Why are people getting so carried away with Pacquiao's 'decline'

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by iceferg, Jun 29, 2012.


  1. horst

    horst Guest

    Shut up you ****ing tool. You're dumb as a post, one of the thickest ****ers on this forum and always have been. If you can't see the difference between Pac in the Cotto fight in '09 and the Mosley/Marquez/Bradley fights in '11/'12, you should quit this forum and take up giving suckjobs to strangers. ******ed **** who has never been anywhere near a boxing gym in his entire existence. **** off. :dead
     
  2. iceferg

    iceferg Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,462
    2,426
    Apr 25, 2008
    Well his last three opponents weren't exactly the type that are easy to look good against.

    Also Mayweather was nearly KO'd against Pacquiao yet everybody said he looked great. Pacquiao dominated Mosley and won every round and he managed to score a knock down yet everybody was saying that it was a terrible performance.
     
  3. iceferg

    iceferg Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,462
    2,426
    Apr 25, 2008
    Aw **** off Popkins got no time for you. Your just biased to ****.

    I can actually agree with an earlier poster that a lot of this rubbish is coming from *******s like yourself who are trying to make excuses in advance incase he loses to Mayweather.

    Didn't you claim Marquez was going to get destroyed by Pacquiao then still claim afterwards that he won even though he blatantly didn't?
     
  4. Uncle Rico

    Uncle Rico Loyal Member Full Member

    39,748
    3
    Jun 28, 2009
    What?

    You talking **** again, Ferg?
     
  5. horst

    horst Guest

    Watch the fights you ****ing ******. :dead
     
  6. exodus

    exodus Active Member Full Member

    1,028
    0
    Jun 25, 2012
    *Mosley

    And an aging, far-removed from the young 1990s Mosely with hand-speed and power to kill.

    The kind of fighters he's faced haven't helped in the appearance of performance abatement, true.

    It makes me wonder just how well he would fare against Floyd.

    I always believed a certain victory for Floyd but I wonder just how easy it would be for him.
     
  7. iceferg

    iceferg Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,462
    2,426
    Apr 25, 2008
    Right so your telling me that Bradley won 5 rounds against Pacquiao? what a load of bollecks and to me a domination is where one guy appears completly in control through out and that's why I'd say Pacquiao dominated him.
     
  8. dannyboy147

    dannyboy147 Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,872
    1,516
    Jun 2, 2010
    The Pacman that went the distance with Bradley looked awful you can put whatever spin on it that takes your fancy if it helps you sleep.

    His punches were sloppy he missed with god knows how many shots (don't be fooled by HBO Commentary). He was throwing shots off balance all night and looked tired in there. The Pacman of old would have slaughtered the light hitting Bradley. I do think Pac did enough to win by a couple of rounds but a complete shut out it was not.

    Saying Bradley and JMM were on roids does not help your point in any way as it is Pacman's camp that refuses to take the tests also. same with the Mosley fight Roach admitted they had refused the tests so didn't want to look like hypocrites by making Shane take the test.
     
  9. iceferg

    iceferg Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,462
    2,426
    Apr 25, 2008
    Erm yes I have actually, I also predicted that Marquez would give Pacquiao a lot of trouble last time to a chorus of boo's from you lot. Pacquiao clearly lost the 2nd and 3rd Marquez fights.
     
  10. exodus

    exodus Active Member Full Member

    1,028
    0
    Jun 25, 2012
    From memory I think I had 1-3 Bradley and 9-12 Bradley.

    There were some definite close rounds in between and perhaps round 2 and 9 too, but I virtually never give even rounds.

    I remember going in to the twelfth I was saying this is 6-5 Bradley, but I can accept that being reversed.

    Before the decision was announced I remarked that due to Pacquiao being the champ, he'll get the close decision. I was honestly surprised when the decision was announced.
     
  11. iceferg

    iceferg Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,462
    2,426
    Apr 25, 2008
    Well I'll admit I watched it with HBO commentary but I honestly don't think it was close and I think Larry Merchant was the only one being biased tbh. I also fully agree that Pacquiao is most probably on steroids. TBH though I wouldn't be at all suprised if Mayweather was as well.
     
  12. Man_Machine

    Man_Machine Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,954
    10,414
    Jun 9, 2010
    Most neutral observers would say there has been a noticeable decline in Pacquiao's performances, although it has not been as sharp as some make out and the opposition needs to be taken into consideration.

    The same neutral observers might also tip Mayweather to beat Pacquaio, regardless of any decline.
     
  13. iceferg

    iceferg Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,462
    2,426
    Apr 25, 2008
    You had Bradley winning the third round? are you ****ing serious. I can't remember the whole fight very well now but I remember Pacquiao completely dominating rounds 3 and 4. I'm just not taking anything else you say seriously. Your a troll
     
  14. exodus

    exodus Active Member Full Member

    1,028
    0
    Jun 25, 2012
  15. horst

    horst Guest

    I disagree, as did the judges in both fights. :smoke