Is he as good as we think?

Yes styles makes fights. I've just seen again JMM v Pac and had it even wider to JMM. Robbery springs to mind. But enough of that.

Marquez showed that a little subtle movement can completely befuddle Pacquiao and make him look frankly very amateurish. So lets look at Pac's last few fights.

Oscar. He couldn't move and stood they to be hit. He got hit and hit often.

Hatton. Led face first and nearly broke Manny's left hand with his face as a result. Great win regardless.

Cotto. As soon as he stopped moving and stood toe to toe, he got blown away.

Clottey. Too worried about leaving himself open and got teed off and widely outpointed. But when he moved and opened up, he had some success.

Marg. Stood toe to toe and got clobbered. Not a great mover anyway and not too fast by any means.

Mosely. Moved a little but threw less resulting in a wide UD. Made Manny look as if he didn't have a plan B. The first signs of that in his heavier career.

JMM showed that a little backward step and a quick counter makes Manny look amateurish and wild. In their 3rd fight manny looked as if he didn't know what a jab was. Interesting also that JMM is the only fighter to show some movement and offense in Manny's recent fights.

This leads me onto Bradley. I've always said that Manny would walk through Bradley. I'm not too sure now. Bradley may not be the most exciting boxers, but he can move and has good in ring intelligence. Something I believe Manny is lacking in. JMM showed what clever tactics when applied can do to him. He starts lunging in and looking desperate.

I'll still pick Manny to win but not by the wide margin I imagined and also I reckon Tim will never get the decision when a $100m fight is on the horizon. Bradley will need a ko twice to make sure of the W.

Manny could do a Diaz on him, but I doubt it.

Opinions please.

Bit harsh on Pacquiao, as good as any fighter is they all have weaknesses and it just so happens that Marquez is the perfect fighter to exploit his, doesn't make him any less a fighter.

I do believe he is or rather was very good. At 33, he is slowing down and the wealth and outside interests have taken something away from him.

I don't think Bradley can fight like Marquez but his own style could well cause alot of problems and this is a very winnable fight for him.

Bradleys own record is fantastic and he is fully prepared for this fight. The question is how prepared is Manny?

Serious question: As a casual boxing fan what was the Paquiao fight that turned heads and defined him as a genuine pound for pounder?

Im watching the weigh in at 2230 online. Be interesting to see how Bradley looks face to face with Pacquiao. He has been very confident as of late, but when its scale time and its face to face, it sinks in. How will he handle that?

Good article by the way AZ, agree with everything you said there. I think Bradley really could cause problems for Manny, but like you stated, with a £100 million fight lined up, i cant see a W for the Desert Storm,

Even still Mayweather will hand Pacquiao a boxing lesson.

Roll on tomorrow night. I Will be tuned in to the weather channel via my laptop tomorrow night!!


See ya lads!

FreekShow wrote:Serious question: As a casual boxing fan what was the Paquiao fight that turned heads and defined him as a genuine pound for pounder?

Errr well, great question. Id probably say Morales or Barrera? However, for the more "casual fan", id say Oscar De La Hoya. Was probably the first time Pacquiao got world wide recognition. Was a "dream fight", big step up in weight etc etc. From then on in, he has cashed out on catch weight belts, a couple of washed up fighters (good names however), and a helping decision against a certain JMM.

But for me, its Barrera. Nobody expected it.

But against De La Hoya, EVERYBODY knew about it.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Bit harsh on Pacquiao, as good as any fighter is they all have weaknesses and it just so happens that Marquez is the perfect fighter to exploit his, doesn't make him any less a fighter.

Possibly harsh, but I recall saying after the SSM fight that he lacked a Plan B. All SSM did was to take a step backward to avoid the slugfest Pac wanted. Stand in front of him and his speed will overwhelm you. MAB tried it and paid for it.

It could possibly be that JMM has his number, but Shane without throwing much back made him look human. Plus in the JMM3 fight, all JMM had to do occassional was flick out a jab and Pac looked confused. Perhaps he knew that a counter was coming if he went forward, but he just seemed to stop and gather himself. He did that too many times for my liking.

FreekShow wrote:Serious question: As a casual boxing fan what was the Paquiao fight that turned heads and defined him as a genuine pound for pounder?

Oscar

mobilemaster8 wrote:

FreekShow wrote:Serious question: As a casual boxing fan what was the Paquiao fight that turned heads and defined him as a genuine pound for pounder?

Errr well, great question. Id probably say Morales or Barrera? However, for the more "casual fan", id say Oscar De La Hoya. Was probably the first time Pacquiao got world wide recognition. Was a "dream fight", big step up in weight etc etc. From then on in, he has cashed out on catch weight belts, a couple of washed up fighters (good names however), and a helping decision against a certain JMM.

But for me, its Barrera. Nobody expected it.

But against De La Hoya, EVERYBODY knew about it.

Cheers mate. I have dipped in and out of watching boxing for the last 15 years but remember buying Boxing Monthly (I think, might have been Boxing News but anyway..) at a train station shop a few years ago which was dominated by the Pac/De La Hoya fight preview and I wondered where this Pac fella had surfaced from!

WelshDevilRob wrote:I do believe he is or rather was very good. At 33, he is slowing down and the wealth and outside interests have taken something away from him.

I don't think Bradley can fight like Marquez but his own style could well cause alot of problems and this is a very winnable fight for him.

Bradleys own record is fantastic and he is fully prepared for this fight. The question is how prepared is Manny?

He didn't look slower. Just more thoughtful and cautious. To me he is at his best when fighting instinctively.

mobilemaster8 wrote:

FreekShow wrote:Serious question: As a casual boxing fan what was the Paquiao fight that turned heads and defined him as a genuine pound for pounder?

Errr well, great question. Id probably say Morales or Barrera? However, for the more "casual fan", id say Oscar De La Hoya. Was probably the first time Pacquiao got world wide recognition. Was a "dream fight", big step up in weight etc etc. From then on in, he has cashed out on catch weight belts, a couple of washed up fighters (good names however), and a helping decision against a certain JMM.

But for me, its Barrera. Nobody expected it.

But against De La Hoya, EVERYBODY knew about it.

Oscar is more known to the 'casual boxing fan' than MAB or Morales.

What the Flip!?

I just posted a kinda long response, hit send and got redirected to the Margarito thread.

Anyway, the jist of my post was this: his career above 135 seems to get written off all too quickly with many excuses made as to why very impressive wins are somehow void.

For a start catchweights. Against De La Hoya it was The Golden Boy's idea if I'm not mistaken. 145 is a pound less than Cotto usually weighed in for welterweight fights. Pacquiao had been a super feather the previous year hadn't he? Manny beat him more dominantly than anybody else by a long shot. Margarito was still twice his size and Manny dominated him too. Also, didn't Cotto impose a catch weight on Marg and get ZERO stick for it?

Hatton went in face first against most of his opponents and was never put fown quite like that. Clottey had been defeated once before facing Manny. By SD to Cotto. He beat a spoiling Mosely by a wider margin than Mayweather.

Marquez has always been his kryptonite. Ali v Norton and all that.

See, that's everything looked at positively. It works both ways.

I haven't mentioned catchweights, size or whose idea was it to make Oscar come down to 147. I'm talking about styles. As soon as Cotto stopped moving and decided to slug, he went. Shane showed some movement (without throwing much) but showed Pac to be fallible. Same with Clottey when he decided to open up a bit. He just didn't look like the human threshing machine when his opponent decides to be a little more than a stationary object.

azania wrote:

WelshDevilRob wrote:I do believe he is or rather was very good. At 33, he is slowing down and the wealth and outside interests have taken something away from him.

I don't think Bradley can fight like Marquez but his own style could well cause alot of problems and this is a very winnable fight for him.

Bradleys own record is fantastic and he is fully prepared for this fight. The question is how prepared is Manny?

He didn't look slower. Just more thoughtful and cautious. To me he is at his best when fighting instinctively.

By slowing down I mean interms of ability. He is no longer at the peak of his powers and that's been apparent in his last few fights. Whether it is physical or due to dedication is open to debate.

I know Az, but many times I've read that his welterweight career is a "joke" and he's the "catchweight king" etc.

As for the thing about movers, well advised footwork would appear to be his undoing. However I think he gets way too much stick for Mosely. Shanes very experienced and was taking no risks at all. Its not as if Manny was ever in danger of not winning a wide, wide decision.

Cotto, you're right, didn't appear to fight with a great gameplan, but that's partly because Cotto does, always and will need to plant his feet to get his shots off.

I found Clottey's moments of offense too rare to draw anything from myself. Its pretty rare to see one world class fighter tear through another world class fighter, threshing machine style. Even Hearns only has one or two Duran style obliterations over greats on his record.

WelshDevilRob wrote:

azania wrote:

WelshDevilRob wrote:I do believe he is or rather was very good. At 33, he is slowing down and the wealth and outside interests have taken something away from him.

I don't think Bradley can fight like Marquez but his own style could well cause alot of problems and this is a very winnable fight for him.

Bradleys own record is fantastic and he is fully prepared for this fight. The question is how prepared is Manny?

He didn't look slower. Just more thoughtful and cautious. To me he is at his best when fighting instinctively.

By slowing down I mean interms of ability. He is no longer at the peak of his powers and that's been apparent in his last few fights. Whether it is physical or due to dedication is open to debate.

Again, when JMM and SSM decided to trade, he looked much better. As soon as they took a step back, he looked confused and fought accordingly by wading in and simply throwing wild punched. This is particularly in small snippets in the Clottey fight and in the Cotto fight. Its the style more than his ability or lack of.

John Bloody Wayne wrote:I know Az, but many times I've read that his welterweight career is a "joke" and he's the "catchweight king" etc.

As for the thing about movers, well advised footwork would appear to be his undoing. However I think he gets way too much stick for Mosely. Shanes very experienced and was taking no risks at all. Its not as if Manny was ever in danger of not winning a wide, wide decision.

Cotto, you're right, didn't appear to fight with a great gameplan, but that's partly because Cotto does, always and will need to plant his feet to get his shots off.

I found Clottey's moments of offense too rare to draw anything from myself. Its pretty rare to see one world class fighter tear through another world class fighter, threshing machine style. Even Hearns only has one or two Duran style obliterations over greats on his record.

That's what I see. It doesn't have to be a dancing machine either. Just a little step back with a jab. OK not so simple as all will be doing it, but you get my drift.

azania wrote:

WelshDevilRob wrote:

azania wrote:

WelshDevilRob wrote:I do believe he is or rather was very good. At 33, he is slowing down and the wealth and outside interests have taken something away from him.

I don't think Bradley can fight like Marquez but his own style could well cause alot of problems and this is a very winnable fight for him.

Bradleys own record is fantastic and he is fully prepared for this fight. The question is how prepared is Manny?

He didn't look slower. Just more thoughtful and cautious. To me he is at his best when fighting instinctively.

By slowing down I mean interms of ability. He is no longer at the peak of his powers and that's been apparent in his last few fights. Whether it is physical or due to dedication is open to debate.

Again, when JMM and SSM decided to trade, he looked much better. As soon as they took a step back, he looked confused and fought accordingly by wading in and simply throwing wild punched. This is particularly in small snippets in the Clottey fight and in the Cotto fight. Its the style more than his ability or lack of.

Again. I didn't say he looked slower. He is ageing - that is my point. He hasn't looked as good recently because he is not as good as he once was. Can't put it any simpler than that.

I reckon its the style of the opponent and not so much his age.

Lets look at him at his peak lower weight years. MAB decided to trade with him and he got routed. Manny was just too fast. Whenever Manny decided to box a little, Manny looked human. You can justifiably argue that MAB was forced to trade. You wont get an argument from me. But a more disciplined JMM stuck to his game plan, free from machismo and beat Manny (in all eyes 'cept for the judges).

I don't think its because he is not as good as he once was. Its just that he's not as good when a boxer employs a more cute tactic. This only reinforces my opinion that Floyd shuts him out and Tim has a better chance that I gave him credit for initially.

Age will be more of a factor for Pacquiao than Mayweather for instance because he relies on quick hand and feet to jump in and out firing of flurries, he has noticeably lost some spring in his legs so is less able of doing it.

FreekShow wrote:Serious question: As a casual boxing fan what was the Paquiao fight that turned heads and defined him as a genuine pound for pounder?

surely the oscar fight? im talking casual fans world wide here.

FreekShow wrote:Serious question: As a casual boxing fan what was the Paquiao fight that turned heads and defined him as a genuine pound for pounder?

surely the oscar fight? im talking casual fans world wide here.

FreekShow wrote:Serious question: As a casual boxing fan what was the Paquiao fight that turned heads and defined him as a genuine pound for pounder?

Barrera was his defining fight. Oscar may have been more high calibre but Barrera put him on the radar p4p terms. He was a 3-1 underdog I think and Barrera was hightly rated.

Casual fans heard of him after Oscar BUT he was already at the top (p4p) when they fought albeit at 130 and 135.

I do think pacquiao is overrated, although still a brilliant fighter who carries his power up more than anyone in history. Boxers make him look very poor. Those who can fight going forwards AND backwards give him problems. Morales I, Barrera II, JMM all showed that you have to be smart to do well vs pacquiao. He has exceptional hand speed, punch variety, punch power and fiery combo's but isn't going to win a chess match as he doesn't have the ring IQ or technique vs elite level fighters

He does great vs good fighters who don't have the technique to exploit his defensive flaws e.g, Hatton, Diaz, margarito

His records are deserved (except recognising him as a light middleweight champion and maybe even lightweight as he had one fight which was the title fight) so deserves to be an all time great and his longertivity at the top should be praised

WHU_Champo_League_in_7Yrs wrote:

FreekShow wrote:Serious question: As a casual boxing fan what was the Paquiao fight that turned heads and defined him as a genuine pound for pounder?

Barrera was his defining fight. Oscar may have been more high calibre but Barrera put him on the radar p4p terms. He was a 3-1 underdog I think and Barrera was hightly rated.

Casual fans heard of him after Oscar BUT he was already at the top (p4p) when they fought albeit at 130 and 135.

I do think pacquiao is overrated, although still a brilliant fighter who carries his power up more than anyone in history. Boxers make him look very poor. Those who can fight going forwards AND backwards give him problems. Morales I, Barrera II, JMM all showed that you have to be smart to do well vs pacquiao. He has exceptional hand speed, punch variety, punch power and fiery combo's but isn't going to win a chess match as he doesn't have the ring IQ or technique vs elite level fighters

He does great vs good fighters who don't have the technique to exploit his defensive flaws e.g, Hatton, Diaz, margarito

His records are deserved (except recognising him as a light middleweight champion and maybe even lightweight as he had one fight which was the title fight) so deserves to be an all time great and his longertivity at the top should be praised

Excellent post and says what I agree with.

I think this proves my point. Although I had Manny winning easily, it just shows what I have been talking about. When an opponent offers himself, Manny will look great. Subtle movements befuddles him.

I don't think its him slipping as if the judges had scored it to Manny by 4 rounds we would all have agreed that he coasted the last 3 rounds deliberately. But in those last 3 rounds, Tim established the jab, moved and countered. What could Manny do? Flail away hoping to land the hail Mary shot. He has never been that good or adaptable.

Top 25 ATG? Not a chance. Top 101-150 maybe. Winning in 8 weights when 4 are gifted and set up may look good on paper, but turn the page and stuff crawls out.

Think it also proves my point that he is "Slowing down" He didn't fight for the full rounds and often took the 1st two minutes off in a round. Seemed to fade late in the fight.

He certainly won the fight but wasn't able to sustain the energy levels that he has in the past. This was not down to Bradleys tactics, as the guy was pretty passive most of the time.

Manny as I said is simply ageing and not as good as he once was. Still, better than the likes of Bradley.