Pacquiao - `The toughest was Morales`

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Bill Butcher, Dec 31, 2008.


Page 3 of 5
  1. harrison

    harrison feu-nrmf md 2005 Full Member

    3,198
    0
    Dec 4, 2008

    from espn....
    Unofficial scorecard
    Round 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total

    Morales     10 -9- 10- 10 -10- 9- 9- 9 - 9
    Pacquiao 9 -10 -9 - 9 - 9 -10 -10- 10 -10

    same as most scorecards.

    this clearly shows morales is not shot... he was leading the first 5 rounds until pac adjusted his game and gave the harder shots to morales. :good
     
    harrison, Dec 31, 2008
    harrison, Dec 31, 2008
    #31
  2. Bill Butcher

    Bill Butcher Erik`El Terrible`Morales Full Member

    28,518
    82
    Sep 3, 2007
    If both wore reyes in the 1st fight, would Pac have won ?.... I doubt it.
    If the Pac of the 2nd fight fought the Morales of the 1st fight, would Pac have stopped Morales ?.... Cant see it.

    Pac was certainly better the 2nd fight, only a fool would say otherwise but vice versa for Morales, he was better in fight 1 than in fight 2.

    Compare EMs movement & reaction time in both fights, he had slipped, he resorted to attacking Pac more full on in fight 2 than in fight 1 because a lot of his jabs & counters were falling short, you could see he had slipped a bit tho as I said, Pac had corrected some vital things that were missing in fight 1 which came together for a fantastic win.
     
    Bill Butcher, Dec 31, 2008
    Bill Butcher, Dec 31, 2008
    #32
  3. pauliemayweathe

    pauliemayweathe Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,995
    0
    Dec 27, 2007
    lol...stop acting like u r best friends with pac...ur a nuthugger of pac not booboy
     
    pauliemayweathe, Dec 31, 2008
    pauliemayweathe, Dec 31, 2008
    #33
  4. Lupe

    Lupe Member Full Member

    350
    0
    Apr 25, 2006
    Suit yourself.

    Prime is not Peak. Using words without understanding their meaning causes unecessary arguments. A boxer reaches prime before they peak. Morales' prime was circa late 97-99 while he was at peak around 99-2001.
    So you are wrong when you say he was a little past prime when he fought Pac in the 2nd fight.

    Now, where I was getting to is this: prime 4 prime and at their peak - and judging by what EM in decline did to Pac - I pick EM anyday.
     
    Lupe, Dec 31, 2008
    Lupe, Dec 31, 2008
    #34
  5. Bill Butcher

    Bill Butcher Erik`El Terrible`Morales Full Member

    28,518
    82
    Sep 3, 2007
    Pac hit Morales hard in every rd in all 3 fights, its no coincidence that Morales did worse in each fight, he was continually sliding while Pac was getting a little better... my personal opinion is that it was Morales decline MORE than Pac`s improvement that gave us the results we witnessed but obviously it was both together.

    Ps. that scorecard does nothing for your arguement, its far from un-common for a man declining to look good for the 1st part of the fight before wearing down.... check out both Arguello/Pryor fights for a similar example. It happens a lot.
     
    Bill Butcher, Dec 31, 2008
    Bill Butcher, Dec 31, 2008
    #35
  6. harrison

    harrison feu-nrmf md 2005 Full Member

    3,198
    0
    Dec 4, 2008
    nyehehe... divac run away ... i wanted to tell him happy new year :lol:
     
    harrison, Dec 31, 2008
    harrison, Dec 31, 2008
    #36
  7. pauliemayweathe

    pauliemayweathe Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,995
    0
    Dec 27, 2007
    raheem was the better man too?
     
    pauliemayweathe, Dec 31, 2008
    pauliemayweathe, Dec 31, 2008
    #37
  8. puga_ni_nana

    puga_ni_nana Dempsey Roll Full Member

    41,814
    5
    Apr 14, 2007
    the question is, was that a prime or peak pacman that morales fought?
     
    puga_ni_nana, Dec 31, 2008
    puga_ni_nana, Dec 31, 2008
    #38
  9. Lupe

    Lupe Member Full Member

    350
    0
    Apr 25, 2006
    Peak.
     
    Lupe, Dec 31, 2008
    Lupe, Dec 31, 2008
    #39
  10. puga_ni_nana

    puga_ni_nana Dempsey Roll Full Member

    41,814
    5
    Apr 14, 2007
    it could be a physically peak pacman but not the best version of pacman. it could be that his best version is the current version. so would you take a current version of pacman versus a prime morales?
     
    puga_ni_nana, Dec 31, 2008
    puga_ni_nana, Dec 31, 2008
    #40
  11. Lupe

    Lupe Member Full Member

    350
    0
    Apr 25, 2006
    First, I would say Pac is still at his peak. Some fighters stay a bit longer.
    However, EM's prime was at 122. He was a beast there. The only man to make it to the final bell was Wayne Mccullough who had an all time best chin. I would still go with EM at 122 by late stoppage.
     
    Lupe, Dec 31, 2008
    Lupe, Dec 31, 2008
    #41
  12. bladerunner

    bladerunner El Intocable Full Member

    33,921
    133
    Jul 20, 2004
    122 wasnt Pac best weight and he was far from the fighter he is today.

    also are you forgetting that MAB went the distance with Morales at 122 and to most people beat him in theyre first fight.
     
    bladerunner, Dec 31, 2008
    bladerunner, Dec 31, 2008
    #42
  13. Ilesey

    Ilesey ~ Full Member

    38,201
    2,600
    Jul 22, 2004
    Shot - probably not.

    At his best - hell no.
     
    Ilesey, Dec 31, 2008
    Ilesey, Dec 31, 2008
    #43
  14. puga_ni_nana

    puga_ni_nana Dempsey Roll Full Member

    41,814
    5
    Apr 14, 2007
    pacquiao is different from the version that fought morales. during that time, he is still a work in progress. as i said, it could be a peak pac physically but nowhere near the pac that we have now.
     
    puga_ni_nana, Dec 31, 2008
    puga_ni_nana, Dec 31, 2008
    #44
  15. Lupe

    Lupe Member Full Member

    350
    0
    Apr 25, 2006
    I have not forgotten that. The fact is EM was already having weight problems at that time and if I remember correctly it was his last fight at '22. I thought he lost that fight too and that he won II and III. At '22 Pac was still great. He destroyed a very capable Ledwaba and Julio in a brutal fashion but EM was THE beast there.
     
    Lupe, Dec 31, 2008
    Lupe, Dec 31, 2008
    #45
Page 3 of 5