My bad, I mistakenly voted for Pacquiao by decision. Arguello struggled with the more unorthodox fighters but Pacquiao at 130 was still fairly hittable and his chin would not hold up to taking many of Arguello's straight rights.
It's certainly not going to be as easy as everyone says it is. Pacquiao at 130 was an absolute monster. Stylistically it's not the type of fight that favours Pac, but I can see Pac getting a lot of success like Pryor did. It's a pick em' fight for me.
I don't think it's stylistically great for Alexis Arguello either. He would be troubled by Manny Pacquiao's handspeed and sheer volume. Arguello certainly had the equaliser - in both hands really - but I don't see him getting the better of the exchanges consistently. If he was to win, it would be from a losing position and by stoppage in my estimation.
Pacquiao wins through attrition. If it's 15 rounds I'm clearly picking Pacquiao. Even though we haven't seen Pacquiao in a 15 round does anyone doubt that he could have fought 20 rounds in the Barrera for example? With 12 still going with Pacquiao, but not as confident.
Alexis Arguello was a true 15 round fighter. He always maintained his knockout power as evidenced by some of the quality operators he managed to stop late -- Ray Mancini, Alfredo Escalera, Ruben Olivares etc. You should also consider that Manny Pacquiao is likely to slow down the longer the fight goes, and that's when you would expect Arguello's pin-point combination punching to come to the fore. So I can't agree with the idea that a 15 round fight would benefit the man who has never fought past 12 in his entire career. That doesn't add up. And as a side note, it stands to reason that Manny could have fought 20 rounds against MAB. He was in complete control of both of their fights and thus was allowed to dictate the action as and when he pleased. Arguello would be a different story - he'd be touching Manny with crisp, accurate punches throughout, and although I consider MAB to have been a fantastic body puncher in his own right, he never delivered them with the same paralysing power as an Arguello. This would be sure to slow Manny down over the 15 round distance.
Pacquiao has the best stamina and workrate since Aaron Pryor. We're talking about the greatest attrition fighter in decades upon decades here. Arguello was vulnerable to losing a war of attrition.
I don't think there are many Junior Welterweights in the history of the sport who could have outlasted Aaron Pryor on the night of his first fight with Alexis Arguello. Besides, Arguello was in the twilight of his career by that point and was operating 10lbs north of Super Featherweight. It would be dishonest to claim Arguello suffered from durability or stamina issues. He was notorious for his championship round performances and having the capacity to always retain his punching power no matter what the round. I stand by what I have said -- the 15 round distance would only benefit Arguello here, not hinder him.
I understand where you're coming from. And normally I wouldn't compare somebody's sustained attack with Aaron Pryor's. I make that comparison with Pacquiao because his workrate was that special.
The Aaron Pryor fight is a good comparison in that I can see the pattern of the fight being much the same. Pacquiao would be winning the majority of the rounds with his superior handspeed and the sheer volume of his output. Arguello, like he did against Pryor, would stay composed and look to counter with the right hand and dig to the body when in close. Pryor was able to take hellacious punches for 14 rounds before forcing a stoppage. In my mind, Pacquiao doesn't possess the punch resistance or durability to be able to do the same. It's important to remember that Arguello was actually coming on strong down the stretch of his first fight with Aaron Pryor. The 13th round was a big round for him, having landed one of the biggest straight right hands I've ever seen land flush without resulting in a knockdown. Pryor just wouldn't be denied that night. It took a superhuman effort on his part to come away with the victory. You don't just easily replicate a performance like that one - they happen very rarely and it takes a certain type of fighter to be able to do it. I would not favour Manny to shake off Arguello's best shots like Pryor was able to do. He would have to be a far more elusive target.
Alright good post. Pryor did take some big shots in that first fight. Huge ones. It's just that we've never seen Pacquiao lose a war of attrition. Every war he gets into he wins eventually through attrition. The first Morales fight which was a violent fight Morales still had to win on points and did not even come close to breaking him. It was still more of a chessmatch than a war, just a violent one. If Arguello wins it's on points IMO and not on KO.
This! Come on, Addie. You'll never meet him and wouldn't know if you did. Get in touch with your inner Foreman&Dempsey and tell him his mother cooks socks!
Alexis would kill Paq. AA was the classic orthodox boxer best qualified to write the textbook on how to trash a short Filipino southpaw, and 130 was his peak weight. Manny might provide a kamikaze explosion of action in a fatal attack, but this is about as suicidal a clash of styles as he could be confronted with. Maybe it's something like Argüello-Ganigan at 135, but w/out Andy's early KD score. More likely, it could also resemble Argüello-Navarrete, or Argüello-Tam. Throwing in a short southpaw Pinoy against AA at 130 like Paq is about as inhumane and evil a fantasy pairing as I could imagine. (Yes, Ganigan was of Pinoy descent BTW, so there's three short southpaw Pinoys worth of carnage AA left in bloody pieces and screaming agony.) Suggesting a crime against humanity is what sas6789 should be charged with for conceiving such a monstrously sadistic idea. (Why so much hatred for Filipinos? What did they ever do to you?)