If this is true:::pac is a bigger sham than i thought

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by IVLG, Dec 10, 2009.


  1. Sting

    Sting Akagami no Shanks Full Member

    2,998
    0
    Jan 19, 2008
    It doesn't matter. Because Cotto DID NOT look drained AT ALL last November. In fact he looked as sharp as ever.

    So again, your thread is pointless.
     
  2. Rooney

    Rooney Boxing Junkie banned

    7,654
    0
    Jul 31, 2009
    Right away:huh

    How many pages in are we already:patsch

    I dont know if this is true, i haven't seen the clauses in the contracts, have u?

    This is all hear say, just like pac taking steroids.:thumbsup
     
  3. IVLG

    IVLG OBJECTIVITY IS BACK LOL Full Member

    582
    1
    Nov 24, 2009
    This past Sunday on GMANews.TV, Manny Pacquiao said he knows exactly what Miguel Cotto is going through trying to get down to weight the week before the fight. Pacquiao went as far as to say that having been in a similar situation himself, the weight reduction is going to play a crucial role in the outcome of the fight.

    Manny stated that along with trying to sweat off the weight, Cotto will be reducing his caloric intake to make the 145 catch-weight limit stipulated in the fight contract. And he knows that effort will be very demanding on Miguel.

    Outside of having your relatives referee and score your fight, there's no more sure way to compromise a fighter and help alter the outcome of it than beating him on the scale. Bringing a fighter down in weight if it's a struggle affects everything he does in the ring in a bad way.

    Pacquiao's failure to make weight resulted in him losing his WBC flyweight title to Medgoen Singsurat when he was knocked out in the third round 10 years ago. He also had a difficult time making the 130-pound limit for his rematch with Juan Manuel Marquez in March of 2008, a fight in which some observers believe the split decision verdict in his favor could have just as easily gone to Marquez.

    A little over a week out from the fight Pacquiao says he weighs between 148 and 149. So much for him being the smaller fighter next to Cotto.

    The catch-weight of 145 for Pacquiao-Cotto has been a topic of fierce debate since the bout was signed. One side of the argument is that Cotto is too big and should meet Pacquiao somewhere below the welterweight limit of 147 to make it more fair. The opposing side asks why Cotto has to put his WBO welterweight title on the line and not be allowed to weigh the maximum the division allows.

    To those who believe Cotto isn't at a slight disadvantage coming in at 145 Manny Pacquiao says you're wrong. And if making 145 isn't a big deal for Cotto why has he never fought below 146 since moving up to welterweight?

    A sure sign of a fighter who struggles getting down to weight is the one who usually weighs in right at the division limit or a half to a full pound below it. Jake LaMotta barely made middleweight before and during his reign as middleweight champ. I trained with former light heavyweight champ Dwight Muhammad Qawi - and making 175 was always a struggle for him, evidenced by him always coming in right at the light heavyweight limit or a half a pound under it once he won and defended the title.

    Then there's the other side where fighters like Marvin Hagler often made the middleweight limit by 2/3 pounds. And the same applied to Michael Spinks making the light heavyweight limit of 175. Both Hagler and Spinks breezed to make weight and always came in under the division limit.

    Miguel Cotto has been weighing in between 146 and 147 since he outgrew the junior welterweight division. That's a testament indicating making the 147 pound limit isn't easy for him and it requires a lot just for him to do that.

    Making 145 isn't the issue concerning Cotto; there's no doubt he'll be able to do that. And it wouldn't be a shock, at least not here, if he in fact came in at 144 being that's he's probably been consumed with how much he weighs during his preparation for the fight. The question is will he be his best and the same fighter who fought Mosley, Margarito and Clottey? And no one knows the answer to that.

    One thing we do know is Cotto won't be better at 145 or 144.5 for Pacquiao than he was at 146 for the three previous mentioned fights. These two fighters are almost the same size and it wouldn't be the least bit surprising if when they get into the ring Saturday night that Pacquiao looks like the bigger fighter.

    Anyone who has ever been around a fighter who's trying to cut weight knows it's not a pretty sight. There's only so much spit, waste and sweat in their body. And there's a good chance that that will compromise Cotto. Which doesn't mean Pacquiao wouldn't have won the fight even if Cotto came in at 146/147, if he does.

    However, those two pounds that Cotto has to lose will affect him more than the 147 he could've carried would've harmed Pacquiao. If losing unnatural weight hurt Pacquiao against Singsurat and Marquez, then it's a fair point Cotto may be hurt trying to cut the extra pound to fight him.

    Of course it'll be argued that Pacquiao had to cut weight because he was still growing, and that's a legit point. But on the other hand, Cotto has already flowered and is very vulnerable to being a little depleted at 145 at this stage of his career.

    Does the catch-weight clause of 145 mean Pacquiao shouldn't receive all due props if he wins? No. Pacquiao supporters will argue it made no difference and he's just the greater fighter. Whereas Cotto's fans will be emphatic that the catch-weight was the main reason Miguel lost if he does. Either way it'll be overstated.

    But it's an undeniable truth that Pacquiao will not be confronting the same fighter in Cotto that fought Mosley and Margarito.
     
  4. puga_ni_nana

    puga_ni_nana Dempsey Roll Full Member

    41,814
    5
    Apr 14, 2007
    these are the kind of news that only joyboys would believe.
     
  5. boxsensei

    boxsensei Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,708
    82
    Oct 19, 2008

    I agree with you, you dumb piece of ****. Thats what im saying. DLH was so dehydrated, thet he actually ended up being smaller than Pac which destroys Pac claim to defeating a bigger man, becasue Pac was the bigger man.
     
  6. thesmokingm

    thesmokingm Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,033
    4,323
    Nov 18, 2009
    You don't have to be a math wiz to know ODH was 2 pounds above the contract weight on fight night. Given this discrepancy its obvious to any moron that the article is bogus.
     
  7. dangerousity

    dangerousity Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    20,253
    2,301
    Jan 4, 2005
    You can tell that no matter how ******ed the thread is, if it is praising Floyd or dissing Pac, you will get the same Floydtoys you can count in both hands come in the thread showing support to it. Nallege, jeffm, Rooney, pimpc & bigreg. Sorry if i missed anyone, I know you love the title of being the no.1 floydtoy and its disrespect to not mention how good you are at tossing his salad.
     
  8. IVLG

    IVLG OBJECTIVITY IS BACK LOL Full Member

    582
    1
    Nov 24, 2009
    This content is protected
     
  9. cherokee

    cherokee boxfan Full Member

    834
    0
    Nov 20, 2009
    this is just as bad as the thread on the other forum where someone claimed that GBP and Mayweather paid JMM to fight and (lose) to floyd to drumbeat his second coming or some **** like that!
     
  10. Bad_Intentions

    Bad_Intentions Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,367
    31
    May 15, 2007
    Great, more conspiracies :verysad.
     
  11. bladerunner

    bladerunner El Intocable Full Member

    33,921
    133
    Jul 20, 2004
    Two *****s arguing with each other.

    This is priceless :rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl
     
  12. DobyZhee

    DobyZhee Loyal Member

    46,602
    14,096
    Mar 5, 2006
    "an undeniable truth?" okay, I'm glad that's where the author stopped writing. Good way to end a Cotto loss excuse rant.

    Why does this sh*t happen on ESB months after the fight? Ridiculous..
     
  13. ericsupreme

    ericsupreme Active Member Full Member

    524
    0
    Dec 4, 2007
    i see your point and all i'm saying is i don't care. pac whipped their ass point blank. and if my ***** floyd is dumb enough to agree to something like that which i know he isn't than he would deserve a good ol fashion ass whipping ass well. on fight night come correct or don't come @ all.

    if floyd would have lost to oscar and he used the excuse of the gloves oscar demanded he wear and all the other bs oscar stipulated. i would feel the exact same way ...that he should not have taken the fight then. obviously he felt could still beat oscar either way. just as dlh and cotto thought they could win agreeing to the catch weight and as you say the dehydration clause.
     
  14. dangerousity

    dangerousity Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    20,253
    2,301
    Jan 4, 2005

    Where is this "rehydration" clause mentioned? And Cotto dropped 1lbs, not 2lbs so get that **** out of here, he was 146 against Clottey. And so what if Pac said that, mental warefare anyone? Cotto didnt look drained fight night, thats all that mattered, and he didnt say he was weight drained AFTER the fight either.
     
  15. puga_ni_nana

    puga_ni_nana Dempsey Roll Full Member

    41,814
    5
    Apr 14, 2007
    lol at these joyboys trying to discredit pac's victory over cotto after floyd ducked the same guy 2 years ago saying he wasn't even a draw. now pac has fought cotto, a job that a real welterweight like floyd should have done while floyd fought a blownout lightweight.