Pacquiao is a good fighter who happens to have come in to the scene at the twilight of a couple Legends career. But why did Pac lose to an obviously shot Morales?
Erik wasn't shot at that time, in my opinion I think that was the fight that made him become a shot fighter.
Because you want to discredit Pac anyway you can. Anyway, just to boost your dwindling ego, Morales is clearly light years better than Pacman and hence even a shot Morales is too much for Pacman. Pacman is actually not that good and he was just lucky that Morales was already shot at the age of 29.
He was'nt shot,he boxed him well and traded with him thus out landing him,can i someone say "DUH"atsch
Morales was never a shot, He did what he had to do and won convincingly. If your just trying to criticize Pacquiao, you have criticize Morales more. No lame excuses please.
Eric's one of my all time favorite fighters but he boxed well never showed signs of being shot though it was a tough bout. Pacmans surely of greatest of our generation.
Obviously the only person in either hemisphere who believes Morales was shot. Your attempt to discredit Pac is rather transparent. Remember theres a lot of bs posted on this site and most of us can spot it a mile off. If its any consolation I felt pac lost against Marquez.
IMO , when Morales outpointed Paq, that was one of Eric's best performances. If you remember, Morales got rocked badly in the last minute of the 12th. After that Eric was never quite the same, and his demise was hastened by two more beating from Manny, plus a humiliation from Zahir Raheem.
Dude Morales owns forever and so is Pac, thats why they are the best out there. Your right knockout, this thread starter just made himself worst out of himself.
Because Morales was not shot. I am sure you knew that already, but you just want to get the attention of Pacdbest, don't you?:yep