Broner and Pacquiao the same size?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by alexthegreatmc, Jan 29, 2016.


  1. alexthegreatmc

    alexthegreatmc Sound logic and reason. You're welcome! Full Member

    39,120
    1,801
    Sep 10, 2013
    I'm referring to their lightweight days, long behind both of them, mind you.
     
  2. tinman

    tinman Loyal Member Full Member

    36,731
    29,286
    Feb 25, 2015
    Because he's eating a ton of food to reach that weight.
     
  3. tinman

    tinman Loyal Member Full Member

    36,731
    29,286
    Feb 25, 2015
    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.
     
  4. alexthegreatmc

    alexthegreatmc Sound logic and reason. You're welcome! Full Member

    39,120
    1,801
    Sep 10, 2013
    So when discussing fighters' natural weights, we have to consider their diet, which we don't entirely know.
     
  5. tinman

    tinman Loyal Member Full Member

    36,731
    29,286
    Feb 25, 2015
    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.
     
  6. alexthegreatmc

    alexthegreatmc Sound logic and reason. You're welcome! Full Member

    39,120
    1,801
    Sep 10, 2013
    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.
     
  7. tinman

    tinman Loyal Member Full Member

    36,731
    29,286
    Feb 25, 2015
    "Easy" implies that he wouldn't be drained at 135.

    Your ideal fighting weight is the lowest weight you can make with ease.
     
  8. Staminakills

    Staminakills Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,329
    2,095
    Jun 8, 2012
    He was 15 at 106, he claimed he had to lie about his age. He was not 17 at 106
     
  9. alexthegreatmc

    alexthegreatmc Sound logic and reason. You're welcome! Full Member

    39,120
    1,801
    Sep 10, 2013
    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.
     
  10. alexthegreatmc

    alexthegreatmc Sound logic and reason. You're welcome! Full Member

    39,120
    1,801
    Sep 10, 2013
    ???

    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.
     
  11. alexthegreatmc

    alexthegreatmc Sound logic and reason. You're welcome! Full Member

    39,120
    1,801
    Sep 10, 2013
    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.
     
  12. alexthegreatmc

    alexthegreatmc Sound logic and reason. You're welcome! Full Member

    39,120
    1,801
    Sep 10, 2013
    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?
     
  13. DANGER_MAN

    DANGER_MAN Guest

    I dont know what you are trying to get at you are arguing for the sake of arguing we get it you are trolling
     
  14. alexthegreatmc

    alexthegreatmc Sound logic and reason. You're welcome! Full Member

    39,120
    1,801
    Sep 10, 2013
    I'm not surprised you two don't get the point when it's clearly stated in the original post lol
     
  15. DANGER_MAN

    DANGER_MAN Guest

    Can you please tell me what you are trying to get at?