How can anyone call Morales shot in 2nd fight with Pac???

:good Good post

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soriano
You're right. I heard that crap too. They will always find a reason to discredit Pac's victories. Here are typical Pac haters ridiculous put downs:

1. Morales is already shot in the 1st fight.
2. MAB was not focused.
3. Morales daddy was not in his corner.
4. Morales was weight drained
5. Pac can't even knock out shot MAB in the 2nd fight
6. Pac fought a paper champ Diaz
7. If not for the 3 KDs, Marquez is the clear winner
8. Marquez won 18 rounds in their 2 fights.

Soriano, you are sorry lol. Those aren't the typical put downs, these are lol:

Pac never rematched the men who ko'd him in 3 rounds.
PAc got a long count against Hussein.
Pac made his bones fighting shop worn Barrera, Larios, Morales, and Dlh.
Pac fought the weakest lightweight imposter of a champ in Diaz.
PAc won't fight PRIME fighters.
PAc's comp is suspect

 

I give PAc credit for rematching Morales and winning. Like any fighter, you want revenge when a man beats you. Morales was still past it. I wish an immediate rematch could've been made but I'll accept the rematch. The third fight...do I even need to say anything???

 

you surely loves to get owned again :rofl:rofl


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


[url]http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/news/story?id=2300980[/url]

 

What are you whinging about then? I've repeatedly said Morales wasn't shot in that fight. But as you said, he wasn't in his prime.

And yes, he did take as many punches... but they were nowhere near as clean. Watch the fights closely, Pac nailed Morales over and over and over again with the left hand FLUSH in the second fight. He did get hit in the first, but generally they were glancing shots because his movement was better.

 

The “they” refers to those who up to this time still could not accept a Filipino is better than the rest of the world. Except for billiards maybe, Filipinos are expected to lose in any athletic competition they are in.

When Manny beat the then rising star Lelo Ledwaba for the super-bantamweight IBF title, Ledwaba himself put up an excuse of his devastating defeat for having prepared for challenger Enrique Sanchez instead of an unknown substitute fighter.

When Manny badly beat up then featherweight top dog Marco Antonio Barrera, the “they” came up with excuses like an interrupted training due to a fire which made the Barrera team change training camp venue.

When Manny twice avenged a close decision loss to Eric Morales by knockouts, the “they” say Eric was drained in making the junior-lightweight limit to really be his old self.

These excuses diminish the credit Manny deserves for the unmatched dedication he puts into his preparation for his fights.

When the Oscar de la Hoya-Manny Pacquiao fight was sealed, no excuse could ever be entertained by the “they” for them to use. After all, 18 out of 20 so called boxing experts picked the bigger Oscar to just easily run over the smaller Manny as a truck does to a stray tin can on the road.

The dust in the Oscar-Manny “dream match” has settled. Pacquiao showed the world how fearlessness, dogged determination, thorough preparation and what have you can make seemingly insurmountable odds can be overcome. The “they” have long awakened from their “dream” but still refuse to give Manny due credit.

They considered the weight drain as an excuse. But Oscar has been around 145-lbs weeks before the official weigh-in. They decided this blame is overused.

Ah, the diet. Now “they” blame the innocent kangaroo, the buffalo and the ostrich. Anybody and anything are to blame but the Pacman.

In these times when America has elected a black man president by a landslide, the “they” still refuse a Filipino can be the best in this sport. You might say why should I mind the “they” who are few? Well, the “they” includes those who can influence the many to lessen the credit Pacquiao deserves.

Just figure out how Dan Rafael ranks Juan Manuel Marquez higher than Manny in his biased rankings at espn.com. Manny is just #2 to JMM.

Rafael gives JMM higher credit for beating 37-year old Joel Casamayor. After all, Casamayor allegedly held the linear lightweight title. Never mind if Joel struggled against Juan Santa Cruz and Michael Katsidis. Never mind if Manny beat JMM twice and has beaten the suddenly “old” Oscar de la Hoya just this month. JMM is better than Pacquiao, period.

But the reality is that Manny is on top of the boxing world. He is now the better P4P than Floyd Mayweather was because, as a commentator aptly puts it, “Manny fights what boxing fans want a fighter fights”.

Ledwaba still fought after his loss to Manny and so did Barrera. Barrera beat Eric Morales to win their trilogy and even scored a knock down over JMM in their fight last year which is years after Manny unseated him as the linear featherweight champion of the world in 2003.

Many, even Filipinos, mistakenly go with sportswriters who don’t recognize the crown Manny won over Barrera. Cliff Rold of ***********.com recognizes this 126-lb championship for Manny though he doesn’t count the 122-lb IFB title which he calls an alphabet belt. Rold counts Manny’s championships at four. The others also count four by including the 122-lb IFB title but excluding the 126-lb linear championship. I go with Joaquin Henson’s count of 5 world championships for Manny Pacquiao. Manny earned the 122-lb title as much as he did the 126-lb crown. Or, Manny Pacquiao. Manny earned the 126-lb crown as much as he did the122-lb title.

When Manny struggled to make the junior-lightweight limit in his fight with JMM just last March, he was a few more pounds over the limit a day or two before the fight, his camp did not raise this blame for his not having scored a convincing win over JMM.

It’s high time the blame on interrupted training, old age, diet, and weight drain should stop when Manny beat the best out there. It’s high time to put the blame on somebody responsible for their defeats. The “blame” is none other than Manny Pacquiao.


LINK: [url]http://philboxing.com/news/story-21404.html[/url]

 

...Better than socks.

 

Did you even read everything? Oh and find me a video where Pac was the one actually who said and came from his own mouth that it was a stupid socks.

 

The EM that showed up against Pac in the 2nd fight would of beaten any other 130lb in the division that night.

Pac took all that was left from Morales after this fight.

 

THE MEX-FANS WILL ALWAYS HAVE 801 EXCUSES WHEN ONE OF THEIR OWN GETS THEIR ASS HANDED TO THEM..."HE WAS SHOT" "HE WAS WORN" AND A BUNCHA B.S...THEY WILL NEVER GIVE PROPS TO THOSE FIGHTERS SUCH A PAC, TITO, FLOYD, VIC D AND SOON SO COME JUANMA FOR BEATING THIER FIGHTERS....:bbb

 

he didn't have his legs

 

Agreed! No way EM was shot in the 2nd fight, slightly past his prime YES. power and chin were still there, maybe little slower than before...and he allowed EGO get in the way, instead of fighting smart like he did in the 1st fight he chosed to fight toe to toe..your chances are 50/50 or 40/60 if you fight like that against Manny..Stamina would play a big factor against an Energizer bunny, plus Pac learned more than Erik in their first fight.

 

Stupid statement... name me one person calling Morales prime? Prime is very specific anyways. There's alot however making out like Morales was shot, ie Roy Jones style...Thats rubbish, that was a very close fight with Pac outgunning Morales, simillar as how Margarito-Cotto was close with one outlasting the other. Morales wasnt prime but at the time and even after the fight, people still knew Morales would have beaten all the other SFW out there except MAB & Pac.

 

:happy:happy:happy

Super thread which dispells one of the most idiotic myths in boxing. Bravo Dangerousity.

Morales turned in a career-best performance against Pacman, then couldn't cope at a weight too high for him (like Hatton at ww, better when he returned to a weight he was comfortable at) against a fighter who was a bad stylistic match (Raheem), and then he came down to sfw and fought like a lion against Pac, but lost to a fighter who was rapidly becoming something special.

Instead of saying Morales was shot by the 2nd fight with no reason for this and no evidence to support it, is it not more likely that suffering the first knockdowns and first stoppage defeat of his career to a younger, stronger, fresher fighter was what caused him to emerge a lesser fighter for the third fight?


It is worth noting that people who often say Morales was shot by his 2nd fight with Pac, thus neglecting the fact that Morales fought like a demon that night and was a shadow of himself after the loss by the time of the 3rd fight, are often the same people who say that Lacy was ruined by Calzaghe and that he was a much better fighter before that beating? As usual, it's all bias and agenda on this forum. Calzaghe ruined Lacy, but a mystery force ruined Morales in the space of one year just before Pacquiao overcame him.

 

:good