Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
titleist,
i'm not saying there will no longer be any pinoy boxers. what i'm saying is philippine boxing will go back once again into total obscurity. aside from pacquiao, the only other good fighter you have is nonito donaire and the very overrated donnie nietes, who only fights bums. since he got a gift decision over manuel vargas, who has this guy fought? exactly!
all the other "next pacquiao's" have been total busts. so tell me, what current boxers are going to step up and become the next world champions? that's why i wrote for you to enjoy pacman while you still have him cause when he's gone, philippine boxing practically disappears! :)
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JonesJrMayweather
BHop's lack of vocabulary and intelligence just means he's wondering when will pacman face a slick boxer, seeing as how they kept him away from Zahir Raheem after Raheem clearly schooled Morrales. They chose to face the obviously faded and done Morrales.
Raheem scored an upset on Morales. Morales had beaten Manny 10 months prior to their rematch. I am not sure what makes you think a fighter gets old overnight. Why would Manny not want to avenge his loss against the fighter who handed him the defeat? Would it have answered more questions if he fought Raheem?
Sometimes, I swear, Manny Pacquiao can do NO right in people's book. Let it go, man. He's only human, and his promoters set up the fights.
So I guess we should all say Manny "ducked" Raheem? :p Also, He also hates black people everywhere and uses PEDs.
To Bernard Hopkins:
You wanna know why Manny hasn't had to fight a black guy in so long? (sure whatever Clottey doesn't count) Because all the Mexicans beat up the blacks in the lower weights. And Manny beats up the Mexicans. It's the food chain.
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
milmascaras1
titleist,
i'm not saying there will no longer be any pinoy boxers. what i'm saying is philippine boxing will go back once again into total obscurity. aside from pacquiao, the only other good fighter you have is nonito donaire and the very overrated donnie nietes, who only fights bums. since he got a gift decision over manuel vargas, who has this guy fought? exactly!
all the other "next pacquiao's" have been total busts. so tell me, what current boxers are going to step up and become the next world champions? that's why i wrote for you to enjoy pacman while you still have him cause when he's gone, philippine boxing practically disappears! :)
What's the point in bringing up the country?
Pacquiao is for the boxing fans to enjoy, not just Filipinos. It may take some time before someone of Pacman's caliber comes along and it may not even be in our lifetime.
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
neutral,
are you accusing me of being a racist just because i believe philippine boxing isn't very good with the exception of pacquiao? i think you're being too thin skinned. it's my opinion, i didn't say anything about race didn't i? grow a pair why don't ya!
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JonnyFolds
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JonesJrMayweather
BHop's lack of vocabulary and intelligence just means he's wondering when will pacman face a slick boxer, seeing as how they kept him away from Zahir Raheem after Raheem clearly schooled Morrales. They chose to face the obviously faded and done Morrales.
Raheem scored an upset on Morales. Morales had beaten Manny 10 months prior to their rematch. I am not sure what makes you think a fighter gets old overnight. Why would Manny not want to avenge his loss against the fighter who handed him the defeat? Would it have answered more questions if he fought Raheem?
Sometimes, I swear, Manny Pacquiao can do NO right in people's book. Let it go, man. He's only human, and his promoters set up the fights.
So I guess we should all say Manny "ducked" Raheem? :p Also, He also hates black people everywhere and uses PEDs.
To Bernard Hopkins:
You wanna know why Manny hasn't had to fight a black guy in so long? (sure whatever Clottey doesn't count) Because all the Mexicans beat up the blacks in the lower weights. And Manny beats up the Mexicans. It's the food chain.
Hopkins is talking about a black american, not a african. He's basically saying a slick american style fighter.
What black american fighter was beaten up at the lower weights by a mexican that pacquiao faced in this silly food chain you speak of?
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
InTheNeutralCorner
Quote:
Originally Posted by
milmascaras1
titleist,
i'm not saying there will no longer be any pinoy boxers. what i'm saying is philippine boxing will go back once again into total obscurity. aside from pacquiao, the only other good fighter you have is nonito donaire and the very overrated donnie nietes, who only fights bums. since he got a gift decision over manuel vargas, who has this guy fought? exactly!
all the other "next pacquiao's" have been total busts. so tell me, what current boxers are going to step up and become the next world champions? that's why i wrote for you to enjoy pacman while you still have him cause when he's gone, philippine boxing practically disappears! :)
What's the point in bringing up the country?
Pacquiao is for the boxing fans to enjoy, not just Filipinos.
It may take some time before someone of Pacman's caliber comes along and it may not even be in our lifetime.
It's comments like that, the reason that people want to see him lose.
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
Yes i agree Erik Morales did look totally shot against Zahir Raheem, infact he looked terrible. But you can't blame Manny Pacquiao for fighting Erik Morales. He's a bigger name, he wanted to revenge his loss, more money, exciting, ETC.
Zahir Raheem is/was a total runner, if he would of fought Manny Pacquiao. He would of been the running man, and it would of been a terrible fight. Hell even though Erik Morales was past it, he still gave a very good showing in the 2nd fight.
A hell of alot more effort, than Zahir Raheem could ever dream of.
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Yes i agree Erik Morales did look totally shot against Zahir Raheem, infact he looked terrible. But you can't blame Manny Pacquiao for fighting Erik Morales. He's a bigger name, he wanted to revenge his loss, more money, exciting, ETC.
Zahir Raheem is/was a total runner, if he would of fought Manny Pacquiao. He would of been the running man, and it would of been a terrible fight. Hell even though Erik Morales was past it, he still gave a very good showing in the 2nd fight.
A hell of alot more effort, than Zahir Raheem could ever dream of.
If what raheem did against Morrales was "running", then I've lost all understanding of what people think "boxing" is....
"He just kept hitting me and moving away" - Erik Morrales after the Raheem fight.
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JonesJrMayweather
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Yes i agree Erik Morales did look totally shot against Zahir Raheem, infact he looked terrible. But you can't blame Manny Pacquiao for fighting Erik Morales. He's a bigger name, he wanted to revenge his loss, more money, exciting, ETC.
Zahir Raheem is/was a total runner, if he would of fought Manny Pacquiao. He would of been the running man, and it would of been a terrible fight. Hell even though Erik Morales was past it, he still gave a very good showing in the 2nd fight.
A hell of alot more effort, than Zahir Raheem could ever dream of.
If what raheem did against Morrales was "running", then I've lost all understanding of what people think "boxing" is....
"He just kept hitting me and moving away" - Erik Morrales after the Raheem fight.
I wasn't on about that fight speficially, i was on about his career as a whole. I appreciate good boxing, which is why im a fan of Pernell Whitaker, Floyd Mayweather Jr.
But ask anyone about Zahir Raheem, and see what response you get. I did actually enjoy i think 2 fights of Zahir Raheem's, one of his early fights when he got floored few times and he comeback to win, and another one but i forget the opponents name.
But as i said you can't blame Manny Pacquiao for fighting Erik Morales, it made sense to fight Erik Morales regarding legacy and money wise. Aswell as making him a real household name.
I don't really think he would of got any credit for beating Zahir Raheem, and it would of been a terrible fight to watch. And with hindsight Erik Morales did give us a FOTY candidate vs Manny Pacquiao in there 2nd fight, so im not complaining.
Plus wasn't Manny Pacquiao still at Super Featherweight ? and Zahir Raheem at Lightweight ?
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Yes i agree Erik Morales did look totally shot against Zahir Raheem, infact he looked terrible. But you can't blame Manny Pacquiao for fighting Erik Morales. He's a bigger name, he wanted to revenge his loss, more money, exciting, ETC.
Zahir Raheem is/was a total runner, if he would of fought Manny Pacquiao. He would of been the running man, and it would of been a terrible fight. Hell even though Erik Morales was past it, he still gave a very good showing in the 2nd fight.
A hell of alot more effort, than Zahir Raheem could ever dream of.
Hows the swimming going mate?
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JonesJrMayweather
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Yes i agree Erik Morales did look totally shot against Zahir Raheem, infact he looked terrible. But you can't blame Manny Pacquiao for fighting Erik Morales. He's a bigger name, he wanted to revenge his loss, more money, exciting, ETC.
Zahir Raheem is/was a total runner, if he would of fought Manny Pacquiao. He would of been the running man, and it would of been a terrible fight. Hell even though Erik Morales was past it, he still gave a very good showing in the 2nd fight.
A hell of alot more effort, than Zahir Raheem could ever dream of.
If what raheem did against Morrales was "running", then I've lost all understanding of what people think "boxing" is....
"He just kept hitting me and moving away" - Erik Morrales after the Raheem fight.
I wasn't on about that fight speficially, i was on about his career as a whole. I appreciate good boxing, which is why im a fan of Pernell Whitaker, Floyd Mayweather Jr.
But ask anyone about Zahir Raheem, and see what response you get. I did actually enjoy i think 2 fights of Zahir Raheem's, one of his early fights when he got floored few times and he comeback to win, and another one but i forget the opponents name.
But as i said you can't blame Manny Pacquiao for fighting Erik Morales, it made sense to fight Erik Morales regarding legacy and money wise. Aswell as making him a real household name.
I don't really think he would of got any credit for beating Zahir Raheem, and it would of been a terrible fight to watch. And with hindsight Erik Morales did give us a FOTY candidate vs Manny Pacquiao in there 2nd fight, so im not complaining.
Plus wasn't Manny Pacquiao still at Super Featherweight ? and Zahir Raheem at Lightweight ?
What I find funny is that Manny gets so much credit for beating Morrales, while Raheem gets zero. when he did it before Manny. Raheem and Morrales fought at 135. But just before that fight Raheem faced Juarez at 130 and beat him too but the same texas team that robbed Paulie against Diaz robbed Raheem against juarez. Don't see why a fight between Manny and Raheem couldn't have been made.
I mean tyson and holy were supposed to fight a mega fight, but Douglass kayoed Tyson so Holyfield fought Douglass. Makes sense to me unless its all about money first in which yeah I understand. But if its about beating the tougher opponent then Raheem should have been the guy that earned his shot.
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JonesJrMayweather
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JonesJrMayweather
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Yes i agree Erik Morales did look totally shot against Zahir Raheem, infact he looked terrible. But you can't blame Manny Pacquiao for fighting Erik Morales. He's a bigger name, he wanted to revenge his loss, more money, exciting, ETC.
Zahir Raheem is/was a total runner, if he would of fought Manny Pacquiao. He would of been the running man, and it would of been a terrible fight. Hell even though Erik Morales was past it, he still gave a very good showing in the 2nd fight.
A hell of alot more effort, than Zahir Raheem could ever dream of.
If what raheem did against Morrales was "running", then I've lost all understanding of what people think "boxing" is....
"He just kept hitting me and moving away" - Erik Morrales after the Raheem fight.
I wasn't on about that fight speficially, i was on about his career as a whole. I appreciate good boxing, which is why im a fan of Pernell Whitaker, Floyd Mayweather Jr.
But ask anyone about Zahir Raheem, and see what response you get. I did actually enjoy i think 2 fights of Zahir Raheem's, one of his early fights when he got floored few times and he comeback to win, and another one but i forget the opponents name.
But as i said you can't blame Manny Pacquiao for fighting Erik Morales, it made sense to fight Erik Morales regarding legacy and money wise. Aswell as making him a real household name.
I don't really think he would of got any credit for beating Zahir Raheem, and it would of been a terrible fight to watch. And with hindsight Erik Morales did give us a FOTY candidate vs Manny Pacquiao in there 2nd fight, so im not complaining.
Plus wasn't Manny Pacquiao still at Super Featherweight ? and Zahir Raheem at Lightweight ?
What I find funny is that Manny gets so much credit for beating Morrales, while Raheem gets zero. when he did it before Manny. Raheem and Morrales fought at 135. But just before that fight Raheem faced Juarez at 130 and beat him too but the same texas team that robbed Paulie against Diaz robbed Raheem against juarez. Don't see why a fight between Manny and Raheem couldn't have been made.
I mean tyson and holy were supposed to fight a mega fight, but Douglass kayoed Tyson so Holyfield fought Douglass. Makes sense to me unless its all about money first in which yeah I understand. But if its about beating the tougher opponent then Raheem should have been the guy that earned his shot.
I give Zahir Raheem credit for beating Erik Morales, that wasn't what i was saying. I meant it made more sense for a rematch with Erik Morales to happen. I wasn't taking any credit away from Zahir Raheem.
But Manny Pacquiao had a great chance to revenge his defeat to Erik Morales, plus he would get alot of fame and money. Where as fighting Zahir Raheem would of been forgettable encounter.
Plus Manny Pacquiao didn't even fight at 135 until 2008, you can't expect him too move up when he's got bigger fights at his own weightclasses JMM, MAB, Erik Morales.
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JonesJrMayweather
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JonesJrMayweather
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Yes i agree Erik Morales did look totally shot against Zahir Raheem, infact he looked terrible. But you can't blame Manny Pacquiao for fighting Erik Morales. He's a bigger name, he wanted to revenge his loss, more money, exciting, ETC.
Zahir Raheem is/was a total runner, if he would of fought Manny Pacquiao. He would of been the running man, and it would of been a terrible fight. Hell even though Erik Morales was past it, he still gave a very good showing in the 2nd fight.
A hell of alot more effort, than Zahir Raheem could ever dream of.
If what raheem did against Morrales was "running", then I've lost all understanding of what people think "boxing" is....
"He just kept hitting me and moving away" - Erik Morrales after the Raheem fight.
I wasn't on about that fight speficially, i was on about his career as a whole. I appreciate good boxing, which is why im a fan of Pernell Whitaker, Floyd Mayweather Jr.
But ask anyone about Zahir Raheem, and see what response you get. I did actually enjoy i think 2 fights of Zahir Raheem's, one of his early fights when he got floored few times and he comeback to win, and another one but i forget the opponents name.
But as i said you can't blame Manny Pacquiao for fighting Erik Morales, it made sense to fight Erik Morales regarding legacy and money wise. Aswell as making him a real household name.
I don't really think he would of got any credit for beating Zahir Raheem, and it would of been a terrible fight to watch. And with hindsight Erik Morales did give us a FOTY candidate vs Manny Pacquiao in there 2nd fight, so im not complaining.
Plus wasn't Manny Pacquiao still at Super Featherweight ? and Zahir Raheem at Lightweight ?
What I find funny is that Manny gets so much credit for beating Morrales, while Raheem gets zero. when he did it before Manny. Raheem and Morrales fought at 135. But just before that fight Raheem faced Juarez at 130 and beat him too but the same texas team that robbed Paulie against Diaz robbed Raheem against juarez. Don't see why a fight between Manny and Raheem couldn't have been made.
I mean tyson and holy were supposed to fight a mega fight, but Douglass kayoed Tyson so Holyfield fought Douglass. Makes sense to me unless its all about money first in which yeah I understand. But if its about beating the tougher opponent then Raheem should have been the guy that earned his shot.
I give Zahir Raheem credit for beating Erik Morales, that wasn't what i was saying. I meant it made more sense for a rematch with Erik Morales to happen. I wasn't taking any credit away from Zahir Raheem.
But Manny Pacquiao had a great chance to revenge his defeat to Erik Morales, plus he would get alot of fame and money. Where as fighting Zahir Raheem would of been forgettable encounter.
Plus Manny Pacquiao didn't even fight at 135 until 2008, you can't expect him too move up when he's got bigger fights at his own weightclasses JMM, MAB, Erik Morales.
hilarious considering after all of that was done, he moved up past casamayor and campbell to "bigger" fights (david diaz) I guess bigger means more money, easier opponents. Or rather tailor made opponents.
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
milmascaras1
neutral,
are you accusing me of being a racist just because i believe philippine boxing isn't very good with the exception of pacquiao? i think you're being too thin skinned. it's my opinion, i didn't say anything about race didn't i? grow a pair why don't ya!
Yes I do believe he's calling you a racist. Frankly I wouldn't take that if I were you.
Re: B. Hopkins: When will Pacquiao fight a Black fighter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
milmascaras1
neutral,
are you accusing me of being a racist just because i believe philippine boxing isn't very good with the exception of pacquiao? i think you're being too thin skinned. it's my opinion, i didn't say anything about race didn't i? grow a pair why don't ya!
Did you see me mention anything about racism in my post? Is that what you think it is? Then you must be guilty.
You have a right to express your opinion but I, also, have a right to ask the point of your opinion. If you don't want to answer it, then don't. Why be defensive? I am just asking as to what is the point of demeaning a country's sport in this forum. Don't you think that you're insulting the whole country?
