Manny Pacquiao vs. Prince Naseem Hamed

I already settled this with you and proved you wrong. You clearly had/have an agenda.

 

Good one.

 

Fancy answering this question yet genius:

 

Go take your agenda somewhere else.

 

Go back to the thread and my responses are there. I am not posting on it again. Many people agree with my theory more than yours and there is medical evidence that you're wrong.

 

Medical evidence was submitted that proved Miguel Cotto was a physically declined force after going through a 10-week training course to weigh in at 145lbs, as compared to his physical state after going through a 10-week training course to weigh in at 146lbs???

I must have missed that scientific testimony.

And 90% of those who agreed with you were either "Pac haters", "Cotto huggers" or else just ****ing ******s. It was the General Forum. :good

 

You're a perfect ******* for bringing this up again. You want to discredit all those guys in that forum but you wouldn't say that if the shoe was on the other foot.

 

Once you get past the anticts, the dancing & prancing and half hour ring enterances there was a method to Hamed's maddness. He gets himself in poistion to put his entire body in to his punch and when that happens. A knockdown at the very least is often the result.
Hamed's biggest advantage is that he is fleeter of foot than Pacquaio.
If he can stay away hit and not get hit he should win. This won't be easy.
Pacquiao is outside of movement speed the better boxer and has faster hands. He is also the bigger man. Pacquiao's goal is to lure Hamed into a toe to toe fight. If Pacquiao can impose his will on Hamed he should win.
Both have power both have been knocked down and Pacquiao's case out.
I thin unless Pacquiao is willing to take a page out of Bareara's book and be a little dirty against Hamed. In order to keep the fight in front of him. The Prince is going to dance the night away.

 

You're not serious?? :huh

 

Does it make me an ******* to still think it's funny that people believe 1 pound is a legitimate excuse for a beating? Then an ******* I most certainly am. :yep

 

The arguement wasn't whether he would have won if not for cutting weight, the arguement was that it affected him, which it did, now **** off. :good

 

No, it didn't. :smoke

 

Delusional. This topic is dead. :dead

 

I'm not to sure anybody would be in a hurry to engage in another war like that with anybody, and given how intelligent Marco is, he figured he could make life easier for himself if he became more calculated. This is the only reason the man is still fighting today in essence. Barrera was saying he wasn't at his physical peal even ahead of his first fight with Morales and he might have been right, but he improved in so many other areas.

I think Barrera was at his peak from around 1999-2002. He was already a great fighter by '97 when he was fighting the likes of Mckinney and Eddie Croft, but he was liable to improve given how young he was at this time, and you could obvious defensive improvements after Jones II. Also started seeing a right hand counter more and more, with the majority of my favorite Marco combination's coming in that time time period between 1999 and 2002.

I'll admit, Barrera looked worryingly sluggish and disinterested in '03, and perhaps had he gone on a steady decline it'd be easier to accept that he was in a bad place...but 2004 was an excellent year for him. Barrera works most effectively at his own pace, but Manny wasn't giving him time or space, he was bulling forward throwing punches in abundance. Handspeed had proven to upset Marco before in the past against Jones, so I'm not convinced at all...that even a 2000 Marco would have weathered the same arsenal. Who knows.

I'm content with giving Pacquoao his just due.

 

Ofcourse you proved the biased ****wit wrong, 1-2lbs of body water can be the difference between life and death, especially in an already dehydrated man. Popkins thinks Freddy Roach wanted the fight at 145 because thats his luck number