I remember watching Velazquez-Pacquiao live at 130 and Emmanuel was saying live that Pacquiao was too small for 130 even and should have stayed at 126 pounds.
So when discussing fighters' natural weights, we have to consider their diet, which we don't entirely know.
Of course. And since we don't know their diet fully just listen to Pacquiao. Who said himself "I can make 135 easily". Instead of ****yzing it if you want you can just listen to Pacquiao.
He probably can, but he's effective at 147 and moreso at 140. But he's been fighting at 147 for about 7 years and he's 37(?), I don't think dropping down to 135 would be ideal. Your body will adjust, and I think he's adjusted to the 140's. No reason for him to remain at 147.
"Easy" implies that he wouldn't be drained at 135. Your ideal fighting weight is the lowest weight you can make with ease.
1. Jr lightweight 2. Point still stands, they fought at 130, and Pac came in heavier. 3. My PERSONAL opinion, Broner is bigger. I don't believe they're the same size and it's obvious. The purpose of the thread is in the OP. You don't have to explain to me, I never claimed they're the same or Pac is bigger; it's for the guys that like to throw out fight night weights. It's not about Pacquiao or Broner, it's about debunking certain arguments.
??? You're just talking **** because you disagree. Main event or under card? Irrelevant. Broner not making weight? Can't use that because guess what... It doesn't apply. How are you gonna call my example a failure then proceed to provide examples out of left field that make zero sense? If you don't understand, whether you agree or not, that's on you. I don't know what else to tell you.
Who said I don't understand? I don't discuss it because it's irrelevant to this discussion and the point I was making. Go back, read why I made the thread, go sit and think about it on the toilet or whatever, come back, and stop making excuses for the weights. Grow up.
Since you're simple, and I'm a nice guy, I'll briefly explain. For starters, it was a rhetorical question. 1. The time from the weigh in to the fight is irrelevant, we're talking 1-4 hours. You said Pac MAY have re-weighed 27 hours to Broner's 24, you're giving Pac the benefit of the doubt. 2. Age is irrelevant BECAUSE I'M NOT DISCUSSING WHETHER THEY'RE ACTUALLY BIGGER THAN EACH OTHER. People say Broner was cutting weight to gain an advantage, yet Pac came in heavier. Was he cutting weight to gain an advantage? Was he too big for 130? Or does that logic only apply to guys you don't like? 3. Broner at 140 came in 157, Pac came in at 148 vs Margo? Ok, and? We're discussing 130, where they weighed the same. Not where Pac fought at 143 and Broner at 140. You're stuck in debunking whether they are the same size yet TOO STUPID to realize that was never in question. Literal, much?
I dont know what you are trying to get at you are arguing for the sake of arguing we get it you are trolling