Article: "Mayweather Diminished By Avoiding Pacquiao"

http://www.sportinglife.com/boxing/...ME=boxing/11/06/08/BOXING_Column.html&BID=543

This writer takes the same tact as the panelists on ESPN's "Around The Horn" program yesterday. Namely, he/she believes that in choosing to fight "average" opponent Victor Ortiz, Mayweather is avoiding the larger challenge of squaring off with current pound-for-pound king, Manny Pacquiao:

This writer, like the ESPN panelists, obviously is not buying Mayweather's drug testing rationale for the Pacquiao fight not occurring.

Is Floyd "tarnishing his legacy" by continuing to fight on without facing Pacquiao? What do you think?

 

It seems as though most of the columnists weighing in on the situation so far have come down on the "Floyd is ducking Pacquiao" side. I guess we'll see where things go from here.

As I've said in other places, I do not think that Pacquiao-Mayweather ever gets made. So, I think the fight is over who gets blamed for it not happening.

So far, it appears as though Mayweather is on the losing end of that argument.

 

I agree, it's a smart business move by Floyd: Relatively easy fight; you get to go through the whole public song-and-dance about OSDT to try to tweak Pacquiao; tap the Latino market for some good PPV numbers; get back in the scene.

Good choice by him. I'm not sure this bout will matter much to the sports opinion makers, but Floyd seems to have lost most of them long ago.

 

I think one of the potential benefits, from Floyd's perspective, of fighting Ortiz is that Floyd gets to keep hammering the entire OSDT theme. This may help change a few minds about who is to blame for Pac-Floyd not happening.

It seems like an uphill fight for Floyd though, particularly after the "cook cats and dogs" video and the rap sheet Floyd has accumulated. That is, many fans probably aren't likely to give Floyd the benefit of the doubt, even if they aren't sure about the whole OSDT issue.

 

I put the title of the article as it came up in Google News. The writer or his editor put a different title on the article's page. My guess is that the title of the thread was the original title of the article, and then it got switched later.

 

By that logic, Hopkins is also suspect. I just can't go with that "logic." Hopkins -- to clear his name, supposedly -- could have agreed to take testing even though it wasn't in the contract. He did not. I don't think less of Hopkins.

Pacquiao supposedly agreed to do testing, and supposedly agreed to a cut-off date that satisfied Mayweather's medical expert(s). The drug testing card has never held much weight for me, given these points.

I never felt like Floyd wanted the fight, at least after Cotto-Pac. I understand that, and understand why there could be a need to try to place a public relations smokescreen up to give Floyd and his reputation cover if he decided not to face Pacquiao.