Pacland's Philippine Boxing Forum

Discussion on boxing and other sports, Filipino greats and anything under the sun.
It is currently Thu Oct 23, 2014 1:12 pm

All times are UTC + 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 5:40 pm 
Offline
Welterweight
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:53 pm
Posts: 204
Location: San Francisco
I'm not convinced with the matchmaking argument for a couple reasons:

1. He was faced pitted against JMM, the fighter that his given him the most trouble over and over again. If there was really an effort to pad his record with easy fights, he would not have been matched against JMM, someone who has proved to give him trouble fight after fight.

2. The alternative fights he could have taken are just as open if not more open to critisism from people looking to find fault. Could you provide some examples of fighters Pacquiao maybe ducked instead of fighting the people he fought? When he fought hatton should he have fought Malinaggi instead? Or when he fought cotto, should he have fought clottey or bradley instead at that time? The alternatives I hear being thrown around are very weak arguements that Pacquiao took an easy matchmaker paved road.

Consider this, with any of the alternative fights you suggest manny should have fought, would there be any possibility that those people would get discredited as good "matchmaking" fights as well?

3. The whole leftover argument is weak. Everyone is someones leftover, and if credit is only reserved for fighters who beat undefeated fighters, then by that standard, Ali, SRR, SRL, Duran, and all the other greats shouldn't get much credit since they all fought peoples leftovers. Consider this: ODLH was a hopkins leftover, Zab was a baldomir leftover, cotto was a pacquiao leftover, Jose Luis Castillio was an Alvarez leftover and the list goes on. Fighting someone who has a loss, does not make that fight any less challenging.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 5:50 pm 
Offline
Light Heavyweight

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:53 am
Posts: 1187
MMAPinoy wrote:
I'm not convinced with the matchmaking argument for a couple reasons:

1. He was faced pitted against JMM, the fighter that his given him the most trouble over and over again. If there was really an effort to pad his record with easy fights, he would not have been matched against JMM, someone who has proved to give him trouble fight after fight.

2. The alternative fights he could have taken are just as open if not more open to critisism from people looking to find fault. Could you provide some examples of fighters Pacquiao maybe ducked instead of fighting the people he fought? When he fought hatton should he have fought Malinaggi instead? Or when he fought cotto, should he have fought clottey or bradley instead at that time? The alternatives I hear being thrown around are very weak arguements that Pacquiao took an easy matchmaker paved road.

Consider this, with any of the alternative fights you suggest manny should have fought, would there be any possibility that those people would get discredited as good "matchmaking" fights as well?

3. The whole leftover argument is weak. Everyone is someones leftover, and if credit is only reserved for fighters who beat undefeated fighters, then by that standard, Ali, SRR, SRL, Duran, and all the other greats shouldn't get much credit since they all fought peoples leftovers. Consider this: ODLH was a hopkins leftover, Zab was a baldomir leftover, cotto was a pacquiao leftover, Jose Luis Castillio was an Alvarez leftover and the list goes on. Fighting someone who has a loss, does not make that fight any less challenging.


are these boxers were the best on their divisions and were at their comfortable weights? Its a big NO. therefore its a product of a great matchmaking.

_________________
The best thing about
the future is that it only
comes one day at a
time


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 6:01 pm 
Offline
Light Heavyweight

Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 12:03 pm
Posts: 1038
Being a real sportsman in time of defeat is one thing that we can consider to be the G.O.A.T.
despite of being cheated he didn't complain against judges nor expresses grudges to the referee. He warmly congratulated his opponent win or lose.

Manny as a man of boxing sport is realistic candidate to be an example of not only for the youth but for all people. He sealed eight titles in eight different division that no one were able to achieve not even Robinson.


Last edited by Indomitable_Soldier on Mon Dec 24, 2012 6:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 6:02 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 10:56 am
Posts: 18695
Location: Paradise
MMAPinoy wrote:
I'm not convinced with the matchmaking argument for a couple reasons:

1. He was faced pitted against JMM, the fighter that his given him the most trouble over and over again. If there was really an effort to pad his record with easy fights, he would not have been matched against JMM, someone who has proved to give him trouble fight after fight.

2. The alternative fights he could have taken are just as open if not more open to critisism from people looking to find fault. Could you provide some examples of fighters Pacquiao maybe ducked instead of fighting the people he fought? When he fought hatton should he have fought Malinaggi instead? Or when he fought cotto, should he have fought clottey or bradley instead at that time? The alternatives I hear being thrown around are very weak arguements that Pacquiao took an easy matchmaker paved road.

Consider this, with any of the alternative fights you suggest manny should have fought, would there be any possibility that those people would get discredited as good "matchmaking" fights as well?

3. The whole leftover argument is weak. Everyone is someones leftover, and if credit is only reserved for fighters who beat undefeated fighters, then by that standard, Ali, SRR, SRL, Duran, and all the other greats shouldn't get much credit since they all fought peoples leftovers. Consider this: ODLH was a hopkins leftover, Zab was a baldomir leftover, cotto was a pacquiao leftover, Jose Luis Castillio was an Alvarez leftover and the list goes on. Fighting someone who has a loss, does not make that fight any less challenging.

THe leftover crap was started by Floid and his Flomos just took off with it .
Funny thing about flomos is they even talk like Floid.
Shane Mosley was Viper's leftover. TWICE.
Ortiz was Maidana's leftover.
Cotto was Pac's leftover.
Those 3 fought Floidy and have had zero wins since. Were they in prime when they fought Floidy ? He didn't exactly beat them up worse than the guys who beat them before.
Zab was KT's chicken dance leftover.
Baldomir was a bum with some 11 losses before fighting Floidy.
Floidy wasn't too thrilled to fight Margarito and Cotto, was he.
Wait, different promoters excuse. Wait, that only applies to Pac. Wait...

Fact is, Hopkins and Pac are probably the only two champions the last decade who won multiple titles on the road as underdogs .
Pac beating Sasakul in Thailand and MAB in Texas would be equal to Floidy going to Argentina to fight Martinez. Hell, I don't think Floidy would be some some 6-1 underdog against Martinez.
The Oscar fight and these day after geniuses have all these excuse for Oscar. Who da fkk was the heavy underdog before the fight ? Pac was some 3-1 underdog and ALL HATERS picked Oscar to win . Even after the weigh-in.
The Ricky Hatton wasn't so great debate is bull kaka . He was 45-1 and the only other notable at 140 then was Bradley. Remember the Naomi Campbell whining Pac ducked me , bullcrap ? Neither one would have survived the prime Pac at 140.

MAB, Morales, JMM and Cotto all won belts AFTER Pac beat them.
Haters want people to forget that fact. All four will likely make it to the hall of fame. How many future hall of famers has Pac KD'd and KO'd ?
4 lineal belts ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 6:09 pm 
Offline
Light Heavyweight

Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 12:03 pm
Posts: 1038
Left over issue is a weak reason for underestimating the fighter.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 6:13 pm 
Offline
Cruiserweight
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 2:47 pm
Posts: 2910
Indomitable_Soldier wrote:
Being a real sportsman in time of defeat is one thing that we can consider to be the G.O.A.T.
despite of being cheated he didn't complain against judges nor expresses grudges to the referee. He warmly congratulated his opponent win or lose.

Manny as a man of boxing sport is realistic candidate to be an example for being the G.O,A.T. He sealed eight titles in eight different division that no one were able to achieve not even Robinson.



very true, some of here are pretending to be blind about what pac achieve breaking boxing record in championships up to the pay per view sales, and his also been only a few boxer to able to fight different races of boxers, ex, russian chinese, japanese, korean, thailander, australian, indonesian, puerto rican, dominican republic, mexican, european, african, american, black american,about 80 percent of his opponent were different race, now that this thing pac has been doing about his personal life people despise him they say bad things just bcoz they are too personal on pac on how he should act on personal life and stuff like that, all of pac achievements will be erase just bcoz he acts differently according to the so called boxing experts as if they are the one who is fighting the one who eats leather the one to get hurt on fight night, pls give pac a break pac didnt bring philippine boxing this far to leave him now that his suffering upsets, thats how life is thats how boxing is what more if you die you are forgotten your just no one that live this world.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 7:38 am 
Offline
Welterweight
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:53 pm
Posts: 204
Location: San Francisco
mauragon wrote:
MMAPinoy wrote:
I'm not convinced with the matchmaking argument for a couple reasons:

1. He was faced pitted against JMM, the fighter that his given him the most trouble over and over again. If there was really an effort to pad his record with easy fights, he would not have been matched against JMM, someone who has proved to give him trouble fight after fight.

2. The alternative fights he could have taken are just as open if not more open to critisism from people looking to find fault. Could you provide some examples of fighters Pacquiao maybe ducked instead of fighting the people he fought? When he fought hatton should he have fought Malinaggi instead? Or when he fought cotto, should he have fought clottey or bradley instead at that time? The alternatives I hear being thrown around are very weak arguements that Pacquiao took an easy matchmaker paved road.

Consider this, with any of the alternative fights you suggest manny should have fought, would there be any possibility that those people would get discredited as good "matchmaking" fights as well?

3. The whole leftover argument is weak. Everyone is someones leftover, and if credit is only reserved for fighters who beat undefeated fighters, then by that standard, Ali, SRR, SRL, Duran, and all the other greats shouldn't get much credit since they all fought peoples leftovers. Consider this: ODLH was a hopkins leftover, Zab was a baldomir leftover, cotto was a pacquiao leftover, Jose Luis Castillio was an Alvarez leftover and the list goes on. Fighting someone who has a loss, does not make that fight any less challenging.


are these boxers were the best on their divisions and were at their comfortable weights? Its a big NO. therefore its a product of a great matchmaking.



Interesting that you don't name the alternatives. If you are in a position to say that the fighters he fought were hand picked, than surely you can name the better alternatives. I think you may be hesitant to provide those names because in the end if you are to look at the landscape objectively you would have to admit Pacquiaos opponents as legitimate. I'm not saying you won't be able to come up with names, all I am saying is that those names wouldn't be a clear cut "more worthy" alternative to who Pacquiao ended up fighting.

Let me give you examples of my point:

* Cotto was the best in his division and the champion
* the only people who could be considered on the same level were clottey and margarito
* Pacquiao did not duck either of those two
* If you go back to that time frame the only other people in the running were names like Malanaggi and Yuri Foreman. If you are saying that Pacquiao took the easy road by dodging Yuri Foreman and Malanaggi then it may be pointless to even have a disscussion because there is no way I can be convinced that Foreman/Malanaggi is better than cotto, clottey, or margarito .

* Also my point still stands that if there truly was an effort to give pacquiao the easy road, he would not be matched over and over again against JMM.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 7:52 am 
Offline
Welterweight
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:53 pm
Posts: 204
Location: San Francisco
JoeyInCali wrote:
MMAPinoy wrote:
I'm not convinced with the matchmaking argument for a couple reasons:

1. He was faced pitted against JMM, the fighter that his given him the most trouble over and over again. If there was really an effort to pad his record with easy fights, he would not have been matched against JMM, someone who has proved to give him trouble fight after fight.

2. The alternative fights he could have taken are just as open if not more open to critisism from people looking to find fault. Could you provide some examples of fighters Pacquiao maybe ducked instead of fighting the people he fought? When he fought hatton should he have fought Malinaggi instead? Or when he fought cotto, should he have fought clottey or bradley instead at that time? The alternatives I hear being thrown around are very weak arguements that Pacquiao took an easy matchmaker paved road.

Consider this, with any of the alternative fights you suggest manny should have fought, would there be any possibility that those people would get discredited as good "matchmaking" fights as well?

3. The whole leftover argument is weak. Everyone is someones leftover, and if credit is only reserved for fighters who beat undefeated fighters, then by that standard, Ali, SRR, SRL, Duran, and all the other greats shouldn't get much credit since they all fought peoples leftovers. Consider this: ODLH was a hopkins leftover, Zab was a baldomir leftover, cotto was a pacquiao leftover, Jose Luis Castillio was an Alvarez leftover and the list goes on. Fighting someone who has a loss, does not make that fight any less challenging.

THe leftover crap was started by Floid and his Flomos just took off with it .
Funny thing about flomos is they even talk like Floid.
Shane Mosley was Viper's leftover. TWICE.
Ortiz was Maidana's leftover.
Cotto was Pac's leftover.
Those 3 fought Floidy and have had zero wins since. Were they in prime when they fought Floidy ? He didn't exactly beat them up worse than the guys who beat them before.
Zab was KT's chicken dance leftover.
Baldomir was a bum with some 11 losses before fighting Floidy.
Floidy wasn't too thrilled to fight Margarito and Cotto, was he.
Wait, different promoters excuse. Wait, that only applies to Pac. Wait...

Fact is, Hopkins and Pac are probably the only two champions the last decade who won multiple titles on the road as underdogs .
Pac beating Sasakul in Thailand and MAB in Texas would be equal to Floidy going to Argentina to fight Martinez. Hell, I don't think Floidy would be some some 6-1 underdog against Martinez.
The Oscar fight and these day after geniuses have all these excuse for Oscar. Who da fkk was the heavy underdog before the fight ? Pac was some 3-1 underdog and ALL HATERS picked Oscar to win . Even after the weigh-in.
The Ricky Hatton wasn't so great debate is bull kaka . He was 45-1 and the only other notable at 140 then was Bradley. Remember the Naomi Campbell whining Pac ducked me , bullcrap ? Neither one would have survived the prime Pac at 140.

MAB, Morales, JMM and Cotto all won belts AFTER Pac beat them.
Haters want people to forget that fact. All four will likely make it to the hall of fame. How many future hall of famers has Pac KD'd and KO'd ?
4 lineal belts ?



EXACTLY! The leftover excuse has got to be exposed. I kind wish Roach or maybe someone in the media would call it out because it is nonsensical. Also if anyone has benefited from matchmaking it was FMJ, he has been around that weight class for much longer and has avoided the top names in that weight class like Margarito and Cotto (until he was much slower). The alternatives for Pacquiao like you mentioned are Campbell and names like Yuri Foreman (far from being better alternatives to the fighters pacquiao ended up fighting) :?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 8:00 am 
Offline
Cruiserweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 6:39 am
Posts: 2315
rhad wrote:

Really who told you?

There were worse boxing controversies then compare nowadays don't you think politics was one of the cause of those
Hagler has been calling Leonard for so long to fight but the latter just ignore and waited for the right opportunity to fight
the former, don't you think his promoter has nothing to do with that?

Ali bounced back from a devastating loss from Frazier and Norton of course with the help of his promoter, Ali got 5M
in fighting Foreman you compare that in present value maybe it's 3 to 5x bigger.

That cash cow thing has been going on for decades, promoting/match making is the business side of the sport and they are making lots of money ever since.

You say boxing is on the decline, maybe one of the reason is politics. Politics is everywhere 8)

Excellent boxing skills + good match making = greatness, fame and fortune



I said boxing doesnt have politics compared nowadays, meaning there's also politics before BUT much worse nowadays.

Before there were no CATCHWEIGHTS, no PAPER BELTS, only the BEST FIGHTING THE BEST!!! Only for FAME, PRIDE, and DIGNITY (some money involve of course) So its LESS politics back then isnt it???

I agree when you said that Ali only got paid $5 Million when he fought Foreman but come on man, that was during the 70's. $5Million back then was a BIG amount of money.

Yeah politics is everywhere thats why its not good for the sports of boxing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 8:05 am 
Offline
Cruiserweight
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 2:47 pm
Posts: 2910
NO MATTER WHAT THE PACHATERS SAY PAC HAS ACHIEVE NEVER BEFORE DONE BY A BOXER, 8 DIVISION CHAMPIONS, FIGHTER OF THE DECADE, 3 TIME FIGHTER OF THE YEAR 2 TIME TOP 1 RANK POUND FOR POUND FIGHTER ALIVE, 5 CONSECUTIVE YEARS TO TOP ATLEAST 1 MILLION PPV BUYS IN MODERN BOXING TELEVISION, HIS NAME IS PRINTED IN HISTORY OF BOXING, HIS ACHIEVEMENTS ARE HARD TO MATCH FOR GENERATIONS, HIS EXCITING BULL RAGING BUZZSAW STYLE OF FIGHT MAKE PEOPLES MONEYS WORTH TO WATCH


Last edited by reynerose on Tue Dec 25, 2012 8:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 8:06 am 
Offline
Cruiserweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 6:39 am
Posts: 2315
arch3d wrote:


I think your wrong, boxing was full of politics even in the 60,s...you just have to google it...



I didnt say that theres no politics back then.

There is politics of course BUT it's WORSE nowadays.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 8:46 am 
Offline
Light Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 4:36 am
Posts: 1263
So to all you aspiring boxers, remember to get KO'd brutally and cry hardest for you to get elevated to the GOAT trophy!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 11:06 am 
Offline
Light Heavyweight

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:53 am
Posts: 1187
BelowTheBelt wrote:
So to all you aspiring boxers, remember to get KO'd brutally and cry hardest for you to get elevated to the GOAT trophy!


ryt on the button. Perhaps the TS is living somewhere. wheres on earth that boxer who suffered a brutal, devastating and life threathening KO will elevate his status as GOAT? Sorry TS, i cant find any logic on this one. You might be living on the other side of the world.

_________________
The best thing about
the future is that it only
comes one day at a
time


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC + 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: itimtubig, patambay, Yahoo [Bot] and 26 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

philboxing.com | pinoygreats.com
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group