Why did Pacquiao lose to a shot Morales?

pac was always throwing his predictable 1 to 2 combos and he cannot fight backwards(until now pac still has that weakness), and because he did not go to the body whereas morales was initiating a good gameplan, fighting on the outside and throwing good combinations that made pacman fight backwards

 

kerrminator it's obvious that you hate pac because you love swinging on guzman's nuts. why can't you wait till his match with jmm is over?

 

As a fighter on the decline, Morales made his last stand in that first Manny Pacquiao fight.

I think Morales then, was having the same problem that Jose Luis Castillo is having now.
It had become terribly draining on him to make 130 lbs but his frame was'nt big enough to seriously compete at a high level at 135 lbs.

Like Castillo is now, Morales was stuck between weights.
.....remember how Morales wanted to fight Pac at a catchweight of 133 lbs for the third encounter......but it did'nt come about?

In any regards, shot is an overstatement. Morales could have and probably could still compete with fighters who dont hold such a big quickness and speed disparity over him.
Morales was more of a ringworn fighter with attributes that were slowly erroding.
Morales was never especially quick or fast, but even those attributes had significantly erroded......and when you are up against a fighter like Pacquiao who's one of his main attributes is speed and quickness and being able to close distance quickly.....Manny Paqcuiao certainly exposed Morales' erroding deficiencies.

A fighter that is declining can still put up a stand and make it a good one, but the performances become inconsistent from fight to fight.
Erik Morales put up one of those stands in the first Pacquiao fight.

Imo Manny Pacquiao beat a formidable Erik Morales, but he by no means beat Morales at anywhere near the height of his faculties!


The upcoming fight for Pacquiao vs JMM will certainly tell us more if it was more that Pac had progressed or Morales had regressed that led to the outcomes in fight 2 and 3 between Morales and Pacquiao.

.....as Morales had shown significant signs of decline before facing Pacquiao in fight 2 and 3, even losing to Raheem and looking awful at it prior to that 2nd fight with Pacquiao.....
.....JMM has not shown that types of radical decline that Morales exhibited prior to his matchups with Pacquiao.....

.....but if Pacquiao can show against JMM what he showed in the 2nd and 3rd Morales fights, and suceed against JMM in the same way he did against Morales. Then I certainly will have to rethink my contention that the results of those Morales fights had less to do with Morales' decline and more to do with Pacquiao's evolution.
The 15th of this month can certainly answer us all alot of questions!

 

certainly doesn't fail. great post as always, divac. :good

 

I agree with that, Morales put every last effort into that win against Pac and he paid for it later, Morales was terrific in beating Pac the first time but by fights 2 and 3 he was gone. It only takes one fight for a fighter at the end of his career to be shot, he won't be the last it happens to either. I sure hope Mosley knows when to call it a day, i would hate to see him beaten up by a nobody.

 

because he wasn't shot yet. However the first fight had pretty much finished him.

One thing we can agree on is he was definately shot by the third pacquiao fight.

 

The fight was scored very close at 115-113 by all of the the judges. Despite the fact that Pac had a bad cut at the 5th round due to a headbutt, the scores were so close. now, imagine if the situations were reversed and EM had the cut instead. theln we could probably see the scores would favor Pac. The cut made Pac fought the way he fought. That early in the fight, when you receive a bad cut, you tend to throw caution to the wind and hope to connect a KO, thus more prone to being countered, or exposed.

But that is already history and that said, Pac won the trilogy. Period. Let's leave it at that and give credit where credit is due. B

 

The fight was scored very close at 115-113 by all of the the judges. Despite the fact that Pac had a bad cut at the 5th round due to a headbutt, the scores were so close. now, imagine if the situations were reversed and EM had the cut instead. theln we could probably see the scores would favor Pac. The cut made Pac fought the way he fought. That early in the fight, when you receive a bad cut, you tend to throw caution to the wind and hope to connect a KO, thus more prone to being countered, or exposed.

But that is already history and that said, Pac won the trilogy. Period. Let's leave it at that and give credit where credit is due.

 

I did'nt have it as close, but if memory serves me, Erik Morales threw away the last two rounds of the fight when he swithched to southpaw and dared Pac to bring it.
Alot of people applaud Morales for doing it, imo it was a stupid thing to do, considering he was visibly rocked in that final round and still refused to turn conventional.

In any regards, by the time the 10th round rolled around, Pac had no chance to win on the cards and needed a KO, of which he did not get.
The fact that Morales turned southpaw and gave the last couple of rounds away made the official scorecards closer than they should have been.
There was no if's and's or but's......Pac fans can cry about Pac fighting with a cut, but Morales was beating Pac before the cut and beat him afterward!

 

. . . THEN LATER ON SAY . . . people are making excuses? :roll:

**** you and grow up. :yep

 

The turn around from the first fight to the second and third was amazing, Morales looked shot in the last two.

 

:good good post buddy :bbb :bbb :bbb

 

hows your boi diaz?



im sooooo glad he ****in lost coz of people like you.

 

how about this? juan diaz is a good fighter who happens to have all the belts at lightweight and was regarded as the man to beat in that division but was overrated by most people here at esb.. but why did diaz lose to a fighter who was knocked out by robbie peden of all people?

 

The left jab by Morales ... who when he used it had one of the best most consistant weapons in the business.