Pacquiao's decline

Bradley 1 was very obvious. He was fighting for 30 seconds to a minute every round

 

Mosley fight...................

 

Lucero to Cotto was his prime. Before that he was green. After that he started declining.

So 2003-2009 he was at his best.

 

Pacquiao has definitely slowed down, but because he doesn't sprint at all times? I don't buy it. I think Pacquiao became more of a boxer than just a pure puncher, and couldn't go back to just being the proverbial "whirling dervish". I stand by this being the reason Marquez had more success in the third fight than he did in previous fights, because there weren't 40 punches coming at him, Pacquiao was clearly more measured, allowing a counter puncher to more easily counter.

Pacquiao, imo, is still as skilled as ever, and hasn't regressed in that sense. I think it's more in the mind. He obviously can't go back to the sprint, he's in his mid 30's, he's not going to be able to act like he was in his 20's, but he's been content since his move to welterweight to box, and flurry at times, but for the most part, rely on brief combos. In fact, he looked his sloppiest, imo, in the Bradley rematch, where he threw a bunch of punches when Bradley was on the ropes, but they weren't punches meant to land, they were just arm punches for activity.

 

hard to say he hasn't given he's 36 but has he declined more than Floyd?

1. He never really lost to bradley, he clearly won the first fight
2. He was looking good vs JMM before he got reckless and got KO'd. Is getting reckless whilst beating up an opponent signs of decline? maybe, if you consider getting stupid part of it... aside from that mental hiccup, he looked sharp
3. He has looked absolutely dominant in his last 3 fights, better than Floyd in Floyd's last 3 fights

declined, yes... a little bit but he's smarter now. That loss made him smarter.

 

Prime Pacquiao finishes Algieri in 3 rounds.

You have to compare his recent fights to his prime fights to tell the difference.

 

The Margarito fight took something out of him.

 

i dont think he could KO algieri just because its really hard to ko someone whos not engaging at all

 

Go watch his fights at 122 and 126. Running didn't work with young Pacquiao. He finished you no matter what and fast.

 

okay, let's play that game.

recent fights:

1. absolutely toyed with rios for 12 rounds, making Rios out to be a punching bag and a joke, which he isn't. I would bet Rios vs Maidana would be a war.
2. Beat Bradley handily, a top P4P boxer.
3. Dominated Algieri by winning all 12 rounds. You say prime Pac would've KO'd him in 3 seconds but i don't see it. Algieri wasn't running into Pacquiao, walking him down like DLH, Hatton and Cotto did, he was running like a b$tch for 12 rounds; rarely have i seen a fighter run so much.. he STILL tasted the canvas


DLH, Cotto, Hatton were great match-ups for Pacquiao, anyone knows this. None had great defense, none had speed, all 3 tried walking Pacquaio down and all 3 got destroyed. Pac definitely destroyed Rios in similar fashion. Bradley and Algieri were just difficult cause they were more defensive; Bradley being a top fighter. Pac looked as good in these fights as he did vs Clottey 5 years ago or so. Clottey was a defensive b$tch for 12 rounds.

 

Pacquiao had 12 title fights at 122. He stopped 11 of those guys.

At 126 he went up in weight and stopped Prime Barrera. Arguably and (I say arguably so we don't open a can of ****) the greatest win since Hagler-Hearns.

He knocked Marquez down 3 times and lost to prime Morales 115-113.

At 126 to his early days at 130 he faced the best run of competition since Ray Leonard and he was either destroying guys or holding his own.

So yea I'd say he stops Algieri in 3 rounds and I'd be shocked if he didn't stop Bradley either back in the day. Of course we'll never know so it's all just my opinion.

 

I'm a pacquiao fan but this doesn't quite make sense.

His Barrera win was impressive but you pointing to prime Morales loss as any proof of him being better?

He KO'd JMM 3 times in 1st round then what happened? JMM made it a draw.

Arguably, Pac's best performance vs JMM was their first 5 rounds in their 4th fight. He did suffer a knock down in 3rd but still, he was pummeling JMM in 4th and 5th rounds, it felt like the stoppage was coming any moment; then, it happened... he was insanely reckless in that move forward.

and when you say best run of competition between 126-130, who are you talking about?

to me, Pac's best run was the 08-10 run between Diaz and Margareito fights. Since then, he's still looked darn good. Again, that bradley loss should've never been a loss and that JMM KO is deceiving, Pac was looking good in that fight.

Boxing is one of the most unforgiving sports ever. In tennis or basketball or football, you can lose a match and its' as if nothing happened. In boxing, 1 robbery or 1 reckless move and that's it - THE DECLINE.

Had that bradley fight not been robbed and had Pac not made that single stupid and incredibly reckless move, the talk about his decline would be much different. 1 robbery and 1 stupid move and all is over... it's a tough sport.

 

Pacquiao faced prime Barrera, Marquez and Morales back to back to back. That's his best run of competition. Period.

Losing to prime Morales 115-113 is not indicative that you aren't prime. Manny just lost to Morales straight up in his prime. Morales was that good.

 

What is this myth Pac was dominating the 4th fight until KO6? The first 5 rounds was pretty much the same fight they always have with the exception of Marquez putting Pac on his azz in round 3! It's only after Pac scored a flash knockdown of his own in the 4th did he even begin to land solid punches on Marquez. Even then before the KO Marquez had caught Pac again with a punch that almost took Pac's head off. I remember Lampley screamed at ringside when Manny walked into the shot that didn't knock him out! They should of known it would only happen again, Pac was a sitting duck for the right that night!