Why does Pacquiao always fight guys coming off a loss ?

Household name or not, many said Pac fought Cotto because he looked bad against Clottey, so Pac fought both.

 

Cotto, Ricky, DLH, Diaz, JMM 1 & 2...MAB 1. None were coming off loses. The reason PAC is held in such hight regard is b/c of his commitment to fighting the best and how he dominates.

Every fighter has some fights where he faces a guy coming off losses. Take Floyd or instance. He faced Zab after Zab lost to Baldo. he faced Mitchell who had a loss just 12 months earlier.

There's no one who has a resume that compares to PAC at the moment. They don't go handing Fighter of the Decade honors to just anyone with an average resume.

 

Had PAC switched the names that he has presently on his reusme with names like Valero....Guzman and Soto the critisim would be a lot more harsh...and actually valid. Having names like EM, MAB, JMM, DLH, Hatton, Cotto, Marg, Clottley hold SO much more credibility than Joan Guzman, Soto or Ed Valero.

If you are complaining now.....had PAC taken the route of least resistance facing the lower level guys right now you'd actually have a point in questioning PAC's credentials.

 

because Roach is a genius LOL

 

If they weren't literally just coming of a loss then they had lost within 2 or 3 fights. Not just lost actually, destroyed. Cotto by Marg, Hatton by May, DLH by Hopkins. So it's really kind of pathetic you try to defer from the legitimate point by making a lame claim like "Cotto beat Clottley". Well first he should have lost that fight, second a fight or 2 before Clottely he was ruined by Marg. So he never fights people on more than a 2 win streak really on average.

 

Void had a loss? When was that? Pac tried to get Void to fight him and Void ran away and hid!