Was Erik Morales washed up in this fight? (VOTE)

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by MIP4P1, Sep 20, 2009.


Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MIP4P1

    MIP4P1 Maestro Full Member

    814
    0
    Sep 18, 2009
    You ever think Morales was shot? :think
     
  2. HyperBone

    HyperBone Silverback Gorilla Full Member

    7,152
    0
    Oct 30, 2008
    i miss your other alt, nallege. :yep
     
  3. HyperBone

    HyperBone Silverback Gorilla Full Member

    7,152
    0
    Oct 30, 2008
    :lol:pathetic joyboy, i like that.

    you keep whining whereas pac keeps winning. how bout that for a start, maestro?:rofl
     
  4. MIP4P1

    MIP4P1 Maestro Full Member

    814
    0
    Sep 18, 2009
    Morales is shot option, clearly leading in the polls.

    The public clearly feels Pacquiao's wins over Morales are meaningless, since a past prime Morales beat Pacquiao, and lost after he was proven shot by his one-sided domination by non-ranked +800 underdog Raheem.

    :think
     
  5. MIP4P1

    MIP4P1 Maestro Full Member

    814
    0
    Sep 18, 2009
    True!

    Roach has a disability, and I'm sure that gives him an extra sense to be able to detect when someone is shot.
     
  6. charlievint

    charlievint Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,338
    1
    Jul 22, 2004
    Naw....this was more less a poor style match up coupled with underestimating Raheem who is very fast and crafty. Every fighter has a bad night and I think this was Eriks. No way was he washed up in my honest opinion but Zahir definitley boxed extremly well that night and I can't take anything away from his win. He did what he had to do.
     
  7. charlievint

    charlievint Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,338
    1
    Jul 22, 2004
    Exactly.....he was past his prime, physically but still able to operate and beat most on the elite levels of his divisions. DLH was past his prime in there with both FLoyd and PAC, but DLH was able to beat most at 154 or at least make competitive outings against the best.
     
  8. MIP4P1

    MIP4P1 Maestro Full Member

    814
    0
    Sep 18, 2009
    Nah!

    You said Oscar was elite against Forbes, and that Oscar would beat Pacquiao. :think

    Now you're saying Morales, after getting dominated by Raheem, was also in his prime, or at least "not washed up". :think

    Roach said Oscar was washed up in the Forbes fight, and he said Raheem was shot in the Raheem fight. I think I'm going to believe Roach's opinion, but you're entitled to believe whatever you wish!
     
  9. MIP4P1

    MIP4P1 Maestro Full Member

    814
    0
    Sep 18, 2009
    No one should doubt Roach when he says a fighter is shot!

    He said Oscar went on a serious decline after his loss to Floyd. With Forbes, Roach declared Oscar as shot. While others thought Oscar was still an elite fighter!

    Roach also said Floyd took everything out of Hatton. Then Hatton almost get's KO'd by Lazcano.

    Roach is the truth when it comes to discovering shot fighters! :deal
     
  10. charlievint

    charlievint Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,338
    1
    Jul 22, 2004
    Sure.....We've seen "ELITE" level guys have off nights and loose against underdogs in the past. EM is human although he seemed for a very long time to be more than. Phsyically he was past his best but no way was he shot....he couldn't have moved up to anther weight class and beat or almost beat the champion in Diaz if he was completely shot.
     
  11. MIP4P1

    MIP4P1 Maestro Full Member

    814
    0
    Sep 18, 2009
    Nah!

    Morales was shot. I'm a believer in Roach when it comes to those type of bold statements.

    David Diaz sucks, and Morales lost that fight to a guy he would have destroyed in his prime easily.

    Morales had nothing left at all. It's a testament just how skilled he is, that he can outbox Pacquiao even though he's shot!
     
  12. charlievint

    charlievint Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,338
    1
    Jul 22, 2004
    EVERYONE said Oscar was going to beat PAC. I don't fault myself for that one. PAC has a way of overcomming even the biggest of odds.

    EM could have had an off night or took Raheem lightly. EM is human and he's capable of having an off night. I never said he was prime, he was definitley past his best physical prime, but you don't need to be 26 yrs old and at your physical peak to be the best version of yourself. EM was still very smart, crafty and a dangerous fighter who could beat most in or around hisweight class.

    Oscar lost to Strum, but that did not mean DLH was shot. He just had an off night and took Felix lightly, and his prefromance showed that. EM, the same thing.

    Roach said one thing in order to get under DLH's skin. He wanted to promote the fight and said thngs to get Oscars blood boiling. But I don't take Roach seriously when he's saying things about an oponnent for PAC. Even when he said he'd KO Hatton inside of 3 rounds....sure PAC did it but I thought it was just to get under Floyd sr skin and to push the promotion of the fight and it worked.

    Roach said Izzy was shot and should retire, he sid the same about Nard after the JOe C fight. ROcah is great but he's wrong on occassion as well. Nacho said DLH was in great shape after the loss and said it wasn't anything having to do with DLH being shot or overtrained or weight drained and more about the person he was facing in PAC. the speed was too much and the versitilty had Oscar unable to find his rythm.

    Everyone has an opinion so we'll just disagree.
     
  13. MIP4P1

    MIP4P1 Maestro Full Member

    814
    0
    Sep 18, 2009
    That's just wrong. :deal

    Roach and Valero both predicted Pacquiao to KO Oscar. Valero said he made Oscar quit in sparring, gave him the black eye, and said Oscar wasn't even training seriously for the fight. The only people who thought Oscar would win were people who had no clue about his current condition... and that just happened to be the majority, but clearly wrong!

    Pacquiao was only a +135 underdog. I saw the odds at Vegas myself about 30 minutes before the bell rang. Hardly "the biggest of odds". He lost to Morales as the -200 favorite, so he has a history of losing when expected to win as well. :think

    No one delcared Oscar shot after Sturm arguably beat him in a close and competitive fight, but plenty did feel Morales was shot, including Roach, after Morales was dominated by Raheem as the -1000 favorite. Completely different!

    Roach is wrong sometimes, but he was clearly right about Oscar and Morales. Both retired shortly after being declared shot and would be massive underdogs against A level competition in their respective times after their losses. :yep
     
  14. charlievint

    charlievint Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,338
    1
    Jul 22, 2004
    Sure....there were a very smalle percentage of people who felt PAC would win, but the majority didn't give PAC any. Valero is known to be a tremendous sparring partner and gives everyone hell. So I wasn't surprised he gave DLH a black eye that DLH credited to ORtiz.:lol: But even with Roach poppin off at the mouth about PAC doing this and that I gave PAC little chance to beat the odds. As did most.

    Based on his then "current" condition he was in tremendous shape and operating at a high level. A year earlier he almost beat Floyd....had a very close fight witht he best boxer on the planet in Floyd jr and them completely dominated Forbes where forbes didn't win a round.

    PAC has history of winning when he's given little chance at winning.. He's caused me to loose a lot of money, but I've come to appreciate the special talent he is. He's got a tremendous champions heart and it's amazing how much he's improved under Roach over the last 7 yrs or so. He's the best b/c of his determination and talent. He works hard and he's got the natrual gifts to keep him on top..which is why Floyd is also one of the very best in this era.

    EM didn't retire, he came back after the 2nd loss to PAC and IMHO beat Diaz at 135. A shot fighter doens't move up in weight and beat a title holder if he's shot. Roach is right a lot but he's been wrong like he was when he said Nard and Izzy should hang em up. He was wrong about DLH and he was wrong about Morales....although I feel Morales needs to stop now.
     
  15. MIP4P1

    MIP4P1 Maestro Full Member

    814
    0
    Sep 18, 2009
    Morales was shot!

    Looks like the world agrees with Roach. The evidence in the video is clearly too strong.

    Keep voting folks!

    :deal
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.