himself. Same with Marquez. He wasn't going to lose much sleep losing to Manny in a fight many thought he'd won.

You think the Mosley that struggled against Sergio Mora was as good as the one that smashed up Margacheato?

ODLH - you said he hadn't lost in years, I pointed out he had.

I think the Mosley beaten by Floyd was far worse than the Mosley he had been accused of avoiding earlier in his career.

I don't know the mental state of the boxers after losing to Floyd. For me they were outboxed rather than given a beatdown, not like they took huge punishment just beaten by someone with better skill.

My understanding from reading a few boxing books is that when a (top class) boxer loses he blames it on the mistakes he made during the fight rather than the other guy being better than them, but as stated I don't know what was going through their minds after losing to Floyd.

This by the way isn't Floyd bashing, I think he is an incredible boxer and would probably make easy work of Pacman. Just feel that some opinions on this are blinded by love of a particular fighter.

The genius of PBF wrote:

huw wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

The difference is, and it's a big one, Mayweather fought those guys when they were on the up, Paquiao didn't.

Really:
Floyd
ODLH 2007
Hatton 2007
Marquez 2009
Mosley 2010

Pac
ODLH 2008
Hatton 2009
Marquez 2004 / 2008 / 2011
Mosley 2011

Not one of these was on his way up when either faced them. Hatton was unbeaten before facing Floyd, had still only the one loss when facing Pac and unbeaten at the weight Pac beat him at.

Now ODLH was WAY passed his best before fighting either of these guys (I was a big Oscar fan yet for me he was really done when Sturm beat him but lost on the cards).

Pac had 2 fights with Marquez prior to Floyd facing him.

Mosley was passed his best when either decided to fight him.

Once Hatton got beat by Floyd Mayweather he was never the same mentally or physically...This is highlighted in the Lazcano fight when he was hurt badly by a light punching lightweight which showed his punch resistance had declined.

De La Hoya was dehydrated at 147 pounds a weight he had not made in years even Roach admits this...at 154 against Mayweather he choose everything ring size, gloves, referee etc.

I have already highlighted the Mosley point.

As you can see Floyd Mayweather fought better versions and deserves more credit.

On Marquez he beat Pacquiao twice only to get robbed by the judges.

Like I said it is no coincedence Pacquiao fights his opponents coming in with poor form.

Robbed? Like Castillo you mean? Fact is Pac fought Marquez when he was younger better and at his preferred weights, not bloated welter-weight fights like with Floyd. Whilst I think a number of Pacs recent fights are quite heavily caveated, his fights with the 3 modern Mexican legends of Morales, Barrera and Marquez outshine anything on Floyd's CV.

huw wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:So what you're trying to say is that getting smashed up by Mayweather (barring ODLH) had no effect on those fighters careers? You think Ricky Hatton, Marquez and Mosley's self-belief was the same after getting completely dominated by Mayweather as it was before?

As for ODLH losing a disputed decision to Mosley and losing to Hopkins, big deal. He hardly disgraced himself. Same with Marquez. He wasn't going to lose much sleep losing to Manny in a fight many thought he'd won.

You think the Mosley that struggled against Sergio Mora was as good as the one that smashed up Margacheato?

ODLH - you said he hadn't lost in years, I pointed out he had.

I think the Mosley beaten by Floyd was far worse than the Mosley he had been accused of avoiding earlier in his career.

I don't know the mental state of the boxers after losing to Floyd. For me they were outboxed rather than given a beatdown, not like they took huge punishment just beaten by someone with better skill.

My understanding from reading a few boxing books is that when a (top class) boxer loses he blames it on the mistakes he made during the fight rather than the other guy being better than them, but as stated I don't know what was going through their minds after losing to Floyd.

This by the way isn't Floyd bashing, I think he is an incredible boxer and would probably make easy work of Pacman. Just feel that some opinions on this are blinded by love of a particular fighter.

Next time you look at his record make sure to check the dates. ODLH lost to Floyd in 2007 and to Hopkins in 2004. That's years.