What Floyd has done in his entire career...

Really?
.
.
.
Really?

 

so pacquiao has stopped an ATG in morales who was never been stopped before and never been stopped by any other boxer again until now and you think it's not his one of his best wins?

 

Read again. He did not say Pac beat Morales 3 times. What he meant is Pac fought Morales 3 times.

 

pac dominated barrera and knocked him out in the first fight, great win! ... there was no reason to fight him again, pac already proved that he was the far better fighter. this is equivalent to pac fighting cotto again at 147 and claiming its a great win ... barrera ii is solid, but far from great

and he had to fight morales and jmm three times because he lost/drew to them! winning the trilogy against morales is solid but he doesnt get more credit for fighting him three times than he would if he dominated him in the first fight ... and he's 1-1-1 against jmm, imo, thats not better than shutting out jmm after a two year layoff

pacs resume has better names at the top but floyds is far deeper and without blemishes

 

Not completely fair to say Floyd never handicapped his opponents. His stunt against Marquez was pretty bad.

 

Pretty much, yeah.

Boxing's all about circumstances. And you can't deny the circumstances regarding the Morales wins.

Name wise, Morales is right up there. And don't get me wrong, they ARE great wins. I'm not trying to argue with you there.

I just think they are overrated by some of the more over zealous Pac fans.

It certainly doesn't come close to the first Barrera win (the second Barrera win is pretty lowly rated on my scale as well, tbh). And Barrera and Morales are pretty even in terms of all time ranking.

So why would the first Barrera win be rated so much more than the Morales wins considering there relatively even ATG ranking?

Answer = circumstances (which have been stated numerous times in this thread, and countless others).

But to re-iterate, AGAIN, they are still great wins. Not arguing there.

 

or pac's body shots that he invested took its toll on morales.

morales was supposed to be stopped against maidana and other 140 fighters in his condition now. the same maidana that stopped ortiz without resorting to suckerpunch.

 

I disagree to an extent: fighting Morales, Marquez and Barrera in something like their primes at weights they are comfortable in and beating them in most fight is a magnificent achievement. Nobody would be able to beat all 3 every single time and dominate completely. That's because they are bona-fide legends. Holding a winning record against each of them is a huge plus on Pacquiao's CV. I don't hold it against Floyd because he is really too big for those 3 guys, but that doesn't mean I don't respect Manny for fighting them. In fact, his efforts in those fights might be more important than anything he has done at welter and higher when his career is finally to be assessed.

 

3 questions:

1. Do you think Morales was prime against Pac in fights 2 and 3?

2. Do you think Morales' best weight in Pac 2 and 3 was 130?

3. Do you think Morales was prime in his first Pac fight?

 

You can believe whatever you want. However, Morales was clearly drained and past his best in those rematches. It was calculated move by team Pacquiao. They refused a 132 lb. catchweight and even inserted a large overweight penalty clause. If want to count beating a drained Morales who had to come down in weight and who had just been schooled by Raheem as one of Pacquiao's best wins, be my guest.

 

how?

pac has not only fought morales, marquez and barrera a combined total of 8 times but he also fought guys like sasakul, ledwaba, delahoya, cotto, hatton, clottey, margarito, mosley and now bradley.

 

*****s logic:

Morales/Pac I = Morales not drained ( schooled Pacquiao )


Morales/ Pac II & III = Morales drained. I wonder why?:think

 

I couldn't agree more. Pac's second win over EM is one of the most overrated wins of this era. The man was just schooled by an average fighter in Raheem one fight prior.

 

so now you are not against catchweight anymore? i thought you guys are blaming pac for fighting cotto at 145 and margarito at 150?

the thing is, morales fought raheem at a catchweight of 133, missed the weight due to lack of interest for that fight. in his fight with pac, making the 130 weight makes him focused to train and not look lethargic like he was against raheem.

say all you want about morales being drained that's why he lost but pac invested on body shots sacrificing those early rounds. it paid off and made floyd jump out of his seat thinking it was a great victory for his 2nd best boxer (floyd's own words).

 

Morales did not "school" Pac in the first fight. It was a close war, but still a very clear win for Morales.

With that said, Morales was certainly not prime in the first fight and was already noting having weight issues with the 130 pound limit. The win is a testament to Morales as a fighter.

Not '*****' logic. Just the way things went down.