Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
+10
Nico the gman
erictheblueuk
Rowley
88Chris05
WHU_Champo_League_in_7Yrs
AdamT
Hammersmith harrier
Derbymanc
TRUSSMAN66
Marlonz
14 posters
The v2 Forum :: Sport :: Boxing
Page 2 of 2
Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
First topic message reminder :
Afternoon all.
A lot of you will remember debating and chewing the fat on the old BBC 606 forum, particularly back in '04 - '07.. If I'm not mistaken, the general perception of Manny Pacquiao back then was that of a cult, hardcore fan favourite fighter who'd already been fighting professionally for almost a decade. Certainly, speaking for myself, this was largely due to his break -out performance vs Barrera, the rivalries with Marquez & Morales, and fine KO wins over undefeated fighters like Lucero & Solis, also, his personal situation seemed rather endearing, if a little surreal with stories of him being a kidnap target for guerrillas etc, etc... I also remember watching an interview with Freddie Roach in which he said he believed Manny would eventually hit his genetic peak and top out at lightweight. I thought that would have been a stretch, so, had anybody told me he'd be fighting and winning convincingly at welterweight 4 and a half years later, I would have just laughed at them. Even the step up to 135 to face the mediocre Diaz was seen as a 50/50 by many on 606 back at that time. As a comparison and reference point, we've seen how Donaire really struggled above 118lbs and was blown away at featherweight by Walters.
But most importantly, Pacquiao had already won world titles at flyweight, super bantam, feather and super feather, achievements that surely cannot come undone regardless of what happened to him at the higher weights. In fact, I'm pretty sure the people who invented the term "Pactard" and "Pacroid" were'nt even aware of when he was going to war at 122, 26 & 30 - pot calling the kettle black there. Factor in his all-action style does'nt lend itself to longevity - something we normally take into consideration when assessing a lead puncher's career - it's remarkable he was able to compete with and beat a prime Bradley for instance as I thought he was slowing down by the time he got to Margarito. I agree he benefitted from a certain degree of hype after the Hatton & Cotto wins, but quite a few people thought he'd lose to Cotto, even after the Margarito controversy and the 145 catchweight.
To me, this "Pacquiao is a fraud" tag was initially created by people who were annoyed that he was simply doing what they did'nt think he could do but alas, with the KO loss to Marquez and the clear loss to Floyd, it seems his legacy is being unfairly denigrated and people have conveniently short memories. There are less talented fighters than Manny who have lost to Floyd, yet even they seem to be spoken of in higher regard which just does'nt make sense to me. As a sidenote, I found it rather sad that Floyd Mayweather Sr seemed to take so much pleasure in Pac's tax troubles, definitely think he himself has played a major part in tarnishing Pac's legacy, what with the PED allegations initially created to try and explain away the Hatton loss. Ariza obviously legit if he is working with Floyd which only makes the allegations even more dishonest and vindictive looking to me.
Anyway, what are your thoughts about Manny's legacy? Do you remember when he was talked about on BBC 606 as a hardcore fan fave? Would he have been held in higher regard had he retired after the Margarito fight, or even had he done so before the Diaz fight?
Afternoon all.
A lot of you will remember debating and chewing the fat on the old BBC 606 forum, particularly back in '04 - '07.. If I'm not mistaken, the general perception of Manny Pacquiao back then was that of a cult, hardcore fan favourite fighter who'd already been fighting professionally for almost a decade. Certainly, speaking for myself, this was largely due to his break -out performance vs Barrera, the rivalries with Marquez & Morales, and fine KO wins over undefeated fighters like Lucero & Solis, also, his personal situation seemed rather endearing, if a little surreal with stories of him being a kidnap target for guerrillas etc, etc... I also remember watching an interview with Freddie Roach in which he said he believed Manny would eventually hit his genetic peak and top out at lightweight. I thought that would have been a stretch, so, had anybody told me he'd be fighting and winning convincingly at welterweight 4 and a half years later, I would have just laughed at them. Even the step up to 135 to face the mediocre Diaz was seen as a 50/50 by many on 606 back at that time. As a comparison and reference point, we've seen how Donaire really struggled above 118lbs and was blown away at featherweight by Walters.
But most importantly, Pacquiao had already won world titles at flyweight, super bantam, feather and super feather, achievements that surely cannot come undone regardless of what happened to him at the higher weights. In fact, I'm pretty sure the people who invented the term "Pactard" and "Pacroid" were'nt even aware of when he was going to war at 122, 26 & 30 - pot calling the kettle black there. Factor in his all-action style does'nt lend itself to longevity - something we normally take into consideration when assessing a lead puncher's career - it's remarkable he was able to compete with and beat a prime Bradley for instance as I thought he was slowing down by the time he got to Margarito. I agree he benefitted from a certain degree of hype after the Hatton & Cotto wins, but quite a few people thought he'd lose to Cotto, even after the Margarito controversy and the 145 catchweight.
To me, this "Pacquiao is a fraud" tag was initially created by people who were annoyed that he was simply doing what they did'nt think he could do but alas, with the KO loss to Marquez and the clear loss to Floyd, it seems his legacy is being unfairly denigrated and people have conveniently short memories. There are less talented fighters than Manny who have lost to Floyd, yet even they seem to be spoken of in higher regard which just does'nt make sense to me. As a sidenote, I found it rather sad that Floyd Mayweather Sr seemed to take so much pleasure in Pac's tax troubles, definitely think he himself has played a major part in tarnishing Pac's legacy, what with the PED allegations initially created to try and explain away the Hatton loss. Ariza obviously legit if he is working with Floyd which only makes the allegations even more dishonest and vindictive looking to me.
Anyway, what are your thoughts about Manny's legacy? Do you remember when he was talked about on BBC 606 as a hardcore fan fave? Would he have been held in higher regard had he retired after the Margarito fight, or even had he done so before the Diaz fight?
Marlonz- Posts : 151
Join date : 2011-05-03
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
88Chris05 wrote:I want to try and get a steady flow of historical articles going again as well, Jeff, but am suffering some serious block these days.
Oatmeal and Water for a couple of days and it will all come out
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
Rowley wrote:88Chris05 wrote:Lewis being Canadian, Mayweather-Pacquiao, Mike Tyson - some great potential material here for when Rowley next decides to sell out again and go all Mr. Popular on us in an article.
Might do a Tyson one Chris, am considering a Tiger Flowers thread if I can ever stop being idle. The Tyson thread will compensate for the tumbleweed that will inevitably greet that one. I pretend I don't care, we all know I'm fooling nobody.
You've missed a basic trick Jeff, a mike Tyson v charley burley thread, is how to spread the word to a broader audience.
Tyson ko 1, by the way
milkyboy- Posts : 7762
Join date : 2011-05-23
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
milkyboy wrote:Rowley wrote:88Chris05 wrote:Lewis being Canadian, Mayweather-Pacquiao, Mike Tyson - some great potential material here for when Rowley next decides to sell out again and go all Mr. Popular on us in an article.
Might do a Tyson one Chris, am considering a Tiger Flowers thread if I can ever stop being idle. The Tyson thread will compensate for the tumbleweed that will inevitably greet that one. I pretend I don't care, we all know I'm fooling nobody.
You've missed a basic trick Jeff, a mike Tyson v charley burley thread, is how to spread the word to a broader audience.
Tyson ko 1, by the way
Dunno about that Milky. Tyson without specifics would lose to Bugner.
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
Nico the gman wrote:Hatton wasn't the best fighter from these shores, he gave his fans a roller coaster ride, probably the most popular boxer ever from the UK, and one of the most approachable outside the ring as well.Marlonz wrote:Yeah, I remember the Hatton/footie types. Even after he lost to Floyd, all you heard was "Well, what other fighter could take 20,000 screaming fans to Vegas with him..." as if that gave Ricky some kind of moral victory!?milkyboy wrote:Agree that fans can influence your view on fighters. Ricky hatton always seemed an alright guy, but his fans and their blind 'Ricky is the greatest' spiel had me hating him after a while. In his case, his excuse of the month for not fighting witter was a contributory factor.
It wasn't just City fans who supported Hatton, and its right, what other fighter could take 20000 fans to Vegas, none I can think of off hand.
Hatton fan and not apoligising for it, 2 weight world champ, Ricky done good..
But you know your stuff nico. It was hard work listening to idiot after idiot spout bollox about him, which was the point. Very good fighter, but managed extremely well.
milkyboy- Posts : 7762
Join date : 2011-05-23
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
ShahenshahG wrote:milkyboy wrote:Rowley wrote:88Chris05 wrote:Lewis being Canadian, Mayweather-Pacquiao, Mike Tyson - some great potential material here for when Rowley next decides to sell out again and go all Mr. Popular on us in an article.
Might do a Tyson one Chris, am considering a Tiger Flowers thread if I can ever stop being idle. The Tyson thread will compensate for the tumbleweed that will inevitably greet that one. I pretend I don't care, we all know I'm fooling nobody.
You've missed a basic trick Jeff, a mike Tyson v charley burley thread, is how to spread the word to a broader audience.
Tyson ko 1, by the way
Dunno about that Milky. Tyson without specifics would lose to Bugner.
Prime Tyson? Tyson in his pomp? Post prison tyson? Ultimately it depends on whether Gus tomato is in his corner.
milkyboy- Posts : 7762
Join date : 2011-05-23
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
milkyboy wrote:ShahenshahG wrote:milkyboy wrote:Rowley wrote:88Chris05 wrote:Lewis being Canadian, Mayweather-Pacquiao, Mike Tyson - some great potential material here for when Rowley next decides to sell out again and go all Mr. Popular on us in an article.
Might do a Tyson one Chris, am considering a Tiger Flowers thread if I can ever stop being idle. The Tyson thread will compensate for the tumbleweed that will inevitably greet that one. I pretend I don't care, we all know I'm fooling nobody.
You've missed a basic trick Jeff, a mike Tyson v charley burley thread, is how to spread the word to a broader audience.
Tyson ko 1, by the way
Dunno about that Milky. Tyson without specifics would lose to Bugner.
Prime Tyson? Tyson in his pomp? Post prison tyson? Ultimately it depends on whether Gus tomato is in his corner.
Surely a Wayne Rooney trained Tyson would have more success against such an oldie..?
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
I think that's key, milky. Tyson looked a totally different fighter in his first fight without Gus against Buster Douglas.
88Chris05- Moderator
- Posts : 9661
Join date : 2011-02-17
Age : 36
Location : Nottingham
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
It was not just Gus Tomato, it was his wife Robin Cousins and her mum Ruth Rendall ripping him off
Rowley- Admin
- Posts : 22053
Join date : 2011-02-17
Age : 51
Location : I'm just a symptom of the modern decay that's gnawing at the heart of this country.
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
It was a tragedy Gus passing away just before the fight. So brave of mike to go on with the fight. A moral victory for me Chris.
milkyboy- Posts : 7762
Join date : 2011-05-23
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
Rowley wrote:It was not just Gus Tomato, it was his wife Robin Cousins and her mum Ruth Rendall ripping him off
True about cousins rowley, and the injury he picked up attempting a triple lutz in training severely hampered him come fight night.
milkyboy- Posts : 7762
Join date : 2011-05-23
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
Between these and the long count, which most at ringside reckon was around 3 hours, I am amazed the loss is still on his record.
Rowley- Admin
- Posts : 22053
Join date : 2011-02-17
Age : 51
Location : I'm just a symptom of the modern decay that's gnawing at the heart of this country.
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
I heard about the count mishap, Rowley. Some woman called Meryl had something to do with it, apparently. And don't bother re-hashing the old Denzil Washington story to me, either, because that was completely unfair as well.
88Chris05- Moderator
- Posts : 9661
Join date : 2011-02-17
Age : 36
Location : Nottingham
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
I hate you too you bast@#d!milkyboy wrote:AdamT wrote:there is a bit of slagging on here but it is mostly light hearted.
I can't speak for others, but there's nothing light hearted about my banter. I hate all you cnuts
For all the hatred that exists between us due to your love of Ray Leonard, it's good to find something that we agree on. Hatton's fans turned me off him more than Hatton himself ever could.milkyboy wrote:Agree that fans can influence your view on fighters. Ricky hatton always seemed an alright guy, but his fans and their blind 'Ricky is the greatest' spiel had me hating him after a while. In his case, his excuse of the month for not fighting witter was a contributory factor.
Atila- Posts : 1712
Join date : 2011-06-03
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
Yeh, I mean what was Denzel doing in mike's room?
Denzel, cousins, the long count, the death of gus and lets not forget BB King ripping him off. Talk about a loaded deck.
Iron mike beats all the greats, smokey robinson, george formby, sugar ray Charles... And on the same night.
Denzel, cousins, the long count, the death of gus and lets not forget BB King ripping him off. Talk about a loaded deck.
Iron mike beats all the greats, smokey robinson, george formby, sugar ray Charles... And on the same night.
milkyboy- Posts : 7762
Join date : 2011-05-23
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
Atila wrote:I hate you too you bast@#d!milkyboy wrote:AdamT wrote:there is a bit of slagging on here but it is mostly light hearted.
I can't speak for others, but there's nothing light hearted about my banter. I hate all you cnutsFor all the hatred that exists between us due to your love of Ray Leonard, it's good to find something that we agree on. Hatton's fans turned me off him more than Hatton himself ever could.milkyboy wrote:Agree that fans can influence your view on fighters. Ricky hatton always seemed an alright guy, but his fans and their blind 'Ricky is the greatest' spiel had me hating him after a while. In his case, his excuse of the month for not fighting witter was a contributory factor.
... And were it possible for you to hate Leonard more, I'm sure I'd have succeeded in doing so!
milkyboy- Posts : 7762
Join date : 2011-05-23
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
You should have all realised the moment Milky admitted he lets out property at extortionate rates to Romanian immigrants that's he's a bastard
kingraf- raf
- Posts : 16604
Join date : 2012-06-06
Age : 30
Location : To you I am there. To me I am here.... is it possible that I'm everywhere?
Re: Is Pacquiao a fraud after 65 pro fights?
I think most had me sussed well before then raf!
milkyboy- Posts : 7762
Join date : 2011-05-23
Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Similar topics
» Mandela memorial interpreter turns out to be a fraud, then a schizophrenic, then a fraud
» Pacquiao's still duckin Hamed, 38, just cos Naz, 38, aint as old as Juan Marquez, 39. This is why Pacquiao and Juan Marquez, 39, are
» The Mayweather vs Pacquiao Debate
» How many fights are really fair fights ???
» My top 5 80's fights v top 5 millenial fights
» Pacquiao's still duckin Hamed, 38, just cos Naz, 38, aint as old as Juan Marquez, 39. This is why Pacquiao and Juan Marquez, 39, are
» The Mayweather vs Pacquiao Debate
» How many fights are really fair fights ???
» My top 5 80's fights v top 5 millenial fights
The v2 Forum :: Sport :: Boxing
Page 2 of 2
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum