from espn.... Unofficial scorecard Round 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total Morales 10 -9- 10- 10 -10- 9- 9- 9 - 9 Pacquiao 9 -10 -9 - 9 - 9 -10 -10- 10 -10 same as most scorecards. this clearly shows morales is not shot... he was leading the first 5 rounds until pac adjusted his game and gave the harder shots to morales. :good
If both wore reyes in the 1st fight, would Pac have won ?.... I doubt it. If the Pac of the 2nd fight fought the Morales of the 1st fight, would Pac have stopped Morales ?.... Cant see it. Pac was certainly better the 2nd fight, only a fool would say otherwise but vice versa for Morales, he was better in fight 1 than in fight 2. Compare EMs movement & reaction time in both fights, he had slipped, he resorted to attacking Pac more full on in fight 2 than in fight 1 because a lot of his jabs & counters were falling short, you could see he had slipped a bit tho as I said, Pac had corrected some vital things that were missing in fight 1 which came together for a fantastic win.
Suit yourself. Prime is not Peak. Using words without understanding their meaning causes unecessary arguments. A boxer reaches prime before they peak. Morales' prime was circa late 97-99 while he was at peak around 99-2001. So you are wrong when you say he was a little past prime when he fought Pac in the 2nd fight. Now, where I was getting to is this: prime 4 prime and at their peak - and judging by what EM in decline did to Pac - I pick EM anyday.
Pac hit Morales hard in every rd in all 3 fights, its no coincidence that Morales did worse in each fight, he was continually sliding while Pac was getting a little better... my personal opinion is that it was Morales decline MORE than Pac`s improvement that gave us the results we witnessed but obviously it was both together. Ps. that scorecard does nothing for your arguement, its far from un-common for a man declining to look good for the 1st part of the fight before wearing down.... check out both Arguello/Pryor fights for a similar example. It happens a lot.
it could be a physically peak pacman but not the best version of pacman. it could be that his best version is the current version. so would you take a current version of pacman versus a prime morales?
First, I would say Pac is still at his peak. Some fighters stay a bit longer. However, EM's prime was at 122. He was a beast there. The only man to make it to the final bell was Wayne Mccullough who had an all time best chin. I would still go with EM at 122 by late stoppage.
122 wasnt Pac best weight and he was far from the fighter he is today. also are you forgetting that MAB went the distance with Morales at 122 and to most people beat him in theyre first fight.
pacquiao is different from the version that fought morales. during that time, he is still a work in progress. as i said, it could be a peak pac physically but nowhere near the pac that we have now.
I have not forgotten that. The fact is EM was already having weight problems at that time and if I remember correctly it was his last fight at '22. I thought he lost that fight too and that he won II and III. At '22 Pac was still great. He destroyed a very capable Ledwaba and Julio in a brutal fashion but EM was THE beast there.