Log in or Sign up

Emmanuel Pacquiao the most overrated boxer of all time

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by McGarnacle, Aug 5, 2009.

Page 1 of 12

McGarnacle New Member Full Member

Joined:

Jun 13, 2009

Messages:

36

Likes Received:

0

I have never understood why people are so obsessed with a fighter who has never really looked good in a fight when you take into account all the circumstances. Pacquiao has one good win and that was his domination of Barrera. This was unbelievabely impressive, I couldn't believe it when it happened. However after that he was dominated by Morales, who even toyed with him at the end of the fight. JMM made him look like an amateur in the first fight and won the second fight in any resonable persons opinion. He rematched Morales and won after Morales was humilated and looked horrendous against some nobody, so it really meant nothing. Pacquiao was getting outbox most of the fight too.

Rematched Morales again ... Barely beat Barrera in a rematch, who was considered "shot". Fought some unknown nobody named Diaz with no KO power. He then fought someone who Roach admitted was "shot, couldn't pull the trigger anymore, looked pale and sickly coming into the ring and had I.V marks in his veins because he was so dehydrated. De La Hoya was also "a part time fighter". Then he fought Hatton who had never looked good in any fight and was literally almost KO'd everytime he fought, no matter how feather fisted his opponent was.

Is this really the resume of someone who is truly great, or someone whose trainer was able to cherry pick opponents in which he really had no chance of losing against. There were exceptions of course early in his career like against Barrera, JMM, and Morales, but he really didnt fare to well in those fights exluding Barrera.

So in the end I feel Pacquiao doesn't have much more to offer than speed and power. Even in his brutal KO of Hatton, he didn't look very impressive to me. He appeared to be blindly throwing his right hook while ducking and looking down, something that worked because Hatton is predictable and always drops his left hand to throw his jumping left hook. The exact same thing he did when Mayweather ko'd him.

McGarnacle, Aug 5, 2009

#1

McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

Joined:

Mar 21, 2007

Messages:

114,680

Likes Received:

51,497

This is the best bit:

McGarnacle said: ↑

ISo in the end I feel Pacquiao doesn't have much more to offer than speed and power.
Click to expand...

McGrain, Aug 5, 2009

#2

Danny_Rand Slick N Quick Full Member

Joined:

Jun 28, 2008

Messages:

9,989

Likes Received:

2

Silly post. You can pick apart any great fighter over the last 20 years legacy like that.

Danny_Rand, Aug 5, 2009

#3
Critic Limited Edition Full Member

Joined:

Nov 30, 2008

Messages:

3,612

Likes Received:

3

McGarnacle said: ↑

I have never understood why people are so obsessed with a fighter who has never really looked good in a fight when you take into account all the circumstances. Pacquiao has one good win and that was his domination of Barrera. This was unbelievabely impressive, I couldn't believe it when it happened. However after that he was dominated by Morales, who even toyed with him at the end of the fight. JMM made him look like an amateur in the first fight and won the second fight in any resonable persons opinion. He rematched Morales and won after Morales was humilated and looked horrendous against some nobody, so it really meant nothing. Pacquiao was getting outbox most of the fight too.

Rematched Morales again ... Barely beat Barrera in a rematch, who was considered "shot". Fought some unknown nobody named Diaz with no KO power. He then fought someone who Roach admitted was "shot, couldn't pull the trigger anymore, looked pale and sickly coming into the ring and had I.V marks in his veins because he was so dehydrated. De La Hoya was also "a part time fighter". Then he fought Hatton who had never looked good in any fight and was literally almost KO'd everytime he fought, no matter how feather fisted his opponent was.

Is this really the resume of someone who is truly great, or someone whose trainer was able to cherry pick opponents in which he really had no chance of losing against. There were exceptions of course early in his career like against Barrera, JMM, and Morales, but he really didnt fare to well in those fights exluding Barrera.

So in the end I feel Pacquiao doesn't have much more to offer than speed and power. Even in his brutal KO of Hatton, he didn't look very impressive to me. He appeared to be blindly throwing his right hook while ducking and looking down, something that worked because Hatton is predictable and always drops his left hand to throw his jumping left hook. The exact same thing he did when Mayweather ko'd him.
Click to expand...

Fail! :smoke ohh a newbie!

Critic, Aug 5, 2009

#4

McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

Joined:

Mar 21, 2007

Messages:

114,680

Likes Received:

51,497

Man, Iron Fist, I haven't thought about him since I was about 10 years old. Amazon for me.

McGrain, Aug 5, 2009

#5
MrMagic Loyal Member Full Member

Joined:

Oct 28, 2004

Messages:

39,534

Likes Received:

72

Thats absurd.

He does however, have great problems with true counterpunchers, I think Cotto will beat him. He's not a lesser fighter if that happens though.

MrMagic, Aug 5, 2009

#6
Govanmauler Boxing Addict Full Member

Joined:

May 30, 2007

Messages:

6,919

Likes Received:

10

McGarnacle said: ↑

I have never understood why people are so obsessed with a fighter who has never really looked good in a fight when you take into account all the circumstances. Pacquiao has one good win and that was his domination of Barrera. This was unbelievabely impressive, I couldn't believe it when it happened. However after that he was dominated by Morales, who even toyed with him at the end of the fight. JMM made him look like an amateur in the first fight and won the second fight in any resonable persons opinion. He rematched Morales and won after Morales was humilated and looked horrendous against some nobody, so it really meant nothing. Pacquiao was getting outbox most of the fight too.

Rematched Morales again ... Barely beat Barrera in a rematch, who was considered "shot". Fought some unknown nobody named Diaz with no KO power. He then fought someone who Roach admitted was "shot, couldn't pull the trigger anymore, looked pale and sickly coming into the ring and had I.V marks in his veins because he was so dehydrated. De La Hoya was also "a part time fighter". Then he fought Hatton who had never looked good in any fight and was literally almost KO'd everytime he fought, no matter how feather fisted his opponent was.

Is this really the resume of someone who is truly great, or someone whose trainer was able to cherry pick opponents in which he really had no chance of losing against. There were exceptions of course early in his career like against Barrera, JMM, and Morales, but he really didnt fare to well in those fights exluding Barrera.

So in the end I feel Pacquiao doesn't have much more to offer than speed and power. Even in his brutal KO of Hatton, he didn't look very impressive to me. He appeared to be blindly throwing his right hook while ducking and looking down, something that worked because Hatton is predictable and always drops his left hand to throw his jumping left hook. The exact same thing he did when Mayweather ko'd him.
Click to expand...

Yeeeee-ikes !:scaredas:

Govanmauler, Aug 5, 2009

#7

maryann Well-Known Member Full Member

Joined:

Oct 19, 2008

Messages:

2,061

Likes Received:

0

yawn

maryann, Aug 5, 2009

#8
GoldenArms Well-Known Member banned Full Member

Joined:

Jan 24, 2009

Messages:

2,326

Likes Received:

242

:**** on this thread

GoldenArms, Aug 5, 2009

#9
Critic Limited Edition Full Member

Joined:

Nov 30, 2008

Messages:

3,612

Likes Received:

3

McGarnacle said: ↑

I have never understood why people are so obsessed with a fighter who has never really looked good in a fight when you take into account all the circumstances. Pacquiao has one good win and that was his domination of Barrera. This was unbelievabely impressive, I couldn't believe it when it happened. However after that he was dominated by Morales, who even toyed with him at the end of the fight. JMM made him look like an amateur in the first fight and won the second fight in any resonable persons opinion. He rematched Morales and won after Morales was humilated and looked horrendous against some nobody, so it really meant nothing. Pacquiao was getting outbox most of the fight too.

Rematched Morales again ... Barely beat Barrera in a rematch, who was considered "shot". Fought some unknown nobody named Diaz with no KO power. He then fought someone who Roach admitted was "shot, couldn't pull the trigger anymore, looked pale and sickly coming into the ring and had I.V marks in his veins because he was so dehydrated. De La Hoya was also "a part time fighter". Then he fought Hatton who had never looked good in any fight and was literally almost KO'd everytime he fought, no matter how feather fisted his opponent was.

Is this really the resume of someone who is truly great, or someone whose trainer was able to cherry pick opponents in which he really had no chance of losing against. There were exceptions of course early in his career like against Barrera, JMM, and Morales, but he really didnt fare to well in those fights exluding Barrera.

So in the end I feel Pacquiao doesn't have much more to offer than speed and power. Even in his brutal KO of Hatton, he didn't look very impressive to me. He appeared to be blindly throwing his right hook while ducking and looking down, something that worked because Hatton is predictable and always drops his left hand to throw his jumping left hook. The exact same thing he did when Mayweather ko'd him.
Click to expand...

:think

Critic, Aug 5, 2009

#10
Critic Limited Edition Full Member

Joined:

Nov 30, 2008

Messages:

3,612

Likes Received:

3

McGarnacle said: ↑

I have never understood why people are so obsessed with a fighter who has never really looked good in a fight when you take into account all the circumstances. Pacquiao has one good win and that was his domination of Barrera. This was unbelievabely impressive, I couldn't believe it when it happened. However after that he was dominated by Morales, who even toyed with him at the end of the fight. JMM made him look like an amateur in the first fight and won the second fight in any resonable persons opinion. He rematched Morales and won after Morales was humilated and looked horrendous against some nobody, so it really meant nothing. Pacquiao was getting outbox most of the fight too.

Rematched Morales again ... Barely beat Barrera in a rematch, who was considered "shot". Fought some unknown nobody named Diaz with no KO power. He then fought someone who Roach admitted was "shot, couldn't pull the trigger anymore, looked pale and sickly coming into the ring and had I.V marks in his veins because he was so dehydrated. De La Hoya was also "a part time fighter". Then he fought Hatton who had never looked good in any fight and was literally almost KO'd everytime he fought, no matter how feather fisted his opponent was.

Is this really the resume of someone who is truly great, or someone whose trainer was able to cherry pick opponents in which he really had no chance of losing against. There were exceptions of course early in his career like against Barrera, JMM, and Morales, but he really didnt fare to well in those fights exluding Barrera.

So in the end I feel Pacquiao doesn't have much more to offer than speed and power. Even in his brutal KO of Hatton, he didn't look very impressive to me. He appeared to be blindly throwing his right hook while ducking and looking down, something that worked because Hatton is predictable and always drops his left hand to throw his jumping left hook. The exact same thing he did when Mayweather ko'd him.
Click to expand...

speed and power kills!

Critic, Aug 5, 2009

#11

simon850 Boxing Addict Full Member

Joined:

Dec 7, 2008

Messages:

5,007

Likes Received:

0

Saying hes overrated is ridiculous, hes a great fighter, however there are question marks at how great he is at welter. His first real test is Cotto, a shot weight drained de la hoya and a shot Hatton were just fights to test the water.

simon850, Aug 5, 2009

#12
FrochPascal Boxing Addict Full Member

Joined:

Dec 6, 2008

Messages:

4,682

Likes Received:

0

.............your right....your right

FrochPascal, Aug 5, 2009

#13
Medicine Boxing Addict banned

Joined:

Dec 6, 2008

Messages:

4,277

Likes Received:

4

mcgarnacle said: ↑

i have never understood why people are so obsessed with a fighter who has never really looked good in a fight when you take into account all the circumstances. Pacquiao has one good win and that was his domination of barrera. This was unbelievabely impressive, i couldn't believe it when it happened. However after that he was dominated by morales, who even toyed with him at the end of the fight. Jmm made him look like an amateur in the first fight and won the second fight in any resonable persons opinion. He rematched morales and won after morales was humilated and looked horrendous against some nobody, so it really meant nothing. Pacquiao was getting outbox most of the fight too.

Rematched morales again ... Barely beat barrera in a rematch, who was considered "shot". Fought some unknown nobody named diaz with no ko power. He then fought someone who roach admitted was "shot, couldn't pull the trigger anymore, looked pale and sickly coming into the ring and had i.v marks in his veins because he was so dehydrated. De la hoya was also "a part time fighter". Then he fought hatton who had never looked good in any fight and was literally almost ko'd everytime he fought, no matter how feather fisted his opponent was.

Is this really the resume of someone who is truly great, or someone whose trainer was able to cherry pick opponents in which he really had no chance of losing against. There were exceptions of course early in his career like against barrera, jmm, and morales, but he really didnt fare to well in those fights exluding barrera.

So in the end i feel pacquiao doesn't have much more to offer than speed and power. Even in his brutal ko of hatton, he didn't look very impressive to me. He appeared to be blindly throwing his right hook while ducking and looking down, something that worked because hatton is predictable and always drops his left hand to throw his jumping left hook. The exact same thing he did when mayweather ko'd him.
Click to expand...

shut ...the ....**** .....up.

Medicine, Aug 5, 2009

#14
McGarnacle New Member Full Member

Joined:

Jun 13, 2009

Messages:

36

Likes Received:

0

speed and power doesn't always kill. It can win you fights and some rounds, but I think JMM and Morales have demonstrated that it can only go so far when your boxing ability is not up to par.

McGarnacle, Aug 5, 2009

#15

(You must log in or sign up to reply here.)

Page 1 of 12