Going up in weight. The Pacquiao Double Standard

Throughout history there have been a number of fighters that have defied the odds by going up in weight, taking on larger opposition, and either winning, or being competitive in good showings.

Pacquiao is most definitely one such fighter, however, the catch-weights and negotiated disadvantages tarnish his own legacy, and blemish the face of boxing.

When Billy Conn stepped up to take on the Brown Bomber, there was no catch-weight. The smaller guy took on the bigger guy and gave it his all. That was that. Why can't Pacquiao do the same?

Imagine if David Haye wanted to fight Vitali Klitschko at a catch-weight, fans would riot. They're in the same division now but they weren't always. Vitali is considerably larger than Haye so in Pacquiao standards, a catch-weight shouldn't be out of the question, should it?

If Adamek pulled that "he big, I little" crap and demanded that the Klits drain themselves, boxing fans everywhere would call him a coward. Why then is Pacquiao excused?

Nate Campbell tried his hand at Welterweight a few months ago. No catch-weight necessary. He didn't fight at 145, but at 147. If Campbell can fight at the limit, why can't Pacquiao?

When we look at the history books, Manny looks as if he competed on a fair and even playing field, but we all know that he didn't. In my opinion, Manny's 7th and 8th "championships" deserve an asterisk.

I know that Manny defended that WBogus belt at the limit so in a lot of minds he cemented his place as a welterweight champion, but why can he defend at the limit, but not win it at the limit? It all boils down to cherry-picking and negotiating disadvantages.

 

So you all would support an Adamek or Haye vs. Klitschko catch-weight? You would support Nate Campbell at a catch-weight? Why do we have divisions then? We should just have all fights at a negotiated and agreed upon weight.

 

If catch-weights are fair and necessary for a smaller fighter like Pac, why didn't he fight Clottey at a catch-weight?