pacquiao v naz at featherweight/126lbs. who wins and how???

who ever lands big first

 

Once he was near his prime, he lost to HOF-class fighter Erik Morales 7-5, then stopped him twice in rematches.

Or, if you are (for some bizarre reason) referring to his two losses from over a decade ago, I must educate you on the following points of interest:

- Pac would fight Naz at featherweight, so how relevant are fights at flyweight?

- Pac in the 90s was extremely green and extremely raw, he had not had the benefit of Freddie Roach's tutelage, he hadn't physically grown into himself yet nor developed into the fighter he would later become

- You would need to actually know boxing to know this, but Pacquiao was dangerously weight-drained for his second loss, as proven by the fact he jumped over 2 weight classes and into a 3rd immediately after that fight, from flyweight to superbantamweight

- If your belief that Naz would beat Pacquiao is based on the fact that Pacquiao had two losses as an inexperienced flyweight, then by the same (feeble) logic then Naz would also torch:

Salvador Sanchez (who lost an SD for the Mexican bantamweight title)

Juan Manuel Marquez (who lost his pro debut as well as fw fights to Norwood and John)

Alexis Arguello (stopped in 1972 in a bout in Nicaragua and lost his 1st fw title challenge to Ernesto Marcel)


You don't often see stupidity like yours on this forum, so thankfully I was on hand to clean house. :good

 

While cleaning house, maybe you could clean Pacmans semen from your lips too?

the point i was making was, if Hamed is a bum for losing to an ATG, what does that make Pacman who lost to not so ATGs?

 

Manny's superior work rate, stamina, and mental toughness lead him to a late round ko.

 

Work rate, stamina and mental toughness will not prevent him from being KTFO

 

Hamed = overhyped arrogant failure. Manny Pacquao = humble proven winner.

 

Julian Jackson beats the **** out of the both of them