Printable View
So we've established Chino is a pretty mean mofo in the division after all.
I was impressed, I didn't think he'd be so competitive with Floyd.
Enough chit chat, could Manny punch him up more convincingly than Floyd?
I think Manny would perform better than Floyd against this opponent, he's got the speed and the power and the volume to match Maidana but his shots are crisper. Of course I am not sure. It'll be a toughie but I don't think Pac will suffer another JMM fate here :)
I agree Pac would do better. He'd employ the lateral movement Floyd did not use that Marcos struggles with.
Maidana when he has gone down it was during exchanges so if he was to come in throwing or had Pac on the ropes I could see Pac dropping him with a right hook. The same way Ortiz dropped him.
I saw Mayweather use plenty of lateral movement. He'd move side to side and waste time out of range, think he could hurt Maidana with a check left hook then find himself on the ropes. Everyone struggles with lateral movement, both the bull and the matador, simply because its a farce in a squared circle. What Pacquiao would do is throw the lead left whilst slipping the jab then turn Maidana and circle away to Maidana's blindside. Lateral movement in a squared circle = getting caught on the ropes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Swanson
I have not seen the Floyd fight yet, exactly how crap did he look because I would think Manny Pac would beat Maidana with relative ease, yet I think Floyd beats Manny Pac easy.
Even turning someone you escape laterally before re-engaging. Floyd backed straight back most of the night. You move laterally to avoid getting caught on the ropes. I don't even begin to understand what you are getting at with "lateral movement in a ssquared circle=getting caught on the ropes" are you saying moving laterally makes you get caught on the ropes? Because if so you are terrible wrong. Or are you saying Floyd was caught on the ropes repeatedly? In that case you are right. If you want to see how lateral movement can keep you off the ropes and not allow a big puncher get off because their feet aren't ready watch Mayweather/Corrales.Quote:
Originally Posted by jahmezI saw Mayweather use plenty of lateral movement. He'd move side to side and waste time out of range, think he could hurt Maidana with a check left hook then find himself on the ropes. Everyone struggles with lateral movement, both the bull and the matador, simply because its a farce in a squared circle. What Pacquiao would do is throw the lead left whilst slipping the jab then turn Maidana and circle away to Maidana's blindside. Lateral movement in a squared circle = getting caught on the ropes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Swanson
I think people are under estimating what Maidana did. The fight looked as you would expect with Maidana coming out like a bull in a china shop. The difference was when Floyd started landing flush shots he stayed with the bull in a china shop mentality. Most guys don't like those flush shots and they hesitate. You could feel that night of your life nothing is stopping me energy from Maidana. I thought Floyd was a little off. In the first there was an spot where Maidana was wide open, Floyd went to hit him but he was a bit late so he stopped and he almost stumbled. It just wasn't that normal grace. There were moments throughout the fight he looked just a bit off. I think he thought the fight would follow the normal script and accidentally ended up in a fight, couple that with a cut and he was a little shook. It's tough to gauge how much of that Maidana created and how much was Floyds fault. Hence the need for a rematch. But make no mistake it was a special performance by Maidana. He was willing to be great, he just came up a touch short.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Just saw the post fight and Floyd said he chose to fight more to entertain the crowd and next time he will box more. Could he be right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonI think people are under estimating what Maidana did. The fight looked as you would expect with Maidana coming out like a bull in a china shop. The difference was when Floyd started landing flush shots he stayed with the bull in a china shop mentality. Most guys don't like those flush shots and they hesitate. You could feel that night of your life nothing is stopping me energy from Maidana. I thought Floyd was a little off. In the first there was an spot where Maidana was wide open, Floyd went to hit him but he was a bit late so he stopped and he almost stumbled. It just wasn't that normal grace. There were moments throughout the fight he looked just a bit off. I think he thought the fight would follow the normal script and accidentally ended up in a fight, couple that with a cut and he was a little shook. It's tough to gauge how much of that Maidana created and how much was Floyds fault. Hence the need for a rematch. But make no mistake it was a special performance by Maidana. He was willing to be great, he just came up a touch short.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
That's why I want a rematch, I'm not sure. I could see him coming back with a gameplan more like the Corrales fight but is he still capable of that, I'm not sure. He's fought the other guys plan before, he out jabbed Oscar, he stood in the pocket and fought Shane, in the corner of the Hatton fight Roger was instructing him to get inside. These things are all counter intuitive but they worked. He said before the fight he would be right in front of Maidana and he was. But that doesn't mean it was by choice. I would expect him to move and get off his shots before Maidana got his feet right in a rematch but maybe he can't. That's the intrigue.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterJust saw the post fight and Floyd said he chose to fight more to entertain the crowd and next time he will box more. Could he be right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonI think people are under estimating what Maidana did. The fight looked as you would expect with Maidana coming out like a bull in a china shop. The difference was when Floyd started landing flush shots he stayed with the bull in a china shop mentality. Most guys don't like those flush shots and they hesitate. You could feel that night of your life nothing is stopping me energy from Maidana. I thought Floyd was a little off. In the first there was an spot where Maidana was wide open, Floyd went to hit him but he was a bit late so he stopped and he almost stumbled. It just wasn't that normal grace. There were moments throughout the fight he looked just a bit off. I think he thought the fight would follow the normal script and accidentally ended up in a fight, couple that with a cut and he was a little shook. It's tough to gauge how much of that Maidana created and how much was Floyds fault. Hence the need for a rematch. But make no mistake it was a special performance by Maidana. He was willing to be great, he just came up a touch short.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
If you move laterally/side to side in a square all your going to do is eventually hit the sides. It's just common sense. Circling is how you avoid hitting the sides (ropes), keep the fight in the centre of the squared circle, conserve energy and, most importantly, ensure that you are always in a position to throw effective punches whilst literally being one step ahead of your opponent. Floyd was at his worst when he used lateral movement against Maidana. He was needlessly wasting time and energy against a swarmer which could have been put to better use early on attacking the body and turning him into punches, he was only negatively reinforcing the impression that Maidana was forcing him to run and, worst of all, he was not in a position to throw effective combinations to keep him at bay. That was the real reason he kept finding himself against the ropes. Believing that simply moving side to side in a box will greatly alter the course of a fight is not only a terrible mistake but an absurd insinuation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonEven turning someone you escape laterally before re-engaging. Floyd backed straight back most of the night. You move laterally to avoid getting caught on the ropes. I don't even begin to understand what you are getting at with "lateral movement in a ssquared circle=getting caught on the ropes" are you saying moving laterally makes you get caught on the ropes? Because if so you are terrible wrong. Or are you saying Floyd was caught on the ropes repeatedly? In that case you are right. If you want to see how lateral movement can keep you off the ropes and not allow a big puncher get off because their feet aren't ready watch Mayweather/Corrales.Quote:
Originally Posted by jahmezI saw Mayweather use plenty of lateral movement. He'd move side to side and waste time out of range, think he could hurt Maidana with a check left hook then find himself on the ropes. Everyone struggles with lateral movement, both the bull and the matador, simply because its a farce in a squared circle. What Pacquiao would do is throw the lead left whilst slipping the jab then turn Maidana and circle away to Maidana's blindside. Lateral movement in a squared circle = getting caught on the ropes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Swanson
Styles make fights and I don't think pac would go through the same struggles.
Maidana is tailor made for pac imo. Despite the fact that floyd is great and all, his choice of punches are pretty much txtbook and unconventional fighters can give him problems.
Pac is different. If anything, pac is under the same category as maidana in terms of being unconventional except that he just flat out more advanced.
Maidana would be up against somebody who is so much faster and throws punches from odd angles just like him.
Maidana does not know how to cut off the ring and he sure as hell wouldn't be able to deal with pac's unpredictable movement.
It would look like the rios fight but maybe a little more competitive.
Pac can't even beat Floyd's tuneup...JMM.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Swanson
Maidana would put Pactrash back to sleep.
Pac falls in with his hands down...to call him more advanced than anybody is retarded.Quote:
Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita
Why bother with this convo...you know DAMN WELL Pactrash ain't going near Maidana.
The very reason Floyd vs Manny is so appealing. Even though I think the same as you, we don't know for sure. Now Maidana comes along and changes the scales a little.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
It's getting interesting!
Nobody knows for sure, but the way Floyd was fighting the first two rounds I thought he was playing around, after that it was clear to me he couldn't stay off the ropes. Spending the night on the ropes is not the way Floyd fights, and would not chose to fight in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterJust saw the post fight and Floyd said he chose to fight more to entertain the crowd and next time he will box more. Could he be right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonI think people are under estimating what Maidana did. The fight looked as you would expect with Maidana coming out like a bull in a china shop. The difference was when Floyd started landing flush shots he stayed with the bull in a china shop mentality. Most guys don't like those flush shots and they hesitate. You could feel that night of your life nothing is stopping me energy from Maidana. I thought Floyd was a little off. In the first there was an spot where Maidana was wide open, Floyd went to hit him but he was a bit late so he stopped and he almost stumbled. It just wasn't that normal grace. There were moments throughout the fight he looked just a bit off. I think he thought the fight would follow the normal script and accidentally ended up in a fight, couple that with a cut and he was a little shook. It's tough to gauge how much of that Maidana created and how much was Floyds fault. Hence the need for a rematch. But make no mistake it was a special performance by Maidana. He was willing to be great, he just came up a touch short.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
To be fair, aside from Marquez, Manny has beaten up every common opponent worse than Mayweather n often finished them sooner.
Now I know not to speak to you in boxing terms. Every person here who has boxed knew exactly what I meant because it's common boxing vernacular . But you describe the word from a mathematical POV. I suspect you are just being difficult. Or when someone mentions. A clinche do you picture the fighter tightening his butthole? Now I'm being difficult. In the future when we are discussing something and I use boxing terminology it will be intended to be the boxing definition on this boxing message board not not literal definition, cool? If we talk on a mathematical board we can use mathematical definitions.Quote:
Originally Posted by jahmezIf you move laterally/side to side in a square all your going to do is eventually hit the sides. It's just common sense. Circling is how you avoid hitting the sides (ropes), keep the fight in the centre of the squared circle, conserve energy and, most importantly, ensure that you are always in a position to throw effective punches whilst literally being one step ahead of your opponent. Floyd was at his worst when he used lateral movement against Maidana. He was needlessly wasting time and energy against a swarmer which could have been put to better use early on attacking the body and turning him into punches, he was only negatively reinforcing the impression that Maidana was forcing him to run and, worst of all, he was not in a position to throw effective combinations to keep him at bay. That was the real reason he kept finding himself against the ropes. Believing that simply moving side to side in a box will greatly alter the course of a fight is not only a terrible mistake but an absurd insinuation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonEven turning someone you escape laterally before re-engaging. Floyd backed straight back most of the night. You move laterally to avoid getting caught on the ropes. I don't even begin to understand what you are getting at with "lateral movement in a ssquared circle=getting caught on the ropes" are you saying moving laterally makes you get caught on the ropes? Because if so you are terrible wrong. Or are you saying Floyd was caught on the ropes repeatedly? In that case you are right. If you want to see how lateral movement can keep you off the ropes and not allow a big puncher get off because their feet aren't ready watch Mayweather/Corrales.Quote:
Originally Posted by jahmezI saw Mayweather use plenty of lateral movement. He'd move side to side and waste time out of range, think he could hurt Maidana with a check left hook then find himself on the ropes. Everyone struggles with lateral movement, both the bull and the matador, simply because its a farce in a squared circle. What Pacquiao would do is throw the lead left whilst slipping the jab then turn Maidana and circle away to Maidana's blindside. Lateral movement in a squared circle = getting caught on the ropes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Swanson
If you're going to be fair you should also mention Floyd fought all but Hatton at more natural weights and Pac fought all but Cotto when they were older.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulk
It's clear.
Besides JMM, Pac did better against common opponents than what Floyd did.
Maidana fight proves that Pac (a "super Maidana) is still very much the possible number 1 guy in boxing and Floyd has to prove otherwise otherwise he'll never be TBE.
to be fair...first is better than worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulk
Manny could/should have fought Shane before Floyd..when Mosley had just taken Margarito's title...but he wanted no parts.
"Shane..can you make 142?" Freddy Roach
What kind of Rabies ass logic is this....?Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Power
ALL the common opponents say:
"Floyd would beat Pacman..;D
Pac is not a "super Maidana"..being that Marcos has never been face-planted for 10 minutes.
Oscar had a TITLE and was still knocking people out when Floyd beat him.
Shane had a TITLE and was still knockin people out when Floyd beat him.
Different is that Mayweather still beat all the guys clearly and besides Cotto beat them first. Pac has never ever really beaten Jmm most everyone though lost the fight then he got kncoked the fuck out. Mayweather didn't lose a round to the guy and as for the fight depends how Pacs chin holds up. He has not faced a big puncher really since the Jmm destruction and look like shit vs Bradley. We will see in next fight exactly were both guys are which should be in coming year or so i guess right maybe more.
Lol there was nothing mathematical about what I posted - you're just a fucking dumbcunt! Anyone who has boxed before knows that side to side movement is just another name for running. You force yourself into an ultra squared - up position from where you cannot throw punches with any proper leverage let alone combinations, you sacrifice all of your range and are reduced to fending and running - that's half the reason why people hate Floyd so much! When Floyd starting to keep the fight in the centre of the ring by turning and circling (thereby also placing himself into a position to "sit down on his punches and dig to the body") lo and behold the fight turned into his favor. I don't know why this is so hard for you to understand. Maybe next time you post on the boxing board you should try disengaging your asshole from Floyd's penis if only for a moment so that you could start posting opinions of value instead of endlessly praising the Lord of coonery Himself :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonNow I know not to speak to you in boxing terms. Every person here who has boxed knew exactly what I meant because it's common boxing vernacular . But you describe the word from a mathematical POV. I suspect you are just being difficult. Or when someone mentions. A clinche do you picture the fighter tightening his butthole? Now I'm being difficult. In the future when we are discussing something and I use boxing terminology it will be intended to be the boxing definition on this boxing message board not not literal definition, cool? If we talk on a mathematical board we can use mathematical definitions.Quote:
Originally Posted by jahmezIf you move laterally/side to side in a square all your going to do is eventually hit the sides. It's just common sense. Circling is how you avoid hitting the sides (ropes), keep the fight in the centre of the squared circle, conserve energy and, most importantly, ensure that you are always in a position to throw effective punches whilst literally being one step ahead of your opponent. Floyd was at his worst when he used lateral movement against Maidana. He was needlessly wasting time and energy against a swarmer which could have been put to better use early on attacking the body and turning him into punches, he was only negatively reinforcing the impression that Maidana was forcing him to run and, worst of all, he was not in a position to throw effective combinations to keep him at bay. That was the real reason he kept finding himself against the ropes. Believing that simply moving side to side in a box will greatly alter the course of a fight is not only a terrible mistake but an absurd insinuation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonEven turning someone you escape laterally before re-engaging. Floyd backed straight back most of the night. You move laterally to avoid getting caught on the ropes. I don't even begin to understand what you are getting at with "lateral movement in a ssquared circle=getting caught on the ropes" are you saying moving laterally makes you get caught on the ropes? Because if so you are terrible wrong. Or are you saying Floyd was caught on the ropes repeatedly? In that case you are right. If you want to see how lateral movement can keep you off the ropes and not allow a big puncher get off because their feet aren't ready watch Mayweather/Corrales.Quote:
Originally Posted by jahmezI saw Mayweather use plenty of lateral movement. He'd move side to side and waste time out of range, think he could hurt Maidana with a check left hook then find himself on the ropes. Everyone struggles with lateral movement, both the bull and the matador, simply because its a farce in a squared circle. What Pacquiao would do is throw the lead left whilst slipping the jab then turn Maidana and circle away to Maidana's blindside. Lateral movement in a squared circle = getting caught on the ropes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Swanson
Maidana does not have chances
There it is, insults, bullshit and racism. You're exposed. Never speak to me because you are useless trash and I will never speak to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by jahmezLol there was nothing mathematical about what I posted - you're just a fucking dumbcunt! Anyone who has boxed before knows that side to side movement is just another name for running. You force yourself into an ultra squared - up position from where you cannot throw punches with any proper leverage let alone combinations, you sacrifice all of your range and are reduced to fending and running - that's half the reason why people hate Floyd so much! When Floyd starting to keep the fight in the centre of the ring by turning and circling (thereby also placing himself into a position to "sit down on his punches and dig to the body") lo and behold the fight turned into his favor. I don't know why this is so hard for you to understand. Maybe next time you post on the boxing board you should try disengaging your asshole from Floyd's penis if only for a moment so that you could start posting opinions of value instead of endlessly praising the Lord of coonery Himself :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonNow I know not to speak to you in boxing terms. Every person here who has boxed knew exactly what I meant because it's common boxing vernacular . But you describe the word from a mathematical POV. I suspect you are just being difficult. Or when someone mentions. A clinche do you picture the fighter tightening his butthole? Now I'm being difficult. In the future when we are discussing something and I use boxing terminology it will be intended to be the boxing definition on this boxing message board not not literal definition, cool? If we talk on a mathematical board we can use mathematical definitions.Quote:
Originally Posted by jahmezIf you move laterally/side to side in a square all your going to do is eventually hit the sides. It's just common sense. Circling is how you avoid hitting the sides (ropes), keep the fight in the centre of the squared circle, conserve energy and, most importantly, ensure that you are always in a position to throw effective punches whilst literally being one step ahead of your opponent. Floyd was at his worst when he used lateral movement against Maidana. He was needlessly wasting time and energy against a swarmer which could have been put to better use early on attacking the body and turning him into punches, he was only negatively reinforcing the impression that Maidana was forcing him to run and, worst of all, he was not in a position to throw effective combinations to keep him at bay. That was the real reason he kept finding himself against the ropes. Believing that simply moving side to side in a box will greatly alter the course of a fight is not only a terrible mistake but an absurd insinuation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron SwansonEven turning someone you escape laterally before re-engaging. Floyd backed straight back most of the night. You move laterally to avoid getting caught on the ropes. I don't even begin to understand what you are getting at with "lateral movement in a ssquared circle=getting caught on the ropes" are you saying moving laterally makes you get caught on the ropes? Because if so you are terrible wrong. Or are you saying Floyd was caught on the ropes repeatedly? In that case you are right. If you want to see how lateral movement can keep you off the ropes and not allow a big puncher get off because their feet aren't ready watch Mayweather/Corrales.Quote:
Originally Posted by jahmezI saw Mayweather use plenty of lateral movement. He'd move side to side and waste time out of range, think he could hurt Maidana with a check left hook then find himself on the ropes. Everyone struggles with lateral movement, both the bull and the matador, simply because its a farce in a squared circle. What Pacquiao would do is throw the lead left whilst slipping the jab then turn Maidana and circle away to Maidana's blindside. Lateral movement in a squared circle = getting caught on the ropes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Swanson
No you've just got nothing to say because you know shit about boxing. Every one of your posts is about Floyd the business man, Floyd the ATG, Floyd the legitimate matchmaker blah blah blah. None of your posts hold any value. It would be cool if you could explain and break down technically why Floyd could win a fight beyond simply saying some corny cliché like "lateral movement". Instead all of your posts amount to worthless gossip.
@jahmez take it easy and do not take things so personally. Ron is talking sense and there is no need to make insults.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclonePac can't even beat Floyd's tuneup...JMM.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Swanson
Maidana would put Pactrash back to sleep.
you sir just typed an idiotic statement. How many times did jmm and pac fight. sooner or later you will figure your opponent out.
your reasoning is chock full o ignorance
He's a big boy and if he can be smartass so can IQuote:
Originally Posted by Master
What JMM does have that Floyd doesn not as well is toughness. That's what enabled him to withstand Pac. I don't see the same in Floyd.Quote:
Originally Posted by chris6878Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclonePac can't even beat Floyd's tuneup...JMM.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Swanson
Maidana would put Pactrash back to sleep.
you sir just typed an idiotic statement. How many times did jmm and pac fight. sooner or later you will figure your opponent out.
your reasoning is chock full o ignorance
Not saying he would but I'm saying he could CRUSH that defence.
It's a reasonable scenario and Floyd knows it. Why else do you think he'd publically humiliate himself with his cowardice for so long!
If you dont think pac is so far ahead of maidana, then u dont know shit about boxing..Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclonePac falls in with his hands down...to call him more advanced than anybody is retarded.Quote:
Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita
Why bother with this convo...you know DAMN WELL Pactrash ain't going near Maidana.
Most sober analysts would agree Floyd is favourite of course. But to say Pac would not be a tough challenge for him is ludicrous!
Of course Pac is better than Maidana.