Bet the house on Pacquiao

There is definitely a pre-Tyson v Douglas kind of feel to this fight. Everyone has completely written off Clottey- Pac and Roach included. That's how upsets occur.

 

If you want to be realistic, there's no use discussing Hail Mary shots stretching Pacquiao out on the canvas. Of course he'll land "something", but it's not going to be a one-shot knockout.

 

The difference being that everything in Tyson's camp was wrong, combined with the perfect storm that had developed within Douglas where he was set against everything to win.

In this fight, all conditions favour Pacquiao, Pacquiao's camp is strong, and Clottey's situation is utter garbage.

This feels nothing like Tyson vs. Douglas.

 

What's your idea of being realistic? Probably different than mine. Anything that involves a possible outcome is considered realistic to me. It's not realistic to grow wings and fly. But, although not likely, still realistic for Clottey to land a perfectly timed liver shot. See DLH vs. BHop.

 

Comical.

1. If you consider anything involving a "possible outcome" is realistic, then why did you suggest earlier that it was unrealistic that Clottey might not land anything? Surely it is a "possible outcome". You just contradicted yourself on your own terms. Please don't waste time trying to say you didn't.

2. By your definition of "realistic", it is just as realistic to believe that Clottey will not land a perfectly timed liver shot, since it is a "possible outcome". Hopefully you can see the difficulty in having such an arbitrary definition of "realistic". To be clear: "Realistic" DOES NOT EQUAL "Possible".

3. I have. Clottey doesn't set his shots up even a quarter as intelligently as Hopkins does.

 

"The man who has no imagination has no wings."
Muhammad Ali

 

You're taking what I said way too literally. My point was that Pac/Roach are already looking past Clottey, as are all boxing fans, experts and oddsmakers, and, historically, that that's when errors and upsets occur.

 

More often that's how one sided fights occur. Upsets are memorable because they are unexpected. They are unexpected because, much more often, exactly what everyone thinks will happen does happen.

 

That HAS to be when an upset occurs. It's not an upset if everyone thinks it's a close fight. What you're saying is basically equivalent to "unexpected things happen unexpectedly". Thanks for the lesson in tautological reasoning.

 

Clottey has one stoppage in his past 11 fights, and all of those fights were against less talented fighters than Pacquiao. A stoppage is a fringe possibility, but not a realistic one, particularly not a one punch KO, which Clottey simply doesn't do.

 

You got to his post before I did, my brother in symbolic logic.

 

Great. We're arguing semantics. I feel like I'm in a ****in English class. Read carefully - a possible outcome falls in the realm of a realistic event. A realistic event is anything that can or will occur - all on different levels of possibility. If I say it's realistic for Josh to Pac out, it neither means it's going to happen nor does it mean it is likely to occur. I CAN say it's realistic for a Hail Mary to occur but not likely because that's my perspective. The key is to understand different degrees.

Are you saying Pac is invincible and cannot be hurt? Is that what you're implying? Sure sounds like to me! All I'm saying is there is a possibility for him to get knocked out by one lucky body shot. Not a great possibility, highly unlikely but the possibility is still there, as small as it may be.

I would most likely bet the house on Pac to win. But let's not assume a Douglas-Tyson type of shocker can't or won't ever happen again.

 

No, because usually while the fans and pundits are looking past the opponent, the fighter and trainer are not. Pacquiao and Roach don't appear to be taking Clottey seriously. And that is when upsets occur. Thanks for the lesson in pretense, btw.

 

1. It was your position that I was being unrealistic to suggest Clottey won't land such a shot. Under your own definition of realistic, you contradicted yourself.

2. I never said or implied that. Try again.

3. This isn't even close to a Tyson vs. Douglas level. Not even in the same ballpark... and that's not even to mention that this is completely beside the point since the whole nature of our discussion at this point is the fact that you contradicted yourself. Try again.