Is Manny Pacquiao Bad For Boxing?

**GAME** · 07-11-2009 04:29 PM

Originally Posted by ICB

Originally Posted by GAME

Originally Posted by ICB

Oh come on GAME you know we have got on in the past, and you know im a MAB fan but i find that to be a silly comparison. Mike Tyson had been shot for over a decade and was coming off a loss to Danny Williams.

Where as MAB was P4P number 3 and was coming off some of his finest performances, against Erik Morales 2, Kevin Kelley, Naseem Hamed, Johnny Tapia.

Now i know all about the problems MAB had prior to the fight, but that isn't Manny Pacquiao's fault is it ? he beat the fighter in front of him who was P4P number 3 and thats all that counts.

Suprisingly in there rematch i felt MAB done better, even though he was past his prime at that point so work that one out. But the point is whether i like it or not because im a massive MAB fan, the fact is Manny Pacquiao just has MAB's number. Which is nothing to be ashamed of but its true.

Just like JMM has Manny Pacquiao's number, but his punch resistance isn't as good as someone like Erik Morales or ETC. Otherwise he would of won both fights, but still i feel the 3 knockdowns in the 1st fight. Where due to JMM being caught cold and getting suprised by Manny Pacquiao's speed.

Yeah but Barrera had his debut in 1989 so what do you expect. Just cuz Manny beat Barrera doesnt mean that would always be the case. If a prime Barrera fought the Pac who fought Torrencampo and Singursat we'd all be saying that Barrera had Pacs number

Its all about stages of career. Pac got Mab at the right time. I also felt he got Oscar at the right time.

Im not saying Singursat has Mannys number. Im saying he got Pac at the right time just as Manny got Barrera at the right time.

But thats totally different GAME, Manny Pacquiao wasn't anywhere close to what he is now and he was still very raw and young plus that was 10 years ago. And we all know that he was badly weight-drained thats why he lost his title on the scales.

Thats totally different to MAB who was in his peak, because he became a better boxer after losing to Junior Jones x2. And he was coming off the best wins of his career against Johnny Tapia, Naseem Hamed, Erik Morales 2, Kevin Kelley, ETC.

And he was P4P number 3, yes he was having problems prior to the fight, but you still can't say MAB wasn't in his peak because he was.

And you say he made his pro debut in 1989, but what does that prove ? he was 15 when he made his pro debut. And and about 28 of his fights were against mediocre opponents, because he was a boy fighting men. He was only 29 in the Manny Pacquiao fight, and he was in his peak coming off his best performances of his career.

Im a big MAB fan but sometimes you just have to be honest, Manny Pacquiao had MAB's number end of. I agree that the 2nd fight doesn't mean that much, but the 1st fight clearly does. That was a great win for Manny Pacquiao, and i was sad when i see it.

But facts are facts GAME Manny Pacquiao has got MAB's number, but thats nothing to be ashamed of. Because all great fighters meet a certain style they can't handle, and Manny Pacquiao is a great fighter himself.

Thats your opinion and you can belive what you like but you are very quick to make excuses for Pacs losses. Dont you think it had anything to do with him losing to the better man that night?

I happen to believe boxing is all about stages of career and a fighter may lose to a lesser fighter just because he isnt at his best anymore. There are several examples of this

I do not think that Singursat is better than Pac but he got him at the right time

I do not think Berbick is better than Ali but he got him at the right time

I do not think Rahman is better than Lewis but he got him at the right time

I do not think Willy Wise is better than Chavez but he got him at the right time

and

I do not think Manny is better than Barrera or Oscar. He just got them at the right time.

Thats boxing.

**TitoFan** · 07-11-2009 05:32 PM

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Manny "Pacman" Pacquaio has greatly divided the boxing community into different factions. Those for him and against him. Many of those fans in his camp think he's the greatest thing since slice bread. And then there are those fans that just don't like him for whatever reason.

This is a serious question because of many boxing fans have called Manny Pacquiao a pussy and coward for wanting to fight Cotto at a catchweight, which would be his first. To be fair I never considered the Oscar fight a catchweight because you can't expect someone to jump 3 weight classes from 135 to fight you when you called him out and it was at the 147 ww limit. So there are endless discussions about the Pacman for or against him in every boxing forum.

So is Manny Pacquiao bad for boxing? Would boxing be better if Manny Pacquiao never picked up the sport?

Discuss.

How can Manny be "bad for boxing"? Honestly, I don't get what's behind the question. NO, Manny's not bad for boxing. He has attracted tons of new fans, and he's dominated in a way that few boxers dominate. And right now he's the hottest draw in boxing.

A better question would be: "Are fanatical Pacquiao fans bad for boxing?" And although I'd be tempted to say "yes", I'll even go the other way there. Sure, they can be downright obnoxious. But in a way, isn't that what gives a little spice to forums such as these? After all, if we didn't have clueless Pacquiao fans to beat up on once in a while, what fun would it be?

**Howlin Mad Missy** · 07-11-2009 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by C-Lo

Originally Posted by ICB

Originally Posted by GAME

wow Manny beat a washed up Barrera so what . Mcbride beat Tyson but I dont hear anyone comparing Mcbride to Jesus

Youre just sore cuz one of your boys got stopped by Chris Byrd and the other got stopped by Corrie Sanders. You should be ashamed

Oh come on GAME you know we have got on in the past, and you know im a MAB fan but i find that to be a silly comparison. Mike Tyson had been shot for over a decade and was coming off a loss to Danny Williams.

Where as MAB was P4P number 3 and was coming off some of his finest performances, against Erik Morales 2, Kevin Kelley, Naseem Hamed, Johnny Tapia.

Now i know all about the problems MAB had prior to the fight, but that isn't Manny Pacquiao's fault is it ? he beat the fighter in front of him who was P4P number 3 and thats all that counts.

Suprisingly in there rematch i felt MAB done better, even though he was past his prime at that point so work that one out. But the point is whether i like it or not because im a massive MAB fan, the fact is Manny Pacquiao just has MAB's number. Which is nothing to be ashamed of but its true.

Just like JMM has Manny Pacquiao's number, but his punch resistance isn't as good as someone like Erik Morales or ETC. Otherwise he would of won both fights, but still i feel the 3 knockdowns in the 1st fight. Where due to JMM being caught cold and getting suprised by Manny Pacquiao's speed.

I thought MAB fought a better fight the second time around too. He landed much bigger blows but I felt he held back too much and didn't want to get into a brawl with Manny. I still had Pac winning, but a closer fight than what the scorecards read. I always thought Manny had MAB's number too. Similar to Vernon Forrest having Mosley's number.

It demonstrates what a number of us said at the time but plenty of people laughed at the idea, that MAB was majorly underprepared for the first fight - and common sense would dictate that with MAB being older and Pac a better boxer by their second fight it would have been an easier fight for Pac but it wasn't.
The other thing is and it goes for all fighters, they can only face the man in front of them whether they are ill, have broken bones etc etc All some people care about are facts and figures but the devil is in the detail as we all know.

**Howlin Mad Missy** · 07-11-2009 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Manny "Pacman" Pacquaio has greatly divided the boxing community into different factions. Those for him and against him. Many of those fans in his camp think he's the greatest thing since slice bread. And then there are those fans that just don't like him for whatever reason.

This is a serious question because of many boxing fans have called Manny Pacquiao a pussy and coward for wanting to fight Cotto at a catchweight, which would be his first. To be fair I never considered the Oscar fight a catchweight because you can't expect someone to jump 3 weight classes from 135 to fight you when you called him out and it was at the 147 ww limit. So there are endless discussions about the Pacman for or against him in every boxing forum.

So is Manny Pacquiao bad for boxing? Would boxing be better if Manny Pacquiao never picked up the sport?

Discuss.

How can Manny be "bad for boxing"? Honestly, I don't get what's behind the question. NO, Manny's not bad for boxing. He has attracted tons of new fans, and he's dominated in a way that few boxers dominate. And right now he's the hottest draw in boxing.

A better question would be: "Are fanatical Pacquiao fans bad for boxing?" And although I'd be tempted to say "yes", I'll even go the other way there. Sure, they can be downright obnoxious. But in a way, isn't that what gives a little spice to forums such as these? After all, if we didn't have clueless Pacquiao fans to beat up on once in a while, what fun would it be?

the same way some posters like to start fights and watch the little people go to work.

ICB · 07-12-2009 01:01 PM

Originally Posted by GAME

Originally Posted by ICB

Originally Posted by GAME

Yeah but Barrera had his debut in 1989 so what do you expect. Just cuz Manny beat Barrera doesnt mean that would always be the case. If a prime Barrera fought the Pac who fought Torrencampo and Singursat we'd all be saying that Barrera had Pacs number

Its all about stages of career. Pac got Mab at the right time. I also felt he got Oscar at the right time.

Im not saying Singursat has Mannys number. Im saying he got Pac at the right time just as Manny got Barrera at the right time.

But thats totally different GAME, Manny Pacquiao wasn't anywhere close to what he is now and he was still very raw and young plus that was 10 years ago. And we all know that he was badly weight-drained thats why he lost his title on the scales.

Thats totally different to MAB who was in his peak, because he became a better boxer after losing to Junior Jones x2. And he was coming off the best wins of his career against Johnny Tapia, Naseem Hamed, Erik Morales 2, Kevin Kelley, ETC.

And he was P4P number 3, yes he was having problems prior to the fight, but you still can't say MAB wasn't in his peak because he was.

And you say he made his pro debut in 1989, but what does that prove ? he was 15 when he made his pro debut. And and about 28 of his fights were against mediocre opponents, because he was a boy fighting men. He was only 29 in the Manny Pacquiao fight, and he was in his peak coming off his best performances of his career.

Im a big MAB fan but sometimes you just have to be honest, Manny Pacquiao had MAB's number end of. I agree that the 2nd fight doesn't mean that much, but the 1st fight clearly does. That was a great win for Manny Pacquiao, and i was sad when i see it.

But facts are facts GAME Manny Pacquiao has got MAB's number, but thats nothing to be ashamed of. Because all great fighters meet a certain style they can't handle, and Manny Pacquiao is a great fighter himself.

Thats your opinion and you can belive what you like but you are very quick to make excuses for Pacs losses. Dont you think it had anything to do with him losing to the better man that night?

I happen to believe boxing is all about stages of career and a fighter may lose to a lesser fighter just because he isnt at his best anymore. There are several examples of this

I do not think that Singursat is better than Pac but he got him at the right time

I do not think Berbick is better than Ali but he got him at the right time

I do not think Rahman is better than Lewis but he got him at the right time

I do not think Willy Wise is better than Chavez but he got him at the right time

and

I do not think Manny is better than Barrera or Oscar. He just got them at the right time.

Thats boxing.

Those examples you have given are totally different to MAB vs Manny Pacquiao, Muhammad Ali had been shot for years. And was suffering from damage to the brain, and had just took a horrible beating off Larry Holmes.

I don't really think Hasim Rahman got Lennox Lewis at the right time, it was more due to Lennox Lewis taking Hasim Rahman lightly. And Lennox Lewis got caught by a lucky punch and if they fought 100 times, they would never happen again. And again i fail to see the comparison here.

That was JCC's 108th fight of course he will lose to bums like that, being 37 and having so many wars. But he did beat him in the rematch, and again this has nothing to do with our discussion.

And i've already explained Manny Pacquiao was still raw, and he was weight drained which is why he lost his title on the scales. That was 10 years ago, totally irrelvant now.

As i've said to you in this thread GAME, MAB was P4P number 3 and was coming off the best performances of his career. And he was at his peak, those examples you gave me there, were fighters that were clearly shot.

Another example was a fighter being seriously weight drained, and still young and raw and was nowhere near at his peak. And the last example was of a fighter taking another fighter too lightly.

I doubt MAB would of taken Manny Pacquiao too lightly, infact has MAB ever taken any opponent lightly ? and again i fail to see how any of those comparison's you put up there are comparable to MAB vs Manny Pacquiao.

Yes MAB did have some troubles outside the ring, but because the fight was so one sided. I really doubt it would of mattered that much anyway. Manny Pacquiao's just too fast for MAB, just like Junior Jones was.

Manny Pacquiao has MAB's number and that is a fact, im a massive MAB fan so don't think im a Manny Pacquiao fan because im not, i do respect the guy but im not a fan. But you just have to admit it but its nothing to be ashamed of, because Manny Pacquiao is an excellent fighter.

**GAME** · 07-12-2009 01:04 PM

By that logic Torrencampo has Pacs number. I dont agree with that but there you go.

ICB · 07-12-2009 01:06 PM

Originally Posted by Howlin Mad Missy

Originally Posted by C-Lo

Originally Posted by ICB

Oh come on GAME you know we have got on in the past, and you know im a MAB fan but i find that to be a silly comparison. Mike Tyson had been shot for over a decade and was coming off a loss to Danny Williams.

Where as MAB was P4P number 3 and was coming off some of his finest performances, against Erik Morales 2, Kevin Kelley, Naseem Hamed, Johnny Tapia.

Now i know all about the problems MAB had prior to the fight, but that isn't Manny Pacquiao's fault is it ? he beat the fighter in front of him who was P4P number 3 and thats all that counts.

Suprisingly in there rematch i felt MAB done better, even though he was past his prime at that point so work that one out. But the point is whether i like it or not because im a massive MAB fan, the fact is Manny Pacquiao just has MAB's number. Which is nothing to be ashamed of but its true.

Just like JMM has Manny Pacquiao's number, but his punch resistance isn't as good as someone like Erik Morales or ETC. Otherwise he would of won both fights, but still i feel the 3 knockdowns in the 1st fight. Where due to JMM being caught cold and getting suprised by Manny Pacquiao's speed.

I thought MAB fought a better fight the second time around too. He landed much bigger blows but I felt he held back too much and didn't want to get into a brawl with Manny. I still had Pac winning, but a closer fight than what the scorecards read. I always thought Manny had MAB's number too. Similar to Vernon Forrest having Mosley's number.

It demonstrates what a number of us said at the time but plenty of people laughed at the idea, that MAB was majorly underprepared for the first fight - and common sense would dictate that with MAB being older and Pac a better boxer by their second fight it would have been an easier fight for Pac but it wasn't.
The other thing is and it goes for all fighters, they can only face the man in front of them whether they are ill, have broken bones etc etc All some people care about are facts and figures but the devil is in the detail as we all know.

Yes but that was also due to MAB, fighting overly cautious which isn't his normal style and it never has been. He can box very well, but that night he was too overly cautious. And thats why Manny Pacquiao couldn't find his rhythm.

And i think even if MAB was at his best i don't really think, it would of made a whole lot of difference. I still see a clear UD for Manny Pacquiao, although it would be more competitive obviously.

ICB · 07-12-2009 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by GAME

By that logic Torrencampo has Pacs number. I dont agree with that but there you go.

Sorry GAME but you've got me confused here bud. Manny Pacquiao beat MAB when he was P4P number 3 and coming off his best performances. And was probably considered to be at his peak at that time, before he fought Manny Pacquiao.

So how does Manny Pacquiao only being 17 years old. Only having his 12 pro fight. And being raw/wild and not being anywhere near his peak, equal to Rustico Torrencampo having Manny Pacquiao's number ?

Or being comparable to MAB vs Manny Pacquiao ? do you seriously believe if they fought now that Rustico Torrencampo would stand a chance ? because he beat an 17 year old version of Manny Pacquiao ?

**GAME** · 07-12-2009 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by ICB

Originally Posted by GAME

By that logic Torrencampo has Pacs number. I dont agree with that but there you go.

Sorry GAME but you've got me confused here bud. Manny Pacquiao beat MAB when he was P4P number 3 and coming off his best performances.

So how does Manny Pacquiao only being 17 years old. Only having his 12 pro fight. And being raw/wild and not being anywhere near his peak, equal Rustico Torrencampo having Manny Pacquiao's number ?

Or being comparable to MAB vs Manny Pacquiao. do you seriously believe if they fought now that Rustico Torrencampo would stand a chance ? because he beat an 17 year old version of Manny Pacquiao ?

Are you serioulsy suggesting that If that Manny who got beat by those guys, faced a prime Barrera, he would stand a chance?

I duno why you keep brininging up Barreras ranking back in 2003 cuz he clearly hadnt trained a day for that fight and it was the worst he has ever been entering into any fight. How else do you explain years later when a washed up Barrera coming off a loss took on the new and improved Manny and Pac couldnt land a glove on him. Barrera boxed at his own pace and did want he wanted. Pac couldnt figure him out but won on workrate against a guy who had been boxing since 1989 so he is bound to be showing signs of wear and tear yet manny couldnt even floor him

All im saying is Manny got Marco at the right time and so did the other fighters Ive listed. Doesnt make em better and doesnt mean they have the other guys number . They just won that night but on another night it would have been different.

ICB · 07-12-2009 01:27 PM

Originally Posted by GAME

Originally Posted by ICB

Originally Posted by GAME

By that logic Torrencampo has Pacs number. I dont agree with that but there you go.

Sorry GAME but you've got me confused here bud. Manny Pacquiao beat MAB when he was P4P number 3 and coming off his best performances.

So how does Manny Pacquiao only being 17 years old. Only having his 12 pro fight. And being raw/wild and not being anywhere near his peak, equal Rustico Torrencampo having Manny Pacquiao's number ?

Or being comparable to MAB vs Manny Pacquiao. do you seriously believe if they fought now that Rustico Torrencampo would stand a chance ? because he beat an 17 year old version of Manny Pacquiao ?

Are you serioulsy suggesting that If that Manny would got beat by those guys faced a prime Barrera he would stand a chance

I duno why you keep brininging up Barreras ranking back in 2003 cuz he clearly hadnt trained a day for that fight and it was the worst he has ever been entering into any fight. How else do you explain years later when a washed up Barrera coming off a loss took on the new and improved Manny and Pac couldnt land a glove on him. Barrera boxed at his own pace and did want he wanted. Pac couldnt figure him out but won on workrate against a guy who had been boxing since 1989 so he is bound to be showing signs of wear and tear yet manny couldnt even floor him

All im saying is Manny got Marco at the right time and so did the other fighters Ive listed. Doesnt make em better and doesnt mean they have the other guys number . They just won that night but on another night it would have been different.

GAME your making too much of these early losses, Manny Pacquiao was 17 years old for crying out loud. He was only a boy, and the other was when he was weight drained and he was still only 20 years old. And despite Manny Pacquiao being seriously weight drained, and nowhere near his peak. The KO itself was controversial, i thought it was a low blow myself but whatever.

Do you know how many great fighters have had early losses in there career's ? Alexis Arguello, Dick Tiger, Henry Armstrong, ETC. I really don't see how its irrelvant to Manny Pacquiao or these fighters, because the fighters that beat them then would of been battered from pillar to post, if they fought them later in there career.

Im bringing up MAB's ranking because he was considered at his peak then, based on coming off his best performance and thats really the end of it. Yes entering the Manny Pacquiao fight, he wasn't at his peak. Because he did have problems, i never said he didn't.

But he did get beaten one sidedly, and again based on how one sided it was. I don't really think it would of mattered had a 100 percent MAB been in there.

The reason MAB done better in the 2nd fight, was because he fought overly cautious. Not taking hardly any risks, which isn't his style. He couldnt fight on the inside because he was getting out speeded and beat to the punch each time.

And any fighter would look bad against a very experiened legend, who is just on the defensive most of the time. Points wise it was still pretty one sided, and it was actually sad to see that fight. As a MAB fan because that just isn't his style, and when he boxed he would be a mixture of a boxer/puncher.

**GAME** · 07-12-2009 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by ICB

Originally Posted by GAME

Originally Posted by ICB

Sorry GAME but you've got me confused here bud. Manny Pacquiao beat MAB when he was P4P number 3 and coming off his best performances.

So how does Manny Pacquiao only being 17 years old. Only having his 12 pro fight. And being raw/wild and not being anywhere near his peak, equal Rustico Torrencampo having Manny Pacquiao's number ?

Or being comparable to MAB vs Manny Pacquiao. do you seriously believe if they fought now that Rustico Torrencampo would stand a chance ? because he beat an 17 year old version of Manny Pacquiao ?

Are you serioulsy suggesting that If that Manny would got beat by those guys faced a prime Barrera he would stand a chance

I duno why you keep brininging up Barreras ranking back in 2003 cuz he clearly hadnt trained a day for that fight and it was the worst he has ever been entering into any fight. How else do you explain years later when a washed up Barrera coming off a loss took on the new and improved Manny and Pac couldnt land a glove on him. Barrera boxed at his own pace and did want he wanted. Pac couldnt figure him out but won on workrate against a guy who had been boxing since 1989 so he is bound to be showing signs of wear and tear yet manny couldnt even floor him

All im saying is Manny got Marco at the right time and so did the other fighters Ive listed. Doesnt make em better and doesnt mean they have the other guys number . They just won that night but on another night it would have been different.

GAME your making too much of these early losses, Manny Pacquiao was 17 years old for crying out loud. He was only a boy, and the other was when he was weight drained and he was still only 20 years old. And despite Manny Pacquiao being seriously weight drained, and nowhere near his peak. The KO itself was controversial, i thought it was a low blow myself but whatever.

Do you know how many great fighters have had early losses in there career's ? Alexis Arguello, Dick Tiger, Henry Armstrong, ETC. I really don't see how its irrelvant to Manny Pacquiao or these fighters, because the fighters that beat them then would of been battered from pillar to post, if they fought them later in there career.

Im bringing up MAB's ranking because he was considered at his peak then, based on coming off his best performance and thats really the end of it. Yes entering the Manny Pacquiao fight, he wasn't at his peak. Because he did have problems, i never said he didn't.

But he did get beaten one sidedly, and again based on how one sided it was. I don't really think it would of mattered had a 100 percent MAB been in there.

The reason MAB done better in the 2nd fight, was because he fought overly cautious. Not taking hardly any risks, which isn't his style. He couldnt fight on the inside because he was getting out speeded each time.

And any fighter would look bad against a very experiened legend, who is just on the defensive most of the time. Points wise it was still pretty one sided, and it was actually sad to see that fight. As a MAB fan because that just isn't his style, and when he boxed he would be a mixture of a boxer/puncher.

Which is my point that its a bout stages of career and Manny may have lost early in his career but it doesnt mean those guys have his number. I wouldnt say Oscar has Chavez' number either

We are gonna have to agree to disagree on this one ice or we will just keep on going round in cirlces repeating the same points.

Ive heard what you say and I disagree. I say that any fighter can be beaten at any stage of their career but on a different night they may have beaten the same guy. Barrera and Pac can both say this about their losses.

**The Congressman** · 07-12-2009 02:12 PM

GAMEboy is digging deeper and deeper grave for himself with his poor logic. 'So sad.