Manny Pacquaio - Phenomena or Phantom?

good read

 

I read it, its not bad or anything. He puts both the positives and negatives on there.

Pac's really only missing Floyd and Bradley on his resume (or if you wanna be crazy you can include Pwill)... otherwise all the names are on there already, if you want to nitpick every little thing then that's fine but many fighters have done that throughout history.

a lot of the catchweights are compromise between two fighters anyway

You never see people say Sam Langford beat people who were "done" and stuff even though they had plenty of losses, somehow I guess today fighters are a lot more fragile and just can't seem to handle a loss or two

 

That's exactly why he took the "man in my avi's" spotlight. A lot have to do with Arum having all the big names in his stable. Obviously, Arum wouldn't allow anyone within his stable to fight Mayweather anyway. So politics do kick-in there as well. There's a reason Cotto is all of a sudden a Mayweather opponent as soon as he left Arum.

 

They had the option, to SAY NO. They are exempt from having the limit for the simple reason that BOTH agreed to 150 or whatever.

Dude, the whole "2-3-4-5 division champion" argument really doesn't mean what it used to. When you have 4-5 recognized belts per division, then that means a number of guys can make that claim in the same divisions at the same time, w/o ever having to fight one another.

It's really nothing but a marketing ploy now. No will EVERY say DLH's 5 or 6 division belts are worth more then Armstong's. Well, no one who wants to be laghed at that is.

But, as said, it was a good read. Nice to see a thread made with thought and with more then one sentance for a change, even if I don't fully agree. :thumbsup

 

Before the fight, it was a mismatch and Pac was the underdog. Even though De La Hoya was drained, it was still a descent win and Pac never fought @ welterweight before.

 

the threadstarter even suggested in another thread that pac should have raheem in his resume rather than morales never knowing the fact that morales has all the rematch options that time.

the OP is just going on what these stupid *****s are saying or he is just a plain ***** himself.

 

Raheem was also a LW, Pac wasn't. Morales went up to LW to try and capture a belt in a 4th division, making "History" as the first Mexican fighter to win a belt if 4 divisions.

So because he failed at the time, Pac needed to move up tp face him?

 

In this era, defeats and close fights are a death sentence. Pacquiao has too many of both to go down as the best of his era. Despite everyone grinding his jock, I think he's closer to Hopkins on the ATG list than he is Mayweather.

Since Oscar, I've said many times: "Pacquiao is the biggest fad in boxing." We'll see, but over the past 3-4 months, I'm closer to being correct than incorrect.

Great top wins: Barrera I, Sasakul, Cotto, Hatton, Ledwaba, Morales II, Mosley

 

very very good read. u make some really good points. i think that his best win to date is against miguel cotto. very solid win against a bigger man. i think u meant to write "phenomenon."

 

Jorge Eliecer Julio is one of Pac's most underrated wins. He beat a former champion who had never been stopped until Pac bulldozed him in just 2 rounds.

 

Roach claimed Pac weighed in 3/4 UNDER what he weighed in his hotel room, before AND after the official weigh in. I think there was also a hefty weight penalty if Oscar missed weight.

 

This is a rather easy question since both are a matter of interpretation. Phantom would mean missing in action or a non-entity. You simply can't credibly make that argument. Phenomena? Yes, by definition. Both Pac and Arum did their jobs and did them well. Pac inside the ring and Arum outside. Your argument is simply if he is being over rated or not but that really doesn't matter to your question. As I have already said, by definition he is a phenomena.

 

This is not a knock on Pacquiao but details that can't be ignored. He has been given a more protected route than most people realize and those circumstances of facing fighters at their worse times will bite him after his career. He even benefitted from Morales' struggling with weight but TBF, fighters agreed to the contracts no matter how crappy they could have been. I do think post-Marquez II he's been looking for the easiest way as possible in order to advance in his career(Diaz? horrible) but he has been a beast as a FW and I do think his second win over Barrera gets underrated because he beat him down before and Barrera was past prime(arguably both times but he was still a good fighter both times). He cheated his way to 8 titles(not everyone but definitely against Cotto and Margo at catchweights) and has already proven he doesn't need those catchweights anymore ever since beating Cotto. Great career but deserves astericks for most fights post-Marquez II .

Correct. The blame has to go to most of the casual fans who, of course, don't know about the history of the sport and are quick to dismiss fighters with losses. RJJ, Holyfield,etc. are horrible to them just because they have "10 losses" oppossed to what they have accomplished as fighters that gave them their big names. This idiotic logic is giving the sport a bad name and putting it into these upcoming fighters/potential stars heads that they are "done" even if they only have 3-5 losses. If this were an earlier time Cotto may have been seen as prime or near prime. Just goes to show you that having an 0 is more treasured than taking on the best which hurts us as true fans because we want to see the best meet in the ring.

:deal Like how this barely gets brought up. I feel Mayweather always fights those willing to fight him except maybe Williams.

 

:huh
Pulling that outta your ass Hermit?
DLH was the call maker remember, not Pac.

 

Paquiao is a *****!!!