Post: #51

(04-26-2015 09:38 AM)Kamikaze Wrote:  What do legends say?









Tally:

ODLH: May
Mosley: May
Cotto: Doesn't pick, but safe to say May (he's trained by Freddie, doesn't want to say Pac)
Hatton: May
Marquez: May
Tyson: Pac
Foreman: Pac
Lewis: May
Hopkins: May

If you look around for more vids, Ray Leonard and Roy Jones also pick May.

The most interesting point was raised by ODLH, and that's that May doesn't handle jabs very well, which is kinda true as evidenced with ODLH and Cotto. That would leave him open to what was originally Pac's greatest, and only, weapon once upon a time... the straight left. Don't know how much to put in that, but I found it interesting.

Of course, Mosley brought up that Pac's also extremely susceptible to the overhand right, and that's May's money punch as well. Shiiiiiiiit

Yeah, I noticed that too: When the most knowledgeable guys in the sport all pick the same guy, its hard not to make him the favorite.

Still, I think Pac has a real chance: he has a style, and skills, that Mayweather hasn't seen before. IF he can regain some of his youthful quickness, he has a shot.

Post: #52

(04-26-2015 12:44 PM)MidWest Wrote:  A lot of you guys are throwing the PED accusations. Do we have any evidence that JMM was juiced? And does Boxing have some kind of regulation or policy against juicing? Can't think they would just let them take steroids just like that.

For me, the acne picture is evidence enough unless it was taken of a 16 year old male.

I have done a couple of steroid cycles, and occasionally hang out with some bodybuilders who use non stop. I have also done a lot of research. So my practical and theoretical knowledge is pretty good on the subject.

To me, when I look at that type of acne on an adult male athlete, I immediately recognize it as 100% classic steroid acne. It is not as horrible as some of the gross cystic acne that some people get, but it is significant. Frequently you can avoid that kind of acne by controlling your estrogen on cycle, and by smoothing out the hormone fluctuations at the beginning and end of a cycle. Maybe JMM had to suddenly adjust what he was taking to beat a pre fight doping control and this prompted the breakout. Happens.

I would not hesitate, without any other evidence but the picture, age, and occupation (male 40, athlete) to bet someone 1000 dollars after seeing that picture that it was because of steroids. I would take that bet all day everyday.

Post: #53

Pretty sure there will be no knockout victory.

Post: #54

As I was sifting through my On-Demand feature I noticed my Comcast provider is offering 2 "free" months of Showtime to customers who order the fight

How else could someone justify spending $99.95 on a single event?

When I called in to confirm the promotion, the representative had heard nothing of the sort but she did give me 2 other movie channels free of charge for 30 days (Little did she know I was ordering it either way)

Man they are laying it on thick

Post: #55

Man, I'm thinking about ordering this fight, but I would hate to spend 100 bucks for one fucking round. Hmmm. And the sports bars night be too crowded

Post: #56

I'd take that Hatton pick with a grain of salt, because Pacquiao knocked him out in two rounds, so he didn't even see enough of him to really make a statement if he's using his fights with the both of them to determine his pick.

I really enjoyed the analysis from BHOP, he seems like he could spend all day talking about this fight. I've heard that both fighters are in tremendous shape, so I cannot wait until Saturday. I'll be rooting for Pacquiao, and I actually think he has what it takes to pull it off. Just from watching Mayweathers' last few fights, his opponents don't come close to Pacquiao. This is a huge step up in opposition for him talent wise. A lot of people underestimate how good of a boxer Tim Bradley is, he's a tough matchup for anyone at 147 in my opinion and could even give Mayweather a decent scrap. We're probably going to see Mayweather in the high guard defense instead of the philly shell, so the fight might be pressed for a little more action than the typical Mayweather bout. The more action, the more favor I give Pacquiao.

My biggest concern for this fight, which a lot of people seem to miss, is the ring size. The difference between Mayweather-Maidana 1 and Mayweather-Maidana 2 is the ring size. Maidana couldn't smother him like he did in the first fight because of the ring size, not because Mayweather had him all figured out. Pacquiao knows how to come forward and be agressive, but I don't like that strategy against Mayweather, and if he's forced to pressed the action, he might get pot-shotted all night.

Post: #57

^^ The only way Pacquiao is going to beat Mayweather though is by swarming him. He will have to take the pot shots in order to get to the inside of Mayweather's defenses.

Post: #58

I think this guys rant is funny.

Post: #59

(04-27-2015 03:08 PM)DChambers Wrote:  ^^ The only way Pacquiao is going to beat Mayweather though is by swarming him. He will have to take the pot shots in order to get to the inside of Mayweather's defenses.

I don't think he has to do that. I posted about this is another thread, that both Mayweather and Pacquiao make their opponent throw considerably less punches than normal. Mayweather because of his defense, and Pacquiao because of his output and throwing punches in bunches at awkward angles.

I'm not sure if you mean swarming/smothering him like Maidana did in the first fight, or swarming by just throwing a lot of punches. You cannot answer a Pacquiao swarm with potshots or shelling up. Marquez figured this out, and used offense to answer back, Mayweather isn't that type of fighter so to see him do that, I feel like he would be out of his element and that would only help Pacquiao.

If you saw the Pacquiao-Algieri fight, Algieri spent most of his time boxing off the backfoot, while Pacquiao had to really come-forward all night. I thought a lot of that had to do with the size of the ring, which is why I think bigger the ring, the better for Mayweather. Floyd can box off the back foot with ease, and if Manny has to chase him down, he can get pot-shotted all night cause he won't be throwing much if he cannot cut off the ring, and he doesn't really have the size to impose on Mayweather. It was obvious that Pacquiao had no respect for Algieri's power either, Mayweather can punch so it's going to be very interesting to see what happens.

Post: #60

"I'm not sure if you mean swarming/smothering him like Maidana did in the first fight, or swarming by just throwing a lot of punches."

The two aren't really mutually exclusive. A swarmer by definition gets in close to smother an opponent and keep them from counter-punching. While in there he throws a lot of punches, generally in combinations and in volleys. That's also the basic recipe to beat Mayweather, however because of Mayweather's technical skills a swarmer will have to throw a far higher volume of punches than he normally would against a lesser opponent.

Maidana in the 1st fight did this.

I agree with you on the ring size aspect as well, could be a game changer.

Post: #61

(04-27-2015 11:47 AM)jayesco Wrote:  I really enjoyed the analysis from BHOP, he seems like he could spend all day talking about this fight.

Ha! That's an understatement. BHOP could spend all day talking about mayonnaise! I remember when the HBO Boxing Podcast had him on...the hosts didn't get a word in edgewise; Bernard spoke for 30 minutes without taking a breath!

Post: #62

(04-27-2015 08:51 PM)The Father Wrote:  

(04-27-2015 11:47 AM)jayesco Wrote:  I really enjoyed the analysis from BHOP, he seems like he could spend all day talking about this fight.

Ha! That's an understatement. BHOP could spend all day talking about mayonnaise! I remember when the HBO Boxing Podcast had him on...the hosts didn't get a word in edgewise; Bernard spoke for 30 minutes without taking a breath!

Hopkins understands history and the magnitude of this fight, and how to sell it. Eloquent dude. He'd make a hell of a commentator or analyst. I'd love to see a fight being called by Paulie Malignaggi and Hopkins.

Post: #63

(04-27-2015 09:52 PM)Kamikaze Wrote:  

(04-27-2015 08:51 PM)The Father Wrote:  

(04-27-2015 11:47 AM)jayesco Wrote:  I really enjoyed the analysis from BHOP, he seems like he could spend all day talking about this fight.

Ha! That's an understatement. BHOP could spend all day talking about mayonnaise! I remember when the HBO Boxing Podcast had him on...the hosts didn't get a word in edgewise; Bernard spoke for 30 minutes without taking a breath!

Hopkins understands history and the magnitude of this fight, and how to sell it. Eloquent dude. He'd make a hell of a commentator or analyst. I'd love to see a fight being called by Paulie Malignaggi and Hopkins.

He has done guest spots on HBO when Roy Jones was unavailable. Like Roy, he REALLY understands the subtleties of the sport and he's an excellent announcer. I used to like Ray Leonard and George Foreman on HBO, too, but they never were able to impart much boxing knowledge. Paulie is good, and he appeals to younger fans, but he's not in RJJ or BHOP's league as an announcer.

My all time favorite boxing announcer was the late Gil Clancy, a trainer who really could impart some insights! Emmanuel Steward was much the same.

Post: #64

How do you guys view the motivations of both fighters and will this effect the outcome?

I don't know enough to tell what's an act, and what's propaganda and what's true, but it seems to me that Mayweather is not as hungry for this as Pacquiao.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/30/sports...hters.html

Quote:He said that, at 38, he expects this to be the second-to-last fight of his career. He is under contract to fight once more, and plans to honor that commitment later this year. He shrugs off questions about the likelihood of a rematch with Pacquiao, and is startlingly blunt about boxing.

“I don’t really enjoy it like I once did, nah,” he said a couple of weeks ago at his Las Vegas gym. “It’s at a point now, it’s a business. It’s my job. I go to the gym, I train, I go home. I know what I have to do. It was fun, but I’m to a point where I’m really over all of this.”

Post: #65

His motivation to win may not be as much but pacquiao is a broken fighter imo. He's been losing way too much.

Post: #66

(04-27-2015 03:46 PM)jayesco Wrote:  Marquez figured this out, and used offense to answer back, Mayweather isn't that type of fighter so to see him do that, I feel like he would be out of his element and that would only help Pacquiao.

I feel like that's one reason this argument of 'Marquez is a counterpuncher and so is Floyd, so Manny will struggle with him' has been given too much weight. They are both counterpunchers but otherwise very different fighters. Marquez is an offensive machine who likes to counter, Floyd is a very defensive fighter. Marquez also hits harder, especially with his right hand because he really loads up on it while Floyd throws it so often as that right lead that really doesn't have much power/rotation on it.

Post: #67

Blah, I really think this would have been an amazing fight 5 or 6 years ago. Pacquiao was absolutely on fire, floyd hasn't really lost a step, it will still be a good fight but not as good as it would have been 5 years ago

Post: #68

Although I've been a huge boxing fan for near 30 years, I don't think I have the same technical knowledge as many here. Here's my take: as human beings, we can't help but HATE Mayweather due to many of his traits: woman batterer, shit talker, insane narcissism, extremely defensive style that casual viewers find "boring". The guy's a pretty objectionable human being. Conversely, Pacquiao is (at least in my opinion) an inherently lovable and goofy character. Even if you're not Filipino (I'm not) I think it's hard not to get caught up in the swell of emotion where an entire fucking country is rooting on their champion like a demigod.

Hence, the genius of Mayweather: it's really hard for people to understand what a transcendent talent Mayweather is because they hate him so much. I sincerely think he belongs in the same breath as Ali, Frazier, Leonard, Tyson and Louis. Pacquiao is a great fighter and he deserves the accolades that he's won, especially coming from such humble beginnings, but he ain't no top 5 of all time. Even though Floyd is a few years older, they are roughly in the same career arc (it could be argued that Manny is actually worse even though he's younger) and I think Floyd will win in a unanimous decision after defending like only he can, and frustrating/wearing down the Filipino.

Bookies are in the business of taking as equal bets as they can on both sides, cutting out a piece of the middle and drinking the arbitrage juice. People hate Mayweather so much, they're increasingly betting down the money-line from >-300 to -200 today at the M. At those odds, I backed up the truck and bet a lot more than I expected to on Mayweather. Obviously, I want Mayweather to win because I have a couple G's riding on it, but if Pacman somehow manages to pull it out, I can't say I wouldn't be happy for him... but I'm putting my money where my mouth is and going for the smart money.

Post: #69

Neither of them would have stood a chance against Sweet Pea Whitaker.

Post: #70

A question for some of the more knowledgeable fans - even after taking into account that Pacquiao may not be 100% of what he was 5 years ago, is present day Pacquiao still the toughest opponent Mayweather has ever faced?
I know that he is 47-0, but has Mayweather convincingly beaten anyone as good as Pacquiao?

Post: #71

(05-01-2015 10:30 AM)VolandoVengoVolandoVoy Wrote:  A question for some of the more knowledgeable fans - even after taking into account that Pacquiao may not be 100% of what he was 5 years ago, is present day Pacquiao still the toughest opponent Mayweather has ever faced?
I know that he is 47-0, but has Mayweather convincingly beaten anyone as good as Pacquiao?

To your first question: YES, manny is the toughest fighter floyd has ever faced.

Which sort of deflates your second question,
de la hoya was past his prime when he fought floyd.

shane mosley caught floyd with a shot that would have knocked just about anyone else out, but otherwise floyd dominated the fight.

We can't really say either of them were as good as pacquiao because pacquiao beat both.

Post: #72

(05-01-2015 10:30 AM)VolandoVengoVolandoVoy Wrote:  A question for some of the more knowledgeable fans - even after taking into account that Pacquiao may not be 100% of what he was 5 years ago, is present day Pacquiao still the toughest opponent Mayweather has ever faced?
I know that he is 47-0, but has Mayweather convincingly beaten anyone as good as Pacquiao?

Without a doubt, yes. The Pacquiao of 5 years ago would have had a better shot, though. That Pacquiao belongs in the same breath as prime Roberto Durán and Aaron Pryor. Not saying he would have won, but those would be damn good fights.

Mayweather apparently also has trouble with southpaws due to the angles he uses in his shoulder roll. The first few rounds he fought Judah, Judah was an awkward challenge for him, until Judah got gassed as he always does. Pacquiao is on another tier, in regards to speed, power, and stamina than Judah.

Someone above said Mayweather is an all-time great. In some respects, so is Pacquiao. If you guys want to read a controversial piece on why Mayweather is not respected by real aficionados and even some legends, here's a link: http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/...ing-demise

Quote:Mayweather's spotless record is a byproduct of his limited activity and a competition field lacking the depth of previous eras.

"That would be highly accurate," claims Jones Jr.

Weston, who fought Hearns and Wilfred Benitez, eschews even that much diplomacy.

"The old guys don't really care [about Mayweather's undefeated record] 'cause they know that his whole career has been padded with bums," Weston Jr., states. "If we made a big dinner and we had all the great champions in a room, with him coming in there, I can tell you right off the bat, they would look at him like he was nothing for one reason: They know he didn't fight the great ones and that he didn't fight in their kind of class of fighters because we understood what the game was about. It was do-or-die. He doesn't understand that. He is about survival and making as much money as he can, and that's it. There's no pride and dignity about his situation and what he wants to stand for."

Mayweather may be an all-time great, but not as great as you think. He's been artful in choosing his opponents at the right times. Though the first time they negotiated the fight it was Pacquiao's fault it didn't get made, Mayweather danced around all his legacy-making opponents, and there was only one: Pacquiao. Pacquiao and Mayweather are the only guys of this generation who would have made a dent in the era of the 80s, when Leonard, Durán, Hearns, Hagler, Pryor and Benítez were at their peaks. It's just sad we get the fight when they're both so much older, and especially with Pacquiao so clearly diminished.

Let's also not discount that this era's Hagler is possibly Golovkin. If Mayweather were to beat Pacquiao and then beat Golovkin, like Leonard did........ I would place him comfortably above Sugar Ray.

Post: #73

Hey Kamikaze, why do you say it was Pacquiao's fault the fight didn't happen the first time? I have heard all different things.

My guess is that the whole public skirmish about PEDs was just smoke and mirrors. The truth is, I am certain that both Mayweather and Pacquiao have taken PEDs throughout most if not all of their careers, and that they have the trainers and the resources to beat any level of drug testing.

I speculate the real issue was money, and who got what under what terms. Perhaps now that both fighters are older, there is less at stake in terms of future earnings if one loses, so it was easier to come to terms.

Post: #74

(05-01-2015 01:00 PM)VolandoVengoVolandoVoy Wrote:  Hey Kamikaze, why do you say it was Pacquiao's fault the fight didn't happen the first time?

There were a lot of rumors that Pacquiao, who started his career at 112 lbs, was on something because he went all the way up to 147 and walked down a strong fighter like Cotto, and absolutely destroyed Hatton at 140. Carrying that kind of power while moving up so many weight classes is highly unusual, in fact it's never been done. So Mayweather wanted to do something unprecedented at the time, and implement Olympic-style random drug testing by USADA all the way up to the day of the fight. I actually don't think that's unreasonable, and many fighters after Pacquiao (after this negotiation) agreed to this.

But Pacquiao was not down for that. He said he was 'afraid of needles,' in spite of the many tattoos he sported at the time. Then the excuse was he felt weak when blood was drawn so close to the fight. He blamed one of his losses, the first to Erik Morales, to having blood drawn too close to fight night. He was basically superstitious about it.

The Mayweather team surprisingly relented and allowed for there to be no blood drawn up to 14 days away from the fight, which in my opinion was quite generous. Pacquiao got on his high horse and did not want to budge on 24 days away from the fight. It was this ten-day window, and all the stupid posturing, that destroyed the fight when it was at its very best, when both Pacquiao and Mayweather were truly in their prime.

So I can't blame Mayweather completely for dancing around Pacquiao. Some say he was out of line to try and implement the drug testing regardless, because it was a strong-arming tactic. It did throw a wrench into the plans because it was a way for Mayweather to get the mental upper-hand, and he did. But that first negotiation failed because of Pacquiao, and even his trainer Freddie Roach said so.

If Pacquiao loses because he's somehow diminished compared to 5 years ago, he has to accept a big share of the blame. It's not all on Mayweather.

Post: #75

(05-01-2015 01:54 PM)Kamikaze Wrote:  There were a lot of rumors that Pacquiao, who started his career at 112 lbs, was on something because he went all the way up to 147 and walked down a strong fighter like Cotto, and absolutely destroyed Hatton at 140. Carrying that kind of power while moving up so many weight classes is highly unusual, in fact it's never been done. So Mayweather wanted to do something unprecedented at the time, and implement Olympic-style random drug testing by USADA all the way up to the day of the fight. I actually don't think that's unreasonable, and many fighters after Pacquiao (after this negotiation) agreed to this.

But Pacquiao was not down for that. He said he was 'afraid of needles,' in spite of the many tattoos he sported at the time. Then the excuse was he felt weak when blood was drawn so close to the fight. He blamed one of his losses, the first to Erik Morales, to having blood drawn too close to fight night. He was basically superstitious about it.

The Mayweather team surprisingly relented and allowed for there to be no blood drawn up to 14 days away from the fight, which in my opinion was quite generous. Pacquiao got on his high horse and did not want to budge on 24 days away from the fight. It was this ten-day window, and all the stupid posturing, that destroyed the fight when it was at its very best, when both Pacquiao and Mayweather were truly in their prime.

So I can't blame Mayweather completely for dancing around Pacquiao. Some say he was out of line to try and implement the drug testing regardless, because it was a strong-arming tactic. It did throw a wrench into the plans because it was a way for Mayweather to get the mental upper-hand, and he did. But that first negotiation failed because of Pacquiao, and even his trainer Freddie Roach said so.

If Pacquiao loses because he's somehow diminished compared to 5 years ago, he has to accept a big share of the blame. It's not all on Mayweather.

I don't think that's the most likely explanation. I think it is very likely that both Mayweather and Pacquiao have been on a variety of PEDs during most of their careers.

Nearly every other major athlete, including the vast majority of Olympians use PEDs, and they don't earn a fraction of what these two can.

Both Mayweather and Pacquiao have much better resources than Olympians or top guys like Lance Armstrong, and if those people can beat even the most stringent drug testing with ease, what makes you think that Pac and Mayweather wouldn't be able to?

So, I find it hard to believe that the fight didn't happen because Pacquiao feared a positive drug test. It had to have been about money.