Originally Posted by turbotime
Don't bother. Irish also believes that Pac beat a prime Morales in the rematch.
Ah,another fantasist who believes because one of his favorite boxers lost in his late 20s,that he must have been past prime.
Seriously guys, does it really make you feel better to make believe that your favorite fighters always had an excuse for losing?
For Tyson fans
Douglas:Mike didnt prepare right.
Holyfield 1 and 2: Despite being 29/30 and in less wars than Holyfield, and coming off a dominating victroy over WBC champ Frank Bruno and massive bookies favorite, he was "past prime". (Mike apparently had a prime that lasted about 6 months sometime in the mid to late 80s)
And well if he was padt prime at 29/30,theres no point even going into Lewis etc.
Tyson fans sleep well knowing that their hero was "unbeatable" in his prime,which apparently lasted about a year... tops,in his early 20s.
July 2004(aged 27) dominates a top class Carlosd Hernandez and takes his IBF belt
Nov 2004 (aged 2
goes toe to toe with ATG Marco Antonio Barrera, and loses controversially
Mar 2005 (aged 2
beats rising superstar Manny Pacquiao in 10 rounds.
Sept 2005 (aged 29) moves up to lightweight, gets beaten by Zahir Raheen by UD, suddenly gets declared shot.
Jan 2006 (aged 29) fights Pacquaio in rematch,gets stopped in 3. Match is apparently irrelevant since some point in the last 9 months Morales has suddenly become "shot"
Therefore Morales never really got beaten by Pacquiao since he was past prime and meant nothing.
Morales fans sleep well in their beds knowing their hero never got beat like a red headed stepchild.