why was Mayweather so impressive if Manny wasn't?

Quick query regarding the way people have percieved the P4P kings most recent performences.

Mayweather beat Cotto by four or five points on my card - can't remember the exact score.
Manny beat Bradley by five points on my card.
I don't think either of these are especially bad score cards.

Cotto's a known quantity: a classy champion and probable future HOF'er. Maybe slightly faded and twice beaten but coming off some good looking wins at his weight.
Bradley: Young, undefeated, doesn't know how to lose and hungry as a vegan. Opinion was divided pre fight, with the most siding with Manny.

So, ignoring official scorecards (something I'm doing more and more of these days) the margins of victoru were similar and the level of opposition was high on both counts. The biggest difference? Mayweather gets massive credit and Manny gets ripped to bits and is written off in a potential matchup. Mayweather spent more than enough time on the ropes, not moving his feet for any version of Manny to deal out some hurt.

So why is a competetive, but decisive win over Cotto so impressive, when a win of similar dominance over Bradley is so dissapointing?

Because Manny gassed halfway, could only muster fighting in spurts of 30 seconds a round, whereas Mayweather actually LOOKED fine and was much more impressive.

Plus Mayweather crushes Bradley far easier than that. Not knocking Pac, he has just peaked, they both have, but Pacs fading quicker.

Bradley is a fighter who had little power at 140 and was moving up in weight. If he had a bit more power he would have win more rounds as when he did land manny barely blinked whereas manny hurt Bradley whenever the landed which made it hard to give him rounds

Manny is classed as slipping as manny normally wins by dominating rounds with crisp combo's, but vs bradley he would do NOTHING for most of the round and win the round by landing a couple clean shots at the end of each round, not quite stealing rounds but close enough.

Mayweather went up in weight vs a proven elite fighter and stayed in front of him the whole fight. He won rounds clearly by landing cleaner shots and not getting hit cleanly, like he does in every fight

Mayweather was also called 'vunerable' and past his best also after cotto so I don't think he was given that much credit

Interesting points, but I'd say the major factor here is that Mayweather-Cotto was a real high quality affair, while Pacquiao-Bradley wasn't. In the former, both men were visibly near the top of their game, whereas on saturday, one of them (at least) was way off that kind of pace.

True, I can see that Mayweather looked better in his duel with Cotto, but opponents often look good against Cotto, who ever looks good against Bradley? Manny's always turned it on more in the last bit of the round, that's nothing new and he didn't look gassed when they were both firing in the 12th, more like he was coasting.

Also, I don't quite get Sean's point about Mayweather crushing Bradley. Wasn't Floyd supposed to shut out and stop Cotto? No credit should be given unless he actually takes on the challenge and does the job.

John Bloody Wayne wrote:True, I can see that Mayweather looked better in his duel with Cotto, but opponents often look good against Cotto, who ever looks good against Bradley? Manny's always turned it on more in the last bit of the round, that's nothing new and he didn't look gassed when they were both firing in the 12th, more like he was coasting.

Also, I don't quite get Sean's point about Mayweather crushing Bradley. Wasn't Floyd supposed to shut out and stop Cotto? No credit should be given unless he actually takes on the challenge and does the job.

I just think Mayweather would dominate Bradley. Crush, may be wrong phrase, but Mayweather would beat Bradley easily, I do not feel Pac beat him as easily or looked like an elite fighter anymore in doing so.

Not giving him credit, just saying what I think would happen. Pretty sure Prime Tyson beats Audley too, doesn't mean I need to see it. Obviously those comparisons are stark mate, but you get my drift.

Even when Cotto won his rounds, it was Mayweather laying on the ropes smiling and feeling his shots while throwing back.

You could see that he was working Cotto out and pulling every move to do it as well as landing a bag load of various shots with both hands.

Manny just showed us everything we already knew and tried to set up his left hand. Thats it.

I think its unfair to judge the 2 performances along side eachother.

The rounds Mayweather won against Cotto where due to his skill.

Mannys were down to Bradley nearly breaking his ankle.

Mayweather to me just LOOKED impressive whereas Manny really didn't to me.

See, when has Manny ever been in a fight where he didn't try to walk his man down and finish them with the left? When has Mayweather been in a fight where he didn't work his man out and pick them apart? Ignore the smile, Hearns was grinning when Hagler finished him.

I don't see how such drastic conclusions can be drawn from each guy doing what they usually do, but maybe missing a step they each had a ccouple of years ago.

I think Manny's faded based on how long his career's been and what its consisted of, what happened on Saturday night, that looked like a pretty good young name going on his resume. Mayweather did look more impressive, but Bute looked more impressive than Froch.

I agree with you to a large extent, although I think Mayweather won slightly better and performed better overall.

I wouldnt really agree that Pacquiao gassed in this fight. I think Bradley just made adjustments in the latter rounds which made things harder for Pacquiao. But Pacquiao was throwing more punches than Mayweather against Cotto did in almost every round for example. He was still producing a decent output at the end and I felt he was generally more agressive than Mayweather was, who can be quite economical at times with his punching.

Another point would make is that Pacquiao had been accused by many as being on the slide even before the fight, and that this fight "appeared" to confirm this. I think Pacquiao is past his best, but for me the bigger issue might be the mental side of things with him as I feel having watched his fights since Cotto that he has lost that kind of ruthlessness and maybe hunger. The fact that he was reportadly watching the bsketball prior to his fight doesnt strike me as a guy that is 100% focused and serious. I dont know if he has that kind of hunger and fire that he had a few years ago before he reached the very pinnacle. Perhaps years spent as the top one or two pound for pound fighter and the lifestyle that accompanies it has just dimmed his motivation.

Another point is that I think Bradley is reasonably underrated by many on account of not being very flashy and having a record of good but unspectacular wins (until now). Cotto on the other hand is a much bigger and respected name.

Overall though my feeling after the Mayweather/Cotto fight was that while it was a good win for Mayweather, its proof he is human and not unbeatable. I thought Cotto did well and it was a very slow start that really cost him. If he started the fight like he fought in the middle it would have been very interesting.

Pacquiao also seems to have a burden on him that when he performs anything short of completely dminating his opponent with a blisterng performance is deemed sub par to some. Ive seen his performances against Margarito and Mosley criticised for instance which is somewhat harsh I think. At the highst level not every fight is going to be easy and maybe expecttions are too high. I thought Bradley would do well enough fight (not win though) and cause Pacquiao problems so I wasnt overly surprised by the action that unfolded. I actually expected Mayweather to win a bit easier overall.

I'm surprised that people seem to be omitting Cotto from Pacquiao's resume?? Granted the fight was at 145 pounds, but at that time, Cotto had never fought above 147 and had weighed in at 146, 5 months earlier vs Clottey - He even acknowledged this himself once the weight had been agreed. He certainly did'nt have to come down from fighting at 154. He was also younger (28) and heavier than Pacquiao on the night of the fight. People have short memories as the initial denigration of Pacquiao's win was that Cotto was "damaged goods" and "shot" after the loss to Margarito. 3 years later, the same people saying Cotto was "shot and damaged goods" are now saying he was only slightly past his prime after the fight with Mayweather??! Or Mayweather, "allowed Cotto to touch him and work him over on the ropes for 3 rounds" but Manny "did not switch off against Bradley, he simply faded"??! There is massive bias and subversion here, I wish people would admit that.

Personally, I believe that Pacquiao's win over Cotto was more thrilling than Floyd's. Especially when you take the consideration that so many people on 606 (BBC) at that time backed Cotto to win by KO. Cotto is not a natural 154 pounder, his best years, most impressive performances and achievements were at 140 and 147. A good performance by Floyd no doubt but factor in that the people who predicted Floyd would toy with Cotto before KO'ing him, did not say at any point during the run up that Cotto would touch Floyd or have the success that he enjoyed in the middle rounds.

After the fact of course, people bump up Cotto's stature and omit Pacquiao's win over him 3 years earlier!! Bradley was undefeated and in his prime - one poster who picked Bradley for the upset said he would put on a "special" performance against Pacquiao. Did anyone, even those who feel Bradley deserved the win, honestly see that??

Bottom line is Pacquiao is not looking as good and it really came to light against the Marquez 3 fight. It is really since then people have written him off as a competitor for FMJ, and I think thats what Floyd was waiting for anyway..

Pacquiao's strength was huge work rate throwing loads and loads of punches at great speed, which meant he came in at 101 angles.. And THAT Pacquiao would have given FMJ something to worry about. I think Floyd's style may age better than Pacquiao's. In reality Floyd was worrying about Pacquiao as he thought he was on Drugs, meaning he must have thought he looked good and was a worry to fight. Thing is, he did not have one speck of evidence that Pacquiao was in drugs.

Now although I would not call Pacquiao past it, he is not as dangerous as he was. whether that is down to him becoming complacent, other distractions outside of boxing, or simply age?, I dont know... Will we see him back to his best, im not so sure.

But I also think FMW has shown signs of age so who knows, maybe it could still be a great fight with both starting to show weaknesses..

For me if FMW wants to show some decency to the sport, he will ignore Pacquiao's so called loss, and still call him out... but I wont hold my breath.

I will just say one more thing, Does anyone think Floyd would ever got robbed like Manny did?... no way.

Bottom line? Pac can't handle a jab. Wasn't it Hopkins who said he had never been in the ring with a slick African American? Well JMM is not an African American but he controlled PAc with a jab and suptle movement. When Cotto (another Non African American - jeez Hop you are stupid) employed the jab in the first 4 rounds, he was doing very well. As soon as he went to war, he was destroyed. Tim used the jab in the last 4 rounds and look at the difference it made and how much Pac was floundering.

Marlonz wrote:I'm surprised that people seem to be omitting Cotto from Pacquiao's resume?? Granted the fight was at 145 pounds, but at that time, Cotto had never fought above 147 and had weighed in at 146, 5 months earlier vs Clottey - He even acknowledged this himself once the weight had been agreed. He certainly did'nt have to come down from fighting at 154. He was also younger (28) and heavier than Pacquiao on the night of the fight. People have short memories as the initial denigration of Pacquiao's win was that Cotto was "damaged goods" and "shot" after the loss to Margarito. 3 years later, the same people saying Cotto was "shot and damaged goods" are now saying he was only slightly past his prime after the fight with Mayweather??! Or Mayweather, "allowed Cotto to touch him and work him over on the ropes for 3 rounds" but Manny "did not switch off against Bradley, he simply faded"??! There is massive bias and subversion here, I wish people would admit that.

Personally, I believe that Pacquiao's win over Cotto was more thrilling than Floyd's. Especially when you take the consideration that so many people on 606 (BBC) at that time backed Cotto to win by KO. Cotto is not a natural 154 pounder, his best years, most impressive performances and achievements were at 140 and 147. A good performance by Floyd no doubt but factor in that the people who predicted Floyd would toy with Cotto before KO'ing him, did not say at any point during the run up that Cotto would touch Floyd or have the success that he enjoyed in the middle rounds.

After the fact of course, people bump up Cotto's stature and omit Pacquiao's win over him 3 years earlier!! Bradley was undefeated and in his prime - one poster who picked Bradley for the upset said he would put on a "special" performance against Pacquiao. Did anyone, even those who feel Bradley deserved the win, honestly see that??

It's pretty bad, i think we should get some little Floyd Mayweather flags for everytime he fights, wish i could be part of the Mayweather fan club, so cool, i hate manny too.

Marlonz wrote:I'm surprised that people seem to be omitting Cotto from Pacquiao's resume?? Granted the fight was at 145 pounds, but at that time, Cotto had never fought above 147 and had weighed in at 146, 5 months earlier vs Clottey - He even acknowledged this himself once the weight had been agreed. He certainly did'nt have to come down from fighting at 154. He was also younger (28) and heavier than Pacquiao on the night of the fight. People have short memories as the initial denigration of Pacquiao's win was that Cotto was "damaged goods" and "shot" after the loss to Margarito. 3 years later, the same people saying Cotto was "shot and damaged goods" are now saying he was only slightly past his prime after the fight with Mayweather??! Or Mayweather, "allowed Cotto to touch him and work him over on the ropes for 3 rounds" but Manny "did not switch off against Bradley, he simply faded"??! There is massive bias and subversion here, I wish people would admit that.

Personally, I believe that Pacquiao's win over Cotto was more thrilling than Floyd's. Especially when you take the consideration that so many people on 606 (BBC) at that time backed Cotto to win by KO. Cotto is not a natural 154 pounder, his best years, most impressive performances and achievements were at 140 and 147. A good performance by Floyd no doubt but factor in that the people who predicted Floyd would toy with Cotto before KO'ing him, did not say at any point during the run up that Cotto would touch Floyd or have the success that he enjoyed in the middle rounds.

After the fact of course, people bump up Cotto's stature and omit Pacquiao's win over him 3 years earlier!! Bradley was undefeated and in his prime - one poster who picked Bradley for the upset said he would put on a "special" performance against Pacquiao. Did anyone, even those who feel Bradley deserved the win, honestly see that??

Ahem to that.

Marlonz wrote:I'm surprised that people seem to be omitting Cotto from Pacquiao's resume?? Granted the fight was at 145 pounds, but at that time, Cotto had never fought above 147 and had weighed in at 146, 5 months earlier vs Clottey - He even acknowledged this himself once the weight had been agreed. He certainly did'nt have to come down from fighting at 154. He was also younger (28) and heavier than Pacquiao on the night of the fight. People have short memories as the initial denigration of Pacquiao's win was that Cotto was "damaged goods" and "shot" after the loss to Margarito. 3 years later, the same people saying Cotto was "shot and damaged goods" are now saying he was only slightly past his prime after the fight with Mayweather??! Or Mayweather, "allowed Cotto to touch him and work him over on the ropes for 3 rounds" but Manny "did not switch off against Bradley, he simply faded"??! There is massive bias and subversion here, I wish people would admit that.

Personally, I believe that Pacquiao's win over Cotto was more thrilling than Floyd's. Especially when you take the consideration that so many people on 606 (BBC) at that time backed Cotto to win by KO. Cotto is not a natural 154 pounder, his best years, most impressive performances and achievements were at 140 and 147. A good performance by Floyd no doubt but factor in that the people who predicted Floyd would toy with Cotto before KO'ing him, did not say at any point during the run up that Cotto would touch Floyd or have the success that he enjoyed in the middle rounds.

After the fact of course, people bump up Cotto's stature and omit Pacquiao's win over him 3 years earlier!! Bradley was undefeated and in his prime - one poster who picked Bradley for the upset said he would put on a "special" performance against Pacquiao. Did anyone, even those who feel Bradley deserved the win, honestly see that??

tunes666 wrote:Bottom line is Pacquiao is not looking as good and it really came to light against the Marquez 3 fight. It is really since then people have written him off as a competitor for FMJ, and I think thats what Floyd was waiting for anyway..

Pacquiao's strength was huge work rate throwing loads and loads of punches at great speed, which meant he came in at 101 angles.. And THAT Pacquiao would have given FMJ something to worry about. I think Floyd's style may age better than Pacquiao's. In reality Floyd was worrying about Pacquiao as he thought he was on Drugs, meaning he must have thought he looked good and was a worry to fight. Thing is, he did not have one speck of evidence that Pacquiao was in drugs.

Now although I would not call Pacquiao past it, he is not as dangerous as he was. whether that is down to him becoming complacent, other distractions outside of boxing, or simply age?, I dont know... Will we see him back to his best, im not so sure.

But I also think FMW has shown signs of age so who knows, maybe it could still be a great fight with both starting to show weaknesses..

For me if FMW wants to show some decency to the sport, he will ignore Pacquiao's so called loss, and still call him out... but I wont hold my breath.

I will just say one more thing, Does anyone think Floyd would ever got robbed like Manny did?... no way.

my opinion is Pretty much the combination of the two, Manny's win over Cotto>> Floyd's win over cotto - only Floyd fans can argue about this.

Mayweather has aged (legs have slowed) but his style means he can adjust, Pac relied heavily on the things he has lost, watch the Oscar fight eventhough he was weight drained and crap pac's footwork and handspeed were fast even when he was hitting bradley he didn't have the speed, he seems to be lunging more aswell at near 34 with the wars he has been in it is understandable, fight should have happened early-mid 2010

"Mayweather has aged (legs have slowed) but his style means he can adjust, Pac relied heavily on the things he has lost, watch the Oscar fight eventhough he was weight drained and crap pac's footwork and handspeed were fast even when he was hitting bradley he didn't have the speed, he seems to be lunging more aswell at near 34 with the wars he has been in it is understandable, fight should have happened early-mid 2010"

Oh I completely agree, Manny started slowing down around the time he fought Margarito/Mosley. Granted he is 33 and has been in wars since a teenager in the Philippines. But I just wonder if staying around 147/50 has dulled him slightly quicker than if he'd kept his weight around 142-43 for the weigh ins. I don't believe what Ariza said about him cramping because he was too muscular, with too little body fat. The lack of potassium in his diet was obviously the cause of that. I think he made a mistake coming in heavier than Bradley, a guy who never had a problem making 140.

But yeah, Floyd and Manny should have met after their respective fights against Marquez and Cotto - 2010 as you say.

Marlonz wrote:"Mayweather has aged (legs have slowed) but his style means he can adjust, Pac relied heavily on the things he has lost, watch the Oscar fight eventhough he was weight drained and crap pac's footwork and handspeed were fast even when he was hitting bradley he didn't have the speed, he seems to be lunging more aswell at near 34 with the wars he has been in it is understandable, fight should have happened early-mid 2010"

Oh I completely agree, Manny started slowing down around the time he fought Margarito/Mosley. Granted he is 33 and has been in wars since a teenager in the Philippines. But I just wonder if staying around 147/50 has dulled him slightly quicker than if he'd kept his weight around 142-43 for the weigh ins. I don't believe what Ariza said about him cramping because he was too muscular, with too little body fat. The lack of potassium in his diet was obviously the cause of that. I think he made a mistake coming in heavier than Bradley, a guy who never had a problem making 140.

But yeah, Floyd and Manny should have met after their respective fights against Marquez and Cotto - 2010 as you say.

Important factor is Bigger guys hit harder and takes alot more out of a person to push back a heavier man - People seem to forget he took big punches in cotto fight and also the amount of punches margarito hit him with you would expect it to be a toe to toe war - people ignore because of what pacquiao landed but he took alot of punches in that fight