If you want to put Pac up against a popular champion from that era, a Pacman/Lopez 15 round fight at 126 would be far more interesting. Argulleo would have Pac all figured out by the end of the 3rd, and dismantle him over the next 3 or 4 rounds.
Oh so you mean when a fighter did not perform his best against another fighter on a given night, he must be past prime? So Judah must have been shot when he fought Tszyu. And so is Tito against Hopkins, Hamed agaisnt MAB, and the list never ends... Fact is that Morales is only 29 years old and showed every bit as good (if not better) against Pac as with all his previous wars with MAB.
PATSYS, give us a analysis for Arguello vs Pacquiao at 130. First describe both of their respective styles. Then, inform us of the weaknesses and strengths of both fighters AND how they pertain to eachother. Then give us a rundown as to how the actual fight would play out.
Unless Pac was planning to box Arguello - there is not much chance of his winning. His aggressive, straight-ahead style is tailor made for Arguello's bomb dropping punches.
Look at Arguello's record, it speaks for itself. 82 wins with 65 within the distance and only 8 defeats. Personally I think on natural boxing ability, Arguello is one of the greatest. His accuracy was phenomenal, and he had great power.
Not a very good post. There is plenty to suggest Morales being past his prime, like his losing 5 of 6 fights, or his losing to two fighters he would have beaten in Diaz and Rahim, or him just being generaly slower and less active than his younger years. Patsys with this much time on the forum I think its time to mature a little, stop playing games, and give an analysis. The Pac by KO thing is old. I know you have watched enough boxing to know that Morales was past his prime by the Pac fight.
nice post..we are supposed to be boxing fans in general. Sure we are also pac fans but that doesn't make us be on pac everytime. Neutral analysis