I am a PAC FAN and a filipino i admire pac because of his courage and braveness showing filipino toughness most specially in the ring. Not offending those fans that only see pac's victories and its knock-out prowess which at the end might leave behind some inner questions(in my opinion) like "Is Pacquiao really good as morales in terms of skills and abilities?". i have no doubt the pacquiao has a a high knockout percentage, has good straight punches, has fast punching abilities, has good fighting heart. but watching on my vcd's PAC vs EM I and II all over again PAC still has unresolve pride of puting much much good domination in every round i mean i don't get it! MORALES and BARRERA at their prime? and many critics always throwing the believe of EM loss because his old and having weight problems? calculating every round domination in favor to morales? i think he is not figthing like( he's inferno chaos against MAB) against morales . i would say and i hope PAC will put domination show and no mercy to morales not just looking for a UD wins but a power to shut-off morales pride of being the greatest and shut-off critics as well.
Well i know some of us already read articles critisizing PAC's abilities and most of it mislittle PAC as one of the best in boxing. i read most of this articles and this time the below article might tell us general evaluation about THE PACMAN.
By Matt Wells: In his religiously divided native country, Filipino Manny Pacquiao just may be bigger than Jesus and Allah combined. Yet what are those of us who have not made him into a false idol to make of the young phenom? The answer to that question may not yet be certain.
With his third fight against Erik Morales just hours away, many fans and pundits see a Pacquiao win as a foregone conclusion. They look at Morales and they see an old, broken fighter whose best days are long behind him. They look at his 1-3 record in his past four fights and see no reason to believe he can turn things around this time. But does that mean that they think that Pacquiao is as good as his supporters believe him to be? That's another question that's hard to answer.
With Pacquiao, we have something that's a bit of a rare thing in boxing right now: a young fighter drowning in die-hard supporters. His countrymen, yes, but also legions of boxing fans elsewhere. People love the guy. They thrill at his every triumph, and make excuses when he comes up short. If you criticize him, they think you're either jealous or stupid. In the presence of such a worshipper, you question the Gospel of Manny Pacquiao at your own risk.
Sure, there are plenty of fighters that have decent fan bases, but there's a difference between liking a particular pugilist and adoring one to the point where you worship the ground he walks on. Roy Jones Jr., Arturo Gatti, and, in the UK, Ricky Hatton, have built us these kinds of followings. Bernard Hopkins and Oscar De La Hoya did pretty well for themselves. Ditto Morales and Marco Antonio Barrera. But apart from Hatton (who is a bit of a question mark right now), these guys are all retired, or are getting there fast. Floyd Mayweather impresses in the ring, but he loses in the PR battles. Other fighters come and go and don't get much attention beyond boxing's core fans. But Pacquiao is different. He is a superstar with years of fighting still ahead of him, if all goes well.
But will all go well? The loyalists see Saturday's tilt as nothing much to sweat over. Morales took a pounding last time out, right? Manny laid into him in the opening seconds and never let up. The old man was lucky to hang around as long as he did. At least that's how you might think the fight went if you listened too much to these people.
As for the first fight against Morales, will, Manny came up short, but the loyalists attribute that one to a little controversy we might call "Winning-gate". Murad Muhammad, Pacquiao's former promoter, had signed a contract that stipulated that his charge had to wear Winning brand gloves rather than the ones made by Reyes that he was used to. Reyes are puncher's gloves, while Winning's are pillows with laces attached. At least that's how the argument goes. The point is, Pacquiao didn't have his KO power when he went up against the slick Morales, and therefore was at a considerable disadvantage.
Sometimes the loyalists are right; the Reyes gloves certainly may have made a difference the second time around. But you can't say that better gloves were the only reason that Pacquiao was able to win that one. A closer examination of the fight, in fact, will reveal that he was actually in major trouble for much of the time in the middle rounds, and that for a while the outcome was very much in doubt. It was only towards the end that he was able to regroup and dominate Morales so easily.
For a long time, the fight looked very much like a carbon copy of their first encounter. The first round was initially a showcase for Pacquiao, who sent the crowd (or at least that part of it that supported him) into a frenzy by connecting on Morales several times with his patented stinging straight left. This was the sort of action that at first made the first fight look like it was going to be won in a walk by the young southpaw. The difference this time, though, was that Pacquiao was mixing hooks in with his lefts, and showing more creativity offensively than he does normally. The result was that he was able to carry his momentum into the second frame, and had Morales seriously hurt with a little under a minute to go.
However, at that point, Morales was able to get the fight going in his favour, just as he had done before. He got moving again, and used his jab to keep his opponent at bay. The frustrated Pacquiao seemed to lose his focus, and the hook disappeared. He once again became the sort of one-dimensional fighter that his detractors claim him to be. Plodding along, shooting out his left hand ineffectively, it seemed as if Morales was going to cruise to another victory.
Of course, the momentum shifted once again. In the sixth, Pacquiao seemed to wake up just at the moment that Morales was beginning to tire. It was his left that served him well once more, but only because he regained the ability to throw combinations that he appeared to have lost a few rounds earlier. A multi-punch flurry with a little over a minute to go in the stanza seemed to slow down Morales considerably. Another combination of shots in the late going in the sixth nearly knocked him right over, and as he staggered back to his corner it was obvious that Pacquiao had taken control of the fight.
The rest was really academic, as Pacquiao chased the weary Morales relentlessly for much of the rest of the bout. The knockdowns in the tenth came as no surprise. But the result of this fight, despite the claims made by Pacquiao's adoring fans, does not definitely prove anything about their fighter. The main question to be asked is this: was the win a result of Pacquaio's superior skill, or Morales' advancing age and decreasing stamina?
The answer carries implications both for this fight and for Pacquiao's career in general. Morales is a hall-of-fame fighter, and a victory over him is an accomplishment in and of itself, regardless of what condition the veteran may be in these days. But was the loss the result of inferior conditioning that caught up to him? His camp would have you believe that, and they are trying to do what they can now to rectify the situation. By all accounts, Morales is in much better shape this time around than he was in the second fight. Now, the advantages he may gain from this could be mitigated by the fact that he has to struggle so much now to get down to 130 pounds. But there's still a chance he won't get so tired so quickly like he did last time.
The issue for Pacquiao, then, will be how he reacts if Morales is more mobile this time. Will he still be able to use his power and aggression to overpower him? Perhaps more importantly, will he be able to maintain his composure if Morales proves to be more elusive in the ring? You could, if you wanted to, make the argument that Pacquiao has lost every round against Morales in which Erik was able to move around the ring effectively. Pacquiao's fans will say that Erik was slowed by the punishment he absorbed, not because he wore himself out. But it's hard to draw the line definitively either way.
But all this speculation may merely be academic. Morales may simply not have the energy anymore to compete with a fighter like Pacquiao. If that's the case, he will probably crumble down the stretch once again. But that still leaves the issue of Pacquiao's abilities unresolved. How good is he if he can only beat an older, worn-down version of Morales?
The answer to this question is that Pacquiao is at least a very good fighter. Good enough to beat Barrera handily back in 2003, when Barrera was on something of a roll. This fight is always the trump card that the Pacquiao loyalists pull out when the critics come out. But how fair is it to base so much on one fight?
Pacquiao looked great against Barrera, no question. But the next time out he took on Juan Manuel Marquez, and the result was mixed. He looked great in the opening round, as he did both times against Morales, but, like in the first fight with Morales, he faded down the stretch. When he is on his game, Marquez can be one the trickiest fighters in the sport, and he used all the tools in his repertoire to get a draw against Pacquiao.
Of course Manny's fans will point out that he would have won that fight were it not for the misguided scoring of Burt Clements, who gave Pacquiao a 10-7 score in the first round when he deserved 10-6 for getting three knockdowns. But that technicality does not change the fact that Pacquiao let Marquez get back into the fight when by all accounts he should have been down and out. You can credit Marquez for his valiant effort and determination; you can also fault Pacquiao for failing to finish the job.
The rest of Pacquiao's recent resume is also something of a mixed bag. He beat Oscar Larios in July of this year, but failed to KO his smaller opponent, despite dominating for most of the fight. In September of 2005 he took out Hector Velazquez, but did not exactly look good doing so (though at least he did better than Morales, who fought the same night and dropped his fight against Zahir Raheem). He is winning, but he is not doing so entirely convincingly.
What Pacquiao needs to do at this point in his career is demonstrate that he is able to fight consistently at a high level. If all goes according to plan, a second win over Morales will be a solid first step. But the important point to stress here is that this win will not be enough to entirely silence his critics. So what can he do to solidify his legacy? Barrera is once again waiting in the wings. His workmanlike second win over Rocky Juarez was nothing special, but it did prove that he is still able to wipe out a young opponent with inferior abilities. Normally a rematch after such a lopsided loss the first time around would not be necessary, but the situation here might be a bit different. There are still many who believe that Barrera just had an "off night", and deserves a second shot at the only man to knock him out of a fight before the closing bell. It remains to be seen if the general public will buy into such a match, but it probably can be made if both parties are so inclined.
There is still the matter of the Morales fight to deal with, of course. If Pacquiao can pick up where he left off last time, he should be fine. After that, he will still have more work to do to justify the legendary status bestowed on him by his legions of fans.
SO? I hope i, im not offending fellow PAC FANS this i think we should be extra real? so what can u say?