How are Pac's wins over Morales 2,3 and MAB 2 rated so high?

Raheem rematch was a pointless fight at that stage, Morales wanted to try lightweight and found out through Raheem that he doesn't belong there. It's a case of bad matchmaking by Arum for someone looking to test his ability in a new division, he put him in there with a mover. If Morales looked bad then he looked bad because of what Raheem was doing not because he was punching his self in the corner like you're trying to hint.

 

I had Morales I a lot closer than what the scorecards were. Turn the sound off and it could have been a draw.

Watch the fight again gentlemen. Morales took tons of shots after the headbutt and before the 12th.

 

Morales was clearly no longer Morales in the rematches. I don't rate those wins highly at all. Basically, Pacquiao is 0-1 against Morales on an even playing field. Manny might have won those fights anyway, but I personally will never know what the outcome might have been with a 100% Morales.

 

:-(

 

Yes I did see the fight, Morales was taking bombs from rounds 6-10 EASILY, I don't care what you think of Morales defense because it's not that bad. I mean Pacquiao was hitting Morales with EVERY punch he threw, a lot those punches could of been blocked by Morales or countered, also Morales wasn't using his jab either. You watch the fight again, it took 4 rounds of bombs (rounds 6-10) to finally finish off Morales. It looked like he gave up.

And if Pacquiao's head movement was better, than why did Morales win the first 3 rounds almost cutting Pacquiao's eye?

 

lets see. on an even field, we have to take away the headbutt and let pac use the puncher's gloves.

 

Obviously Pacquaio being a better fighter in the second Morales fight played a part of it but you watch the Raheem fight before that and you can tell hes no longer what he once was. I don't know Pac only gets partial credit in my book for that one and the 3rd fight shouldn't of taken place I don't think anyone can argue Morales wasn't shot by that point.Im not hating Pacquaio's a great fighter but I really don't think Morales was in his prime the second time around.

 

you and your pathetic ilk always say "Pacquiao got his ass handed to him" when talking about the first fight. He lost but come on..ass whooping? get f'n real. exaturation on your guys part.

and why is it that when Pacquiao backs up it automatically looks like he's losing the fight?

 

Try again.

 

for what? I stated facts, literally.

 

You stated excuses, literally.

 

and I also didn't see Burger King Raheem inflict any REAL damage when they fought. He only buzzed Morales 1 time in the 5th round. The rest he cruised to victory.

 

:rofl
I scored the first fight a Morales win and you are rejoicing and nodding in approval. Pac improves in 2 & 3 and you have many excuses.

So whos making who?

 

I was talking about improvements, the head movement he showed wasn't spot on but a work in progress and something they have worked on. Like Morales blocked many shots Pac dodged many and blocked as well. I don't care if you agree with me or not, Morales was never known for great defense, he's an aggressive boxer puncher, that's his style and has always been which is why Raheem gave him trouble. Morales didn't get used to fighting slick fighters and Raheem was a poor version of what a slick fighter can do.

You openly admit Morales landed big bombs the first 3 rounds, nearly busted Pac open and nearly dropped him in the first yet insist Morales lost because he's shot and not because of the punches Pac was landing?

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl