Pacland's Philippine Boxing Forum

Discussion on boxing and other sports, Filipino greats and anything under the sun.
It is currently Sun Oct 20, 2019 12:52 am

All times are UTC + 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 383 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 26  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 10:40 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight

Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:03 pm
Posts: 6369
Quote:
In relation to Emmanuel53 questions, I offer the following clarificatory statements about the catchweight in Miguel Cotto’s case.

1. Manny fought Cotto at a catchweight of 145 for the 147 title for reason that Manny has never fought a full Welterweight and Manny is P4P and cash King.

2. In a proposed Pac Cotto 2, the fight was shot down not because of weight but based on skills only. Manny’s camp thinks he can beat Cotto at 154, no catchweight.

3. In Pac-Cotto 2, I stipulated that if Cotto has grown to be a walking Super MW (168), can cut weight and be fighting at 154 – Manny can ask Cotto for a catchweight of say, 152 to narrow the advantage for Cotto who may come at a comfortable 165 lbs as against Manny’s 150. The fight would still be a legitimate 154 bout.

4. In the Pac-Margo match-up, again the bigger Margo can cut to 151 catchweight and be fighting at a comfortable 165 compared to Manny’s 150 at fight night. THIS IS AS LEGITIMATE (THOUGH STILL DISADVANTAGEOUS FOR PACMAN) AS A DAY OF FIGHT WEIGH-IN IN ANY RULE BOOK OF BOXING. The consideration on skills apply only on what is to be the agreed weight. If Manny thinks he can beat Margo at a 151 catchweight, then he negotiates and agrees to it.



The above statements don't clarify the issues. On the contrary, they further muddle them.

First, you forget that Manny fought Oscar at 147 lbs. and actually made the fight appear one sided. Oscar is even bigger than Cotto
and based on that performance, it would be safe to say that even if Oscar was allowed to come in at his most comfortable weight., Pacquiao would still be competitive. More importantly it gave you a preview of how Manny would perform against the bigger guys.

Secondly, Pacquiao utterly destroyed Hatton who also campaigned in the welterweight ranks. It took Mayweather, who was consensus pound for pound king , ten rounds to finish Hatton at welterweight. In contrast, Manny barely broke a sweat in that fight. And the kayo punch provided a visible portent of things to come even in the higher weight classes.

Thirdly, you admitted that Manny's skills shot down the proposed second fight against Cotto. These are the same skills which Manny possesses at 147 lbs., so you actually haven't given the justification for the catchweight at 145 lbs. On the contrary, you shot down that argument yourself. Moreover, no matter what stipulations you raise for that proposed second fight against Cotto on weight considerations, THE UNDENIABLE FACT IS IT'S STILL OVER 147 LBS. And same day weigh ins, walking weights, another catchweight, doesn't change that fact.

Fourthly, how can " the consideration of skills apply only on what is to be the agreed weight." In their prime, the skills of a boxer are omnipresent provided they come in great condition. You just admitted that Manny's skills are the same at 147 lbs. and 151 or 154 lbs. so how can this consideration apply only to the agreed weight. Skills transcends weight classes and that is precisely the reason why there are boxers apart from Manny who won titles in different weight classes.

Lastly, I give as an example the Sturm vs. Oscar fight as compared to the Oscar vs. Hopkins contest. Delahoya won the WBO middleweight title over Sturm at the full middleweight limit of 160. pounds, albeit in a controversial fashion. In a unification bout against Hopkins, the fight was held at a catchweight limit of 158 lbs. Sturm, fought most of his bouts at middleweight and is actually still campaigning as a middlweight and thus is as legitimate a middleweight as any boxer out there. So what in the world prompted
Oscar to fight Hopkins at a catchweight?[/quote]

All your statements are your opinions. The question is, do they prove a catchweight fight is not legitimate as implied in these statements?:

helven wrote:
Now tell me, what possible redemption could there be - personal or political - in two historic catchweight wins 50 years from now? Stop living the hype that Manny once fought at Flyweight. He is a legitimate welterweight now as anybody out there. Leniency is relative to the circumstances. Manny, himself, is actually giving those historians something to diminish about his legacy. For whatever it's worth in the final reckoning, he did it so with consent even if Arum, WBC and Texas Boxing Commission are partly to blame.[/quote]


You are funny you know. And what are we discussing here - are these not opinions? Your opinion, my opinion, Helven's opinion. If there is certainty in everything, then there would be no argument or discussion in the first place.

But I'll give you some facts. Your logic that "the consideration of skills apply on what is to be the agreed weight" sucks big time. Is that not an OPINION ON YOUR PART TOO?The prime example is Manny. How many times have you read that Manny CARRIED HIS SPEED AND POWER THRU THE WEIGHT CLASSES AND HAS IN FACT IMPROVED HIS OVERALL BOXING SKILLS ? Was Pernell Whitaker less evasive in the welterweight class in his prime, than in the lightweight division where he began? And didn't the Sturm vs Oscar fight take place at the full division limit as compared to the Oscar vs. Hopkins fight which took place at a catchweight? How can you even make that TYPE OF A RETORT IF YOU REPRESENT YOURSELF AS A RATIONAL AND THINKING BOXING FAN? If THAT TYPE OF STATEMENT MIRRORS YOUR THINKING PROCESS, THEN YOU'RE A BOXING PSEUDO-EXPERT WANNABE.
And please don't divert the issues as you're wont to do under duress. I just answered the points which were directed at me. I am giving the courtesy to Helven who's more than capable of defending his position.
Now I'm awaiting your retort on those points which you raised.[/quote]


Emmanuel 53 says:
I never had the tendency to heap praise on myself in the past nor keep score on any running arguments. This is the first time I'm going to say this in Pacland. - I RECKON I'VE WHIPPED YOUR *** BIG TIME AND ANYBODY OUT THERE WHO THINKS OTHERWISE CAN HAVE THEIR SAY ON THIS MATTER.
I'M SIMPLY TIRED OF ARGUING WITH SOMEBODY WHO HAS A MESSIANIC COMPLEX AND PROCLAIMS HIMSELF AS HAVING A MISSION IN PACLAND.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 10:43 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:53 pm
Posts: 6150
reigncourts wrote:
helven wrote:
reigncourts wrote:
helven wrote:
Now tell me, what possible redemption could there be - personal or political - in two historic catchweight wins 50 years from now? Stop living the hype that Manny once fought at Flyweight. He is a legitimate welterweight now as anybody out there. Leniency is relative to the circumstances. Manny, himself, is actually giving those historians something to diminish about his legacy. For whatever it's worth in the final reckoning, he did it so with consent even if Arum, WBC and Texas Boxing Commission are partly to blame.


What do you quote me for?


I said your statement implies a catchweight is not legitimate since it has no redemption value or whatever you mean by that.



Here, in case you get lost searching for my statements.
viewtopic.php?f=104&t=176886&start=45&st=0&sk=t&sd=a


reigncourts wrote:
This question on your understanding of what a catchweight aim to achieve begs for a resolution. I treat an agreed catchweight as perfectly legitimate not only for non title fights but more so on big boxing events. It is being applied in boxing to forestall the need to go back to 'day of fight weigh-ins'. I said you misinterpreted its meaning since you refer to it as non legit and this led to confusion in our arguments.


Please produce the statement where i said catchweight is non legit. Please do me that favor. You really have trouble understanding a simple explanation, let alone the textbook definition of catchweight as it applies to actual agreement between two fighters - opting not to fight at a designated weight division limit (say 150 lbs., Pac-Margo) and those opting to fight at a designated weight limit albeit they must weigh in on the same day of the fight (ex. 160 lbs., Hagler- Leonard).

If you're misinterpreting my refusal to support the proposed 150 lbs. light middleweight fight between Pac vs. Margo as something illegitimate, you're mistaken! On the surface, it's a legit catchweight bout by all means but in the manner it's being manipulated and abused is wrong! Twice in a row for Manny is a clear exploitation of catchweight privilege cloaked in the guise of historic significance. And to think, WBC connived with Top Rank to bypass the most worthy challengers who should be disputing the vacant WBC light middleweight title. If you think i'm contradicting myself - again, the burden of proof is for you to show my statement that says Pac vs. Margo is non legit.


reigncourts wrote:
An example is when I said the Leonard - Hagler fight can be considered as a catch weight in the sense that Sugar Ray asked for a day of fight weigh-in, You instantly protested claiming the fight is a legitimate Middleweight bout. Of course it is a legit bout since Leonard was challenging Hagler for his MW title and asking for a day of weigh-in does not alter that. And why should it appear in your list of catchweight fights when I say it can be considered for comparison purposes? So, again I ask you to resolve the disagreement. Make a stand, is catchweight legitimate or not?


The highlighted statement above speaks so much of your ignorance. Your penchant for interpreting historic fights with special clauses to fit your own logic is truly pathetic. For the nth time i repeat...

Asking for a same day weigh in to fight for a specific weight division limit is not within the bounds of catchweight definition. Regardless if the challenger begs for it. Had Leonard demanded Hagler to fight at 158 lbs., THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE PERFECT EPITOME of catchweight zone because the bargain is below the specific middleweight, 160 lbs. limit.

_________________
"PaiN MaKEs tHE MaN"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 10:49 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 12:31 pm
Posts: 4713
Location: City of Angels, Pamp
Emmanuel53 wrote:
You are funny you know. And what are we discussing here - are these not opinions? Your opinion, my opinion, Helven's opinion. If there is certainty in everything, then there would be no argument or discussion in the first place.

But I'll give you some facts. Your logic that "the consideration of skills apply on what is to be the agreed weight" sucks big time. Is that not an OPINION ON YOUR PART TOO?The prime example is Manny. How many times have you read that Manny CARRIED HIS SPEED AND POWER THRU THE WEIGHT CLASSES AND HAS IN FACT IMPROVED HIS OVERALL BOXING SKILLS ? Was Pernell Whitaker less evasive in the welterweight class in his prime, than in the lightweight division where he began? How can you even make that TYPE OF A RETORT IF YOU REPRESENT YOURSELF AS A RATIONAL AND THINKING BOXING FAN?
And please don't divert the issues as you're wont to do under duress. I just answered the points which were directed at me. I am giving the courtesy to Helven who's more than capable of defending his position.
Now I'm awaiting your retort on those points which you raised.

Reigncourts reply:

You’re wrong on what an opinion is and what are stated as facts. When I say a Welter division is 140-1/4 to 147, that is a fact. A boxer who comes in 5 lbs. above his division is a cheater and has to be penalized, that’s a fact.

When Manny's camp shot down a Pac-Cotto because a rematch at this point is not exciting, that's fact and the fight did not push through.

When you say: First, you forget that Manny fought Oscar at 147 lbs. and actually made the fight appear one sided. Oscar is even bigger than Cotto, that’s the most opinionated statement I’ve read. And this is what’s causing the disagreement.
I state facts you answer with your opinions. When you debate, you have to be able to distinguish between facts and opinions.

_________________
I defend PAC on OSDT and Catchweight Issues; Not his Traditional Politics and Religious Exploits.

"Marcos, Hitler, Diktador, TUTA. Patalsikin ang bangkay ni Marcos sa LNMB". PATALSIKIN!!!
____


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 11:02 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight

Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:03 pm
Posts: 6369
[quote="reigncourts"]Emmanuel53 wrote:
You are funny you know. And what are we discussing here - are these not opinions? Your opinion, my opinion, Helven's opinion. If there is certainty in everything, then there would be no argument or discussion in the first place.

But I'll give you some facts. Your logic that "the consideration of skills apply on what is to be the agreed weight" sucks big time. Is that not an OPINION ON YOUR PART TOO?The prime example is Manny. How many times have you read that Manny CARRIED HIS SPEED AND POWER THRU THE WEIGHT CLASSES AND HAS IN FACT IMPROVED HIS OVERALL BOXING SKILLS ? Was Pernell Whitaker less evasive in the welterweight class in his prime, than in the lightweight division where he began? How can you even make that TYPE OF A RETORT IF YOU REPRESENT YOURSELF AS A RATIONAL AND THINKING BOXING FAN?
And please don't divert the issues as you're wont to do under duress. I just answered the points which were directed at me. I am giving the courtesy to Helven who's more than capable of defending his position.
Now I'm awaiting your retort on those points which you raised.

Reigncourts reply:

You’re wrong on what an opinion is and what are stated as facts. When I say a Welter division is 140-1/4 to 147, that is a fact. A boxer who comes in 5 lbs. above his division is a cheater and has to be penalized, that’s a fact.

When Manny's camp shot down a Pac-Cotto because a rematch at this point is not exciting, that's fact and the fight did not push through.

When you say: First, you forget that Manny fought Oscar at 147 lbs. and actually made the fight appear one sided. Oscar is even bigger than Cotto, that’s the most opinionated statement I’ve read. And this is what’s causing the disagreement.
I state facts you answer with your opinions. When you debate, you have to be able to distinguish between facts and opinions.[/quote

Emmanuel53 says:

" I state facts you answer with your opinions". " The consideration of skills apply on what is to be the agreed weight". The second Cotto vs. Pacquiao fight was shot down DUE TO SKILLS - These are just samples of your statements - ARE THESE FACTS?
I'M OUTTA HERE. NO USE ARGUING AGAINST SOMEBODY WHOSE EGO IS AS HUGE AS THE COWBOYS STADIUM.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 11:26 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:53 pm
Posts: 6150
reigncourts wrote:
REIGNCOURTS POSTINGS ON CATCHWEIGHTS:


1. Originally posted by Ninjamurf
Reference search http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f12/adcc- ... ndex2.html

The origin of day before weigh in's goes back to when boxing became a big media event in the late 60's, early 70's. Ali was a big part of it. Before that boxers were not only weighed in the "day of" but most were weighed in hours or minutes before the fight. But someone finally figured out, "hey, let's get these guys together the day BEFORE the fight, have them weigh in, do a little press conference, let them talk some smack, and we'll generate even MORE interest in this fight!" But, here's the rub. Back then no one cut. Everyone trained, got into shape, and fought in whatever weight class they NATURALLY belonged in. Not a single fighter bitched and whined about it. Why? Because they all fought at their natural weight anyway. It took a full decade or so before some boxers in the smaller weight classes finally said, "hmm, you know what? I could weigh in on Friday and then add a couple pounds before my fight on Saturday. That might give me an advantage?" Again, it was only a COUPLE of pounds "back in the day." Now fast forward to 2005. The advances in sports medicine and our knowledge of physiology has grown tremendously. Now we have people like Billy Rush who can help a fighter "weigh in" at one weight but actually get him ready to fight 20, 25, even 30 pounds heavier the next day. Technically this may all be "legal" (for all those of you who say it isn't cheating) but the fact is that they are still "gaming the system." I still don't understand how you can have a UFC Welterweight Title match...between 2 guys who enter the Octagon at 190lbs.? (see: GSP vs. Hughes.) Another one that burns me is when Riggs fought Hughes. Hughes weighed in, made 170 and sat down. Immediately began drinking his pedialyte and had a sandwich, power bars, etc. Riggs didn't make weight. Went away to cut. Came back and STILL didn't make weight. Weighed in at 173 I think? The rub? Hughes was sitting right there next to him and actually weighed MORE than Riggs did right at that moment. So what's so special about the weigh in? We have weight classes to try and ensure even matches between competitors who supposedly belong to that weight class. Why the day before? Why not a week before? Hell, I weighed 170 in High School, why can't I take that weight?



Remember that post of yours earlier from a certain source?
I WILL USE IT AGAINST YOU.

Remember also in the previous thread wherein you asked me about the origin of catchweight? I answered exactly the same thing...

helven wrote:
.....By all means, Leonard's asking for a weigh in on the same day is legitimate because they're both coming at the weight limit of 160 lbs. which is the Middleweight division. I repeat, if two boxers agree to come in at a weight limit of a specific weight class - it is a legitimate divisional title fight. The current practice of weighing in a day before the fight DID NOT ABOLISH the old tradition of SAME DAY WEIGH IN. We're presently adopting the modern practice in order promote the fight to a wider TV, live and PPV audience unlike before when it was merely restricted to radio and live attendance (prior to TV subscription debut). You're merely confusing yourself with the re hydration disadvantage you're seeing at Hagler when in fact it's an old age practice. And Hagler knew his body well, he was a conditioning freak. He never bulked up that much on fight night. Even Manny can do the same with anybody at lower weights depending on their arrangement. Not all weight concessions are considered "catch weight" OK? Leonard got a smaller purse in exchange for reverting to old school weigh in set up which is as legitimate as the present procedure as long as both parties consent to it.

A credible link that says it is indeed a catchweight Middleweight bout will strengthen your argument, so please, show me something. Goodluck if you can find one.



Here is your answer (from a source you probably don't understand) on what prompted the idea of catchweight to come to the fore...

reigncourts wrote:
Fighters of today, the article says, are gaming the system - cutting weight for a day before weigh-in and rehydrating 10 to 30 pounds on fight night. To prevent this some combat sports have reverted to day of fight, even hours before fight weigh-ins. And to think that in boxing people deride the use of catchweights when the correct rules are more stringent, that is the day of fight weigh-in.


Here's the link >>>> viewtopic.php?f=104&t=176886&start=45&st=0&sk=t&sd=a


You know what, THIS IS PERHAPS the most peculiar series of debates in Pacland. We're here in this thread and yet we're actually arguing on carryover issues from previous threads that you escaped from. Eventually, your inconsistencies are sprouting like mushrooms. Maybe, the web of complications are taking their toll on you now. Just heed my advice, stick around this time until the end because no way you're gonna win this argument by merely pasting links you don't understand. Sooner or later, it's gonna bite you in the a$$.

_________________
"PaiN MaKEs tHE MaN"


Last edited by helven on Thu Sep 02, 2010 11:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 11:27 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight

Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:03 pm
Posts: 6369
Quote:
Quote:
reigncourts wrote:
]When Manny's camp shot down a Pac-Cotto because a rematch at this point is not exciting, that's fact and the fight did not push through



Sorry but I can't help myself. The second Pacquiao vs. Cotto fight didn't push through. That's a fact but to say it won't be exciting is not a fact, it's an opinion held by the majority. Capish.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 12:06 am 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 12:31 pm
Posts: 4713
Location: City of Angels, Pamp
Helven wrote:
If you're misinterpreting my refusal to support the proposed 150 lbs. light middleweight fight between Pac vs. Margo as something illegitimate, you're mistaken! On the surface, it's a legit catchweight bout by all means but in the manner it's being manipulated and abused is wrong! Twice in a row for Manny is a clear exploitation of catchweight privilege cloaked in the guise of historic significance. And to think, WBC connived with Top Rank to bypass the most worthy challengers who should be disputing the vacant WBC light middleweight title. If you think i'm contradicting myself - again, the burden of proof is for you to show my statement that says Pac vs. Margo is non legit.


helven wrote:
Now tell me, what possible redemption could there be - personal or political - in two historic catchweight wins 50 years from now? Stop living the hype that Manny once fought at Flyweight. He is a legitimate welterweight now as anybody out there. Leniency is relative to the circumstances. Manny, himself, is actually giving those historians something to diminish about his legacy. For whatever it's worth in the final reckoning, he did it so with consent even if Arum, WBC and Texas Boxing Commission are partly to blame.

Helven wrote:
If you're misinterpreting my refusal to support the proposed 150 lbs. light middleweight fight between Pac vs. Margo as something illegitimate, you're mistaken! On the surface, it's a legit catchweight bout by all means but in the manner it's being manipulated and abused is wrong! Twice in a row for Manny is a clear exploitation of catchweight privilege cloaked in the guise of historic significance. And to think, WBC connived with Top Rank to bypass the most worthy challengers who should be disputing the vacant WBC light middleweight title. If you think i'm contradicting myself - again, the burden of proof is for you to show my statement that says Pac vs. Margo is non legit.

reigncourts replies:

For clarity, lets dissect further the case of Leonard and Manny’s fight against Hagler and Marga respectively;

In both events, boxers were being weighed-in day before the fights. This is an assumption since day before fight weigh-ins started with the advent of television to give way to televised weigh-ins.

1. Leonard asks for a day of the fight weigh-in ostensively to preclude both fighters coming in heavier if the weigh-in was made day before the fight. Result both at 160.

2. If Manny opted for a day of fight weigh-in (old rules never officially revised) both he and Marga would have weighed at 154 at fight time similar to Leonard vs Hagler.

3. But since the promoters would not forego the weigh-in hype of the fight Manny can demand a catchweight to be agreed on by both fighters. (Note: Margarito is obviously a lot bigger and have fought at 154 in the past). In this case Manny comes in at 150 (his max fighting form) and Margarito may be able to rehydrate to 160 lbs.

If the first example Leonard vs Hagler match up (both 160 lbs) is a legitimate day of fight weigh-in bout, it follows that the second example Manny vs Marga is as legitimate as the first. In the third example, Margo has a 10 lbs. advantage over Manny and yet you would not accept it as legitimate as the first or the second example. That’s why I said that instead of being criticized, Manny should be commended for fighting bigger opponents.

Todays boxing fans who are ignorant of these facts criticize the wins, but boxing experts and historians can see these and will be appreciated favorably on Manny’s side than degrade the titles. Leonard’s fifth title over Lalonde is always debatable because he never fought at Light Heavy.

In your highlighted statements above, I said they imply or questions the legitimacy of the catchweight titles.

_________________
I defend PAC on OSDT and Catchweight Issues; Not his Traditional Politics and Religious Exploits.

"Marcos, Hitler, Diktador, TUTA. Patalsikin ang bangkay ni Marcos sa LNMB". PATALSIKIN!!!
____


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 12:31 am 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:53 pm
Posts: 6150
reigncourts wrote:

For clarity, lets dissect further the case of Leonard and Manny’s fight against Hagler and Marga respectively;

In both events, boxers were being weighed-in day before the fights. This is an assumption since day before fight weigh-ins started with the advent of television to give way to televised weigh-ins.

1. Leonard asks for a day of the fight weigh-in ostensively to preclude both fighters coming in heavier if the weigh-in was made day before the fight. Result both at 160.

2. If Manny opted for a day of fight weigh-in (old rules never officially revised) both he and Marga would have weighed at 154 at fight time similar to Leonard vs Hagler.

3. But since the promoters would not forego the weigh-in hype of the fight Manny can demand a catchweight to be agreed on by both fighters. (Note: Margarito is obviously a lot bigger and have fought at 154 in the past). In this case Manny comes in at 150 (his max fighting form) and Margarito may be able to rehydrate to 160 lbs.

If the first example Leonard vs Hagler match up (both 160 lbs) is a legitimate day of fight weigh-in bout, it follows that the second example Manny vs Marga is as legitimate as the first. In the third example, Margo has a 10 lbs. advantage over Manny and yet you would not accept it as legitimate as the first or the second example. That’s why I said that instead of being criticized, Manny should be commended for fighting bigger opponents.

Todays boxing fans who are ignorant of these facts criticize the wins, but boxing experts and historians can see these and will be appreciated favorably on Manny’s side than degrade the titles. Leonard’s fifth title over Lalonde is always debatable because he never fought at Light Heavy.

In your highlighted statements above, I said they imply or questions the legitimacy of the catchweight titles.



If are still in doubt and you still don't get my point - just produce any other conclusive statement of mine to settle this once and for all. If you can't find anything, then, it's safe to assume that your reading comprehension failed you again.

_________________
"PaiN MaKEs tHE MaN"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 2:15 am 
Offline
Middleweight
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:27 pm
Posts: 595
Location: Worlwide
legacy again and again and again.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 4:58 am 
Offline
Light Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 11:02 am
Posts: 1050
Location: La La Land
it will enhance indeed his ALREADY solid Legacy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 7:11 am 
Offline
Heavyweight

Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:03 pm
Posts: 6369
I'd like to begin my comments on a quote I lifted from a previous discussion.

Quote:
On Margarito deserving the #2 ranking I said it was WBC’s hocus-pocus.


That single statement says a lot. It casts doubts on Margarito's title aspirations for the jr. middleweight crown because it
not only questions the legitimacy of his ascent in the rankings, it also demeans the reputation of the governing body. The author of that quote has even gone on record as calling the Mexican fighter, MARGACHEATO.

Legacy in this case is based on a historical account of Manny's ring exploits. As in the case with other great fighters, these accounts do not limit themselves to figures as in number of bouts, win/loss columns, ko's scored, titles won. More importantly, they delineate the circumstances surrounding significant bouts marking milestones in a fighter's career. Read boxing literature on the likes of Sugar Ray Robinson, Henry Armstrong, Roberto Duran, and you will be flooded with details on the most significant highlights of their respective careers.

An account on Manny's career should be no different. Our discussions on Manny's legacy are actually irrelevant unless they see print for public consumption. In this case, articles written by boxing scribes are the primary source of information in the future, in addition to video footages of his bouts.


The title of this thread reads - Will Manny win over Margo enhance his Legacy? What do the majority of boxing writers say. They are in unison calling the Mexican, Margacheato and this includes even Manny's most ardent supporters. Almost to a writer, everybody is saying that Manny took the fight for FIFTEEN MILLION REASONS. It doesn't help that the fight is being done at a catchweight, actually Manny's second in his last three fights. Apart from the hand wrap controversy, there is the issue of Margarito's two last fights which further underlines that the fighter got the title shot as a result of his connections.

Some bleeding hearts opine that Margarito deserves a second chance. I'm fine with that but Margarito has to prove himself first and earn that title shot. Did he? What has he done at jr. middleweight to leapfrog over such contenders as Alfredo Angulo, Kermit Cintron, Vanes Martirsoyon, Sergiy Dzinziruk. With one fight, and a pedestrian performance against a perceived patsy, Roberto Garcia, he effectively dislodged everybody else from their rightful position. If Manny was anyone of those mentioned contenders, wouldn't we be crying to the high heavens about the foulness of this deed? Would history be as blind to this travesty as some people are?

And how about the eight titles? If belts were the prime consideration in ranking all time greats, Delahoya and Sugar Ray Leonard would be at the top of the heap. Are they? Duran who lost to Leonard, Hearns and Benitez is even ranked a lot higher than his tormentors. Legacy is not a mere numbers game. Far from it, the legacy of a fighter is judged by the circumstances surrounding his exploits.

For me, this fight is an either or choice for Manny. Are you choosing the money or your legacy? Unfortunately he can't have it both ways. It's an oft quoted cliche but nonetheless apt for Manny's situation - You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Oh and by the way, guess who authored the statement which I quoted above. I bet most will be surprised.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 7:38 am 
Offline
Light Heavyweight

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 11:51 pm
Posts: 1869
Location: Earth
[quote="jr_PH"]No. Manny has nothing to prove fighting Margarcheato. It will not increase his stock. Manny even said he believe Margacheato knows about the illegal hand wrap. Why is he fighting a cheater then? It's illogical.


Illogical? Not really, it makes absolute business sense. Pocket a cool 15+ Mil to whomp on the 'Plastered Tornado'...sh*t why not? On top of that grab another belt in another weight class? It makes absolute sense depending on how you see it, though I will say that Marga should be banned but aside from Marga who else would have made business sense? This fight materializing shouldn't be a surprise to anyone, I mean c'mon Arum is Jewish.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 9:26 am 
Offline
Light Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:58 am
Posts: 1835
Location: Baltimore, MD
Damn reigncourts, you're a little bit too long winded for these forums. You create a book-size topic for a thread, then follow it up with an epic novel-size of another post to this lame thread. I say ho-hum. :snoring:

_________________
Integrity is a powerful word. I choose to live by it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 9:29 am 
Offline
Light Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:58 am
Posts: 1835
Location: Baltimore, MD
reigncourts wrote:
Following are excerpts of comments from thread titled
"Reason why Arum doesn't like Bradley, Berto, Williams"
for further discussions:
viewtopic.php?f=104&t=177395&hilit=
The discussions start after TS completes any remaining unanswered questions.

Die hard started:
Reason why ARUM doesn't like Bradley, Berto, Williams

To my fellow Paclanders,

Against the Grain: On the Pacquiao-Margarito Fight
LINK: http://thecruelestsport.com/2010/08/29/ ... ito-fight/ by Carlos Acevedo dated 29August 2010

Mars318 wrote:
Bradley, Berto, Williams have not fought big names while Margarito had fought guys like
Miguel Cotto
Paul Williams
Sergio Martinez
Joshua Clottey
Sugar Shane Mosley
Kermit Cintron
and 44 fights
and was ducked by Floyd Mayweather Jr

reigncourts
Boxing is business and sometimes dirty if not most of the time. Business dictates that in this fight Margarito should be treated as temporary ally to gain better PPVs for the Pacman. The fight is not only for the money and the 8th title but also to even up with Floyd's PPVs. Are we going to deny this to the Pacman?


Mars318 wrote:
Bradley, Berto, Williams have not fought big names while Margarito had fought guys like
Miguel Cotto
Paul Williams
Sergio Martinez
Joshua Clottey
Sugar Shane Mosley
Kermit Cintron

and 44 fights
and was ducked by Floyd Mayweather Jr.


I fully agree. Ask helven.

helven:
I'm right here. What's the question babe?

Reign, one of the main reasons why Floyd dismissed a clash with Margarito was his animosity with Bob Arum that time whom he accused of shortchanging him during their partnership. Floyd didn't want the Top Rank honcho to make more money at his expense and yeah, he disliked Margarito for insulting him in various occasions and he wouldn't reward him a huge payday. The $8million offer was seen as a mere smokescreen and he knew Bob Arum would earn more dough had he took the bait.

If you're so understanding of Arum's business decision to push thru with his top rank wards, think for a minute about Floyd's motives in turning down Margarito. If you're thinking Floyd did that solely out of fear, you're dead wrong. Use some business sense here the way you're embracing Arum's words as truths.

Reigncourts:
If we put it that way then, I was correct in my assessment since the first negotiations that a fight involving Bob Arum, Dela Hoya and Mayweather is doomed to fail. And since you are still using this argument, Floyd never ducked Margo and the Pacman-he just don't like Bobfather. Now, that's a lame excuse for the self proclaimed best to pick opponents. And here we are criticising Pac for taking the Margo fight and do what he is supposed to do. The critics ignore the fact Texas gave Margarito the license, not Pacquiao.


reigncourts wrote:
Boxing is business and sometimes dirty if not most of the time. Business dictates that in this fight Margarito should be treated as temporary ally to gain better PPVs for the Pacman. The fight is not only for the money and the 8th title but also to even up with Floyd's PPVs. Are we going to deny this to the Pacman?

helven
Since boxing is business and boxing dictates that Margarito deserves it more than anyone else - do you think he still deserves the shot if he wasn't a Top Rank guy based on his track record and marketability?

Justify.

reigncourts
Hard evidence to predict a PPV target? Give your numbers like Dr Love (?), and lets play the numbers game.

helven
If you're so understanding of Arum's business decision to push thru with his top rank wards, think for a minute about Floyd's motives in turning down Margarito. If you're thinking Floyd did that solely out of fear, you're dead wrong. Use some business sense here the way you're embracing Arum's words as truths.

reign
If we put it that way then, I was correct in my assessment since the first negotiations that a fight involving Bob Arum, Dela Hoya and Mayweather is doomed to fail. And since you are still using this argument, Floyd never ducked Margo and the Pacman-he just don't like Bobfather. Now, that's a lame excuse for the self proclaimed best to pick opponents. And here we are criticising Pac for taking the Margo fight and do what he is supposed to do. The critics ignore the fact Texas gave Margarito the license, not Pacquiao.


helven:
Do you really believe that Margarito was in as much threat then to Floyd as Manny is now to him? Hey, believe me - even at his peak - Margarito is not that good to make a dent in the elite ranks. Honestly, do you really think Floyd sees him as a threat to his "0" as Manny does?
My God Reign, two circumstances are never more different from each other. Quit squeezing Margo's balls too hard, you're now bordering on the ridiculous. Bob Arum is not a major roadblock anymore in the proposed Pac-Floyd megafight. It was Manny himself whom Floyd didn't want to mess with.

So, you mean to say that the Texas decision is all to blame now and Manny frees himself from any brunt of criticism?

reigncourts wrote:
Hard evidence to predict a PPV target? Give your numbers like Dr Love (?), and lets play the numbers game.

helven:
Evidence based on official PPV receipts/results to measure his PPV clout to support your argument that he really is a PPV attraction. Not merely based on a Margohugger's fanatical projection.

reigncourts:
Boxing is business and sometimes dirty if not most of the time. Business dictates that in this fight Margarito should be treated as temporary ally to gain better PPVs for the Pacman. The fight is not only for the money and the 8th title but also to even up with Floyd's PPVs. Are we going to deny this to the Pacman?

helven
Since boxing is business and boxing dictates that Margarito deserves it more than anyone else - do you think he still deserves the shot if he wasn't a Top Rank guy based on his track record and marketability?

Justify.


Please answer that question, you have a recurring habit of disappearing when confronted with questions you don't like.

Reigncourts:
Margarito held the title when he challenged Floyd and when he fought Cotto and Mosley. That's marketability and since you questioned Margo's marketability I asked you to make your prediction and see if it's not as ridiculous as Dr. Love's prediction.

First it was the catchweight. Then Marga's license. Are you sure you want to push this through the PPVs numbers. I didn't expect your hatred of Marga to go that far. For the sake of the Pacman, give it up now.

helven
All i'm asking is for you to give me proof of Margarito's few PPV results based on record. I'm not asking for your prediction as it's moot and academic. We're talking real numbers here, so give it to me and let's assess if he really is that drawing power you're trying to sell.

There's a credo in boxing that says "You're only as good as your last fight".
It is where the MARKETABILITY of a prizedfighter is rightly measured.
If you're on a roll, you're hot.
If you're on the skid, you are supposed to work your way up again.
That's plain and simple. No shortcuts.

I don't hate Margarito, i rooted for him against Cotto.
I hate what you're trying to make us believe that he deserves it more than anyone else.
On what merits? You hardly gave me a convincing answer ever since.
You can't continuously sweep the dirt under the rug. Margo is a shot fighter whose only claim to that opportunity is supported by Arum's greed to keep all the money in the house. That's all there's to it.

I bet you can't even explain to me why HE IS THE NO. 1 Light Mid WBC Contender now.

reigncourts replies:
You question Margarito' marketability? You forgot his mexican fans who believed he is not guilty of wrongdoing and it was all the trainers fault? He served time and now he's got the license to fight at Cowboy's Stadium where many of hi fans are nearby.

Now I've been answering your question and it's time you don't avoid mine.
How much PPVs do you think this fight will make?
How many Filipinos, Mexicans and Americans do you think will fill the Cowboy's Stadium.

And dont give me that B/S where you bought your watch, blah, blah -when I ask you only for the time.
.

helven wrote:
Mexican fans? Did they turn up in his last fight? Come on, give me the OVERWHELMING FIGURE!

Tell me something...do you really think the Texas license totally vindicate Margarito of his transgression? If you have been reading around, majority of sane writers and fans are still viewing that decision as absurd. And IT IS NOT EVEN COMPETITIVE if we go by their early forecast. What happens in Texas is boxing corruption at its best to pave way to a joint undertaking by Sulaiman, Bob Arum and Jerry Jones. If you don't smell something fishy in there, you probably have been spending too much time in the dark.

As to be expected from you as usual, you never address the whole point of my question because you are only passionately driven by your emotional fanaticism.

Answer me directly - IF MARGARITO WAS NOT A TOP RANK GUY, DO YOU THINK HE STILL DESERVES IT MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE?

Stop beating around the bush, give it to me straight.


reigncourts wrote:
Now I've been answering your question and it's time you don't avoid mine.How much PPVs do you think this fight will make?
How many Filipinos, Mexicans and Americans do you think will fill the Cowboy's Stadium.

And dont give me that B/S where you bought your watch, blah, blah -when I ask you only for the time.

helven
You want a straight answer?
Here's mine... it won't break the previous PPV record of Pac-Clottey.
That's the 2nd time i'm saying that in this forum. The first one was in a related thread concerning that matter.

Attendance, more or less about the same in the aforementioned fight.
Remember, you're the one who's making wild claims that it's supposed to even up with Floyd.

Alright. Deal with my prior questions and stop making a fool of yourself anymore with your flimsy notions.

reigncourts wrote:
Now you're acting stupid, feign ignorance, as usual. The things you're asking me are the subject of this thread and I agreed to it. Why ask me the question separately? Just read the article and if you don't agree, then say so. And dont forget to add your PPV numbers.

helven
Are you having trouble with your comprehension again when the going gets tough for you?

Since you're all out for Margarito and you're saying he is marketable - GIVE ME his official PPV history based on RECORDED ACCOUNTS! Based on his last fight and the previous fights. Because if you can't back up your claims with real proofs - you're just muttering nonsense without the aid of your brain.

Give it to me then and let's see how MARKETABLE he is.
When you back up somebody, convince us all with real PROOFS, NOT JUST mere pep talks you can get away with unknowing Pacquiao fans who only want to see him fight regardless of the circumstances.

studstar wrote:
two things for me:

1. margarito of all people does not deserve the payday, so my reason is personal, i dont him him fruther glorified and kids thinking if i have the right connections in business im going to be ok, regardless of the relative ethics involved. its not like there are no other choices, i think margarito should stew a bit more before getting the lotto.

2. i imagine berto, bradley, williams, martinez, while not blockbusters will still do better than clottey. given similar circumstances. all the major sports outlets would eat up this fight more than the margarito fight, yes, nytimes, bostonherald, cnnsi, espn, yahoo, they would all support this fight and conceivably create enough buzz to make it a blockbuster.


That's a very sensible answer my friend. That single post MAKES MORE SENSE than all REIGNCOURTS' posts put together.

reigncourts
Fifty years from now people, even the diehard boxing fans won't even remember Margarito's name, unless he beats Manny. All they will be talking about is only a Great Filipino Boxer was able to achieve 8 titles in as many weight divisions. They would not talk of a die hard, reigncourts, helven or studstar as having helped Manny to reach the top. Does that make sense to us people?

studstar wrote:
^totoo yan brad. we dont matter in the grand scheme of things. i have a 12yr old son though, who is into sports and syempre boxing, he's asked me about the merits of a margarito fight, and i told him basically the same thing i posted. i am not against margo fighting pac, but not this soon, in what really looks like a lottery win. i also believe margarito knew about the plaster, from evreything ive read about the topic he shld know he had something on.

it might not matter to historians and anyone outside my family, but i think it does matter to my son, who still believes in fairness, equality and justice, and i hope it resonates in his lifetime and when he has kids himself.

helven
On a personal note, that is a very true. It would have been easier to keep silent about this but seeing someone echoing the absurdity of Bob Arum in this forum is just too much to bear.

helven
Do you think after 50 years, those people will not be REMINDED by history books and boxing historians HOW MANY ACHIEVED his 8th title?

Whatever stand we're taking right now reflects the kind of fans we are not only in relation to Manny but in how we view boxing in general. Fanaticism should take a backseat to reality if you really love the sport more than the boxer.


Reigncourts answer:
Here goes the numbers game. With Margarito’s fans coming back to support him after the hype, (perhaps 24/7 but I doubted this) I’d say 70,000 at Cowboy’s Stadium and 800,000 PPVs. And if the scribes critical of the fight subside, and studstar and helvin don’t ask for a boycott of the fight – it can reach the million mark. I base this prediction on the Pac-Clottey and Mayweather-Marquez performance in PPVs. Since this is only a prediction, I need not explain anymore details than I have stated.

helven
Your PPV forecast seems to belie your earlier enthusiasm when you said this fight would level up with Floyd's. Starting to feel the heat now and coming to terms a little bit with reality?

How about answering this question now?

IF MARGARITO IS NOT A TOP RANK GUY, DO YOU THINK HE STILL DESERVES IT MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE?

:reigncourts wrote:
Boxing is business and sometimes dirty if not most of the time. Business dictates that in this fight Margarito should be treated as temporary ally to gain better PPVs for the Pacman. The fight is not only for the money and the 8th title but also to even up with Floyd's PPVs. Are we going to deny this to the Pacman?

helven wrote:

Since boxing is business and boxing dictates that Margarito deserves it more than anyone else - do you think he still deserves the shot if he wasn't a Top Rank guy based on his track record and marketability?

Justify.


powerpac wrote
What business man do you know that would rather make money for the other guy instead for himself?



Like Clint Easwood famous line in the "Unforgiven," "Deserve has nothing to do with it."

LMAO! I love that movie.

helven
Nobody of course.
Every businessman looks out for himself in the get go. However, Arum is not your everyday businessman. He is a boxing Promoter extra ordinaire. When he plies his trade, famous athletes and multi-millions are involved. BUT...he's got a big responsibility to the viewing public. To give their money's worth and to offer the best entertainment as advertised. There is supposed to be a reciprocal chain reaction in his line of work. Even in times when he was staging one major event after another, it seems we are compelled to agonize thru a series of terrible undercards first. Inspite of that, his stranglehold in the sport remains influential. That's the kind of businessman he is. He always wins.

Now, for posterity sake... he must give us something special in accordance to what a historic, once-in-a-lifetime 8th division championship is supposed to feel. Even if it means opening up the door of his house to take chances against undefeated guys like Bradley and Berto. Unfortunately, before he even evaluates its bright possibilities, he readily kills the notion of matching Manny up with a nobody. Well, Joshua Clottey must have been so popular then to get his confidence. That's the major knock on Arum, you never know when he is telling the truth.

Anyway, the sport of boxing is far from a Western movie. Vengeance is usually forsaken in the negotiation table. Boxing high-rollers often set aside their animosity towards one another to work for a common good. Good entertainment for wider audience. Deserve has a lot to do with it because boxing thrives on the satisfaction of casual and avid fans. They always DESERVE the best for their money's value. Same principle applies in choosing the key players in the game. Thrill, unpredictability and tough competition are foremost in consideration for a fine matchmaking. What do we have in store? Early predictions are already foregone conclusions. Even the early odds are disappointingly huge in Manny's favor. Fans don't have trouble predicting the winner, rather, in guessing what round Margarito will fall. This is so much similar to Clint Eastwood's movies, he squints and throws his softly-spoken one-liners before blasting his enemies all over the place. Predictably, he gets his revenge. He always wins in a dramatic fashion. Arum lies and tells us what we want to hear. In the end, he, not only, wins but gets the last laugh as well. Yeah, he gets his revenge at our expense.


reigncourts wrote:
Ok then, if your reason is on pure moral issues , that is on rewarding Margo with lottery-the Bobfather has clearly stated that he spends a lot of money promoting his fighters and he was not about to give the fighters being mentioned a free ride on promotional expenses. Love him or hate him, but any promoter has to protect his interest. I may not fully agree with Bob but certainly I believe Marga’s guilt is not proven beyond doubt and has already served his punishment. We can accuse the Texas Com of taking bribe money (which I don’t believe either- I think it was Jones business clout) but certainly it proved my point as well as Manny’s explanation in a subsequent press release. My side is only being realistic, that boxing is indeed a dirty sport than most and that the “ends justify the means” as long as you don’t violate a law (my version). And that's how I justify the moral issues to my family and friends.

helven
By going thru the motions and by being realistic like you say - you are tolerating an immoral cause all along by adding your support to the proliferation of such farcical events in the future. You can't continually wash your hands with muddy water, then, expect others to tell you that you're smelling like a rose thereafter.

helven wrote:
Do you think after 50 years, those people will not be REMINDED by history books and boxing historians HOW MANY ACHIEVED his 8th title?

Whatever stand we're taking right now reflects the kind of fans we are not only in relation to Manny but in how we view boxing in general. Fanaticism should take a backseat to reality if you really love the sport more than the boxer.

helven wrote:
Your PPV forecast seems to belie your earlier enthusiasm when you said this fight would level up with Floyd's. Starting to feel the heat now and coming to terms a little bit with reality?

How about answering this question now?

IF MARGARITO IS NOT A TOP RANK GUY, DO YOU THINK HE STILL DESERVES IT MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE?

Reigncourts reply:

Out of respect for the greatest boxers of all time, historians are a bit more lenient when it comes to minor criticisms that tend to diminish the legend. Forty four years ago Ali was convicted of evading the draft which later led to his license being revoked for 3 ½ years. It was during this time Ali made one of his famous quotes “I got nothing against no Viet Cong. No Vietnamese ever called me a nigger.” But you won’t find these in a standard list of his quotes, because others would rather forget about this episode in his life and concentrate on his ring exploits. My point is if they ever looked at Manny’s records he would see Margarito’s name as the last victim and that’s it. The Pac-Margo fight is legitimate. Both are licensed and they will understand that a catchweight is as legitimate as a day of the fight weigh-in no matter how many times a fighter asks for it.

IF MARGARITO IS NOT A TOP RANK GUY MAYBE HE’S BANNED FROM BOXING FOREVER. AND BY THE SAME TOKEN IF MANNY IS NOT A TOP RANK GUY, IT’S DOUBTFUL IF HE HAS GONE PAST HIS FIFTH TITLE. IT IS WITH BOB ARUMS PROMOTIONAL SKILLS THAT LED TO THE PAC-HATTON AND PAC-COTTO FIGHTS. FILIPINO CULTURE DICTATES THAT “YOU DON’T BITE THE HANDS THAT FEEDS YOU” AND MANNY SHOULD NOT BE FAULTED FOR ADHERING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO THIS NORM AS LONG AS HE IS NOT COMMITTING ANY INFRACTION TO THE RULES.


reigncourts wrote:
Out of respect for the greatest boxers of all time, historians are a bit more lenient when it comes to minor criticisms that tend to diminish the legend. Forty four years ago Ali was convicted of evading the draft which later led to his license being revoked for 3 ½ years. It was during this time Ali made one of his famous quotes “I got nothing against no Viet Cong. No Vietnamese ever called me a nigger.” But you won’t find these in a standard list of his quotes, because others would rather forget about this episode in his life and concentrate on his ring exploits. My point is if they ever looked at Manny’s records he would see Margarito’s name as the last victim and that’s it. The Pac-Margo fight is legitimate. Both are licensed and they will understand that a catchweight is as legitimate as a day of the fight weigh-in no matter how many times a fighter asks for it.

helven wrote:
Ali's legend reached astronomical heights after the Rumble in the Jungle, not immediately after his refusal to get drafted in the Vietnam war. Yeah, he was enormously popular back then but he was hardly considered among the 10 greatest Heavyweights of all time at that point. Remember, you're talking of Ali, pre- Golden era of Heavyweights. His greatness was solidified AFTER HIS REINSTATEMENT from exile by beating the likes of Joe Frazier, Ken Norton, Bob Foster, Floyd Patterson, Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers, Leon Spinks and Jimmy Young and yes - George Foreman.

To set Ali as an example for what is to be expected to come out of Pacquiao's legacy is a flawed analogy my dear friend. Ali fought them all fair even when he had nothing more to offer. Remember the pitiful beating he took from Larry Holmes? He never demanded any concession to his advantage. He was convicted due to political reasons and when the whole of America came to realize their grand folly in the Vietnam war, so did their perspective on the belated significance of Ali's firm stand not only for himself but for all the black people in his country. So to speak, Ali's reputation was redeemed with the kind passage of time. History judged him fairly.

Now tell me, what possible redemption could there be - personal or political - in two historic catchweight wins 50 years from now? Stop living the hype that Manny once fought at Flyweight. He is a legitimate welterweight now as anybody out there. Leniency is relative to the circumstances. Manny, himself, is actually giving those historians something to diminish about his legacy. For whatever it's worth in the final reckoning, he did it so with consent even if Arum, WBC and Texas Boxing Commission are partly to blame.

reigncourts wrote:
IF MARGARITO IS NOT A TOP RANK GUY MAYBE HE’S BANNED FROM BOXING FOREVER. AND BY THE SAME TOKEN IF MANNY IS NOT A TOP RANK GUY, IT’S DOUBTFUL IF HE HAS GONE PAST HIS FIFTH TITLE. IT IS WITH BOB ARUMS PROMOTIONAL SKILLS THAT LED TO THE PAC-HATTON AND PAC-COTTO FIGHTS. FILIPINO CULTURE DICTATES THAT “YOU DON’T BITE THE HANDS THAT FEEDS YOU” AND MANNY SHOULD NOT BE FAULTED FOR ADHERING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO THIS NORM AS LONG AS HE IS NOT COMMITTING ANY INFRACTION TO THE RULES.

helven wrote:
See how obviously you're trying to divert your shallow answer?
ALL I'M ASKING, IN CASE YOU STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND MY QUESTION....

PROVE TO ME THAT MARGARITO IS A WORTHIER OPPONENT THAN ANYBODY ELSE assuming he is not a Top Rank fighter! That question begs for your thorough evaluation of his marketability and latest track record in comparison to BERTO, BRADLEY AND WILLIAMS.

And must you draw a hypothetical parallelism with Manny's career granting he is not a Top Rank fighter too? I didn't ask for that and yet, you're more anxious to elaborate on that matter to make up for your uncertainties with Margarito. With other posters, you might get away with that but now with me. I'll pin you down real hard as soon as i see a little hole in your premise.

Please address my hanging question above with a straightforward answer. I will not let you off the hook until you capitulate.

helven wrote:
By going thru the motions and by being realistic like you say - you are tolerating an immoral cause all along by adding your support to the proliferation of such farcical events in the future. You can't continually wash your hands with muddy water, then, expect others to tell you that you're smelling like a rose thereafter.

Reigncourts reply:
The Great Moral Crusader will make sure Manny Pacquiao will not rest assured that his catchweight titles are not criticized and debated endlessly as fake titles. Now you’re hating Pacquiao on account of my defending such titles as legitimate. Again, You don’t fully understand what a catchweight is. Lets move on and stop this nonsense or meet me at my new thread, or I’ll call you out from that side – if this is allowed by forum rules.

matchbox wrote:
Theres not much fight left for manny ...soon he will retire. thats why its bad news for Bradley, Berto, and Williams. They are not the one that can bring the most money for Pacman. Its hard when you are inside the ring. You try to beat up the other guy but in so doing you also got beat up. Can't blame Manny to look for a much more financially viable fight everytime he goes inside the ring. His choice might not be the most popular one for the fans but financially wise it is the most rewarding.

Die hard
+Yes, lets just enjoy the remaining fight of MP before he retire from boxing for good.
imho, I think MP has 2fights left (May 2011 & Oct/Nov 2011).

Reigncourts
I agree with this observation from the start, bro. And sorry for bringing this old issues on catchweight and others. I said I'm not answering anymore questions not relevant to this article. They go to that thread we agreed upon.

helven wrote:
See how obviously you're trying to divert your shallow answer?
ALL I'M ASKING, IN CASE YOU STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND MY QUESTION....

PROVE TO ME THAT MARGARITO IS A WORTHIER OPPONENT THAN ANYBODY ELSE assuming he is not a Top Rank fighter! That question begs for your thorough evaluation of his marketability and latest track record in comparison to BERTO, BRADLEY AND WILLIAMS.

And must you draw a hypothetical parallelism with Manny's career granting he is not a Top Rank fighter too? I didn't ask for that and yet, you're more anxious to elaborate on that matter to make up for your uncertainties with Margarito. With other posters, you might get away with that but now with me. I'll pin you down real hard as soon as i see a little hole in your premise.

Please address my hanging question above with a straightforward answer. I will not let you off the hook until you capitulate.

reigncourts replies:
So now you have turned into a stalker. I was proving my point on how future generations won’t be raising any fuzz on the legitimacy of Pacquiao’s cathweight titles and you proceed to display you’re “FANTASTIC KNOWLEDGES” of boxing history. But do you really believe I or anyone else would read your irrelevant dissertation of jumbled history? I’m not wasting my time with this useless exercise. Meet me at my new thread if you wish but I’d rather not fill this thread space with useless trash. And btw, you still don’t know what a catchweight is, like Emmanuel53.

Helven wrote:
By going thru the motions and by being realistic like you say - you are tolerating an immoral cause all along by adding your support to the proliferation of such farcical events in the future. You can't continually wash your hands with muddy water, then, expect others to tell you that you're smelling like a rose thereafter.

Reigncourts reply:
The Great Moral Crusader will make sure Manny Pacquiao will not rest assured that his catchweight titles are not criticized and debated endlessly as fake titles. Now you’re hating Pacquiao on account of my defending such titles as legitimate. Again, You don’t fully understand what a catchweight is. Lets move on and stop this nonsense or meet me at my new thread, or I’ll call you out from that side – if this is allowed by forum rules.

reigncourts wrote:
matchbox wrote:
Theres not much fight left for manny ...soon he will retire. thats why its bad news for Bradley, Berto, and Williams. They are not the one that can bring the most money for Pacman. Its hard when you are inside the ring. You try to beat up the other guy but in so doing you also got beat up. Can't blame Manny to look for a much more financially viable fight everytime he goes inside the ring. His choice might not be the most popular one for the fans but financially wise it is the most rewarding.

die hard!!! wrote:
+Yes, lets just enjoy the remaining fight of MP before he retire from boxing for good.
imho, I think MP has 2fights left (May 2011 & Oct/Nov 2011).

I agree with this observation from the start, bro. And sorry for bringing this old issues on catchweight and others. I said I'm not answering anymore questions not relevant to this article.
They go to that thread we agreed upon.

Yes bro, the good thing is MP will be fighting for the another record breaking 8th div.world title. and as a Filipino, we should/must and need to be united as one and show our support to MP's remaining fights.


reigncourts wrote:
So now you have turned into a stalker. I was proving my point on how future generations won’t be raising any fuzz on the legitimacy of Pacquiao’s cathweight titles and you proceed to display you’re “FANTASTIC KNOWLEDGES” of boxing history. But do you really believe I or anyone else would read your irrelevant dissertation of jumbled history? I’m not wasting my time with this useless exercise. Meet me at my new thread if you wish but I’d rather not fill this thread space with useless trash. And btw, you still don’t know what a catchweight is, like Emmanuel53.

helven wrote:
You were the one who brought Ali to the fore with your trivial understanding of his legacy. I just picked up where you left off and set the record straight. What do you expect me to do, gloat over your naive prognosis? This is a debate, if there's any historical fact i twisted - you have the liberty to disprove my statements at your disposal. But instead of doing that, you orchestrated another escape route in the middle of somewhere. Pretty clever exit but it's obvious YOU ARE RUNNING AWAY from the question at hand. It's really hard to sustain a decent argument with you because you can't sustain your position for long. Maybe you're right, this is turning into a useless exercise when the other guy, who has ran out of ammunition, is too proud to yield.



DID YOU ACHIEVE ORGASM WITH THIS LONG-AZZ POST?

_________________
Integrity is a powerful word. I choose to live by it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 10:51 am 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:53 pm
Posts: 6150
THREAD TITLE: Will Manny win over Margo enhance his Legacy?



reigncourts wrote:
Watch how Floyd Mayweather looked like he has seen a ghost when Margarito challenged him for the Welterweight title. After the incident Floydie again feigned retirement to duck not only Margo but Mosley and Cotto as well. A win by Pacquiao over Margarito fight makes him a better Welterweight Champion than Floyd, having won over the last of the Welterweight top contenders that Mayweather ducked, except Mosley.

If Floyd ducks Manny again after Margarito, a last battle with the Pacman would be
Shane Mosley at Welterweight. No catchweight, only day of the fight weigh-in. (147lbs for both.) or whatever they agree upon. A win over Mosley forever seals Floyd Mayweather’s legacy as runner-up to The Pacman. Manny Pacquiao will then be remembered as P4P King in two divisions, The Featherweights and Welterweights in his reign.

Manny Pacquiao vs Margarito after Mayweather Ducks Again
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iP3DJAI6Cac


I don't know if that was intentional but your INTRODUCTION has nothing to do with your topic. Since Emmanuel has already addressed your title, it's just fitting that you express your own thoughts so we can all get back on the right track. That way, we will fully understand how you view the upcoming fight as vital to Manny's legacy.

_________________
"PaiN MaKEs tHE MaN"


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 383 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 26  Next

All times are UTC + 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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