Yea this proves how lackluster an opponent Diaz was...

[AdamGB]

Move on man, stop the hating already! It has been a few years that have gone by, no use getting stuck with that garbage. I'm sure even the real El Teribble, Erik Morales, have already have moved on too. It does not reflect positively on you if these keeps on.

The news is about David diaz' triumphant return, why rain on his parade and drag other names to fuel whatever fires or agendas you want to flare?

I am happy for David Diaz. He is a Chicago man. Some acquaintances and friends, swear by how level-headed and an overall good guy the man really is! Focus on the negatives... one way or another, you'd surely lose out. Move on, Man!

triumphant return? he barely beat a shot fighter who was basically totally outclassed in his last fight against Katsidis and didn't listen to reason and retire, it was an extremely close fight as Jaz was saying and given the condition that Chavez is in now, that's not saying anything good for Diaz, he's garbage, and always has been garbage, any top 15 lightweight beats the shit out of him, how he is out of the ring has nothing to do with his abilities in the ring (which aren't many), it's brought up because while others are accused of cherry picking (Mayweather, Klitschko's, DLH, etc.), Pacquiao always is given an excuse (i say given cause it's usually not coming from him), 2 of his last 3 opponents have been cherry picked (a shot weight drained DLH, and the garbage that is David Diaz), and that's the point i'm making, now get off your high horse it has nothing to do with Morales, i don't bitch and make excuses for his losses, nor do i overhype wins, cause well lets face it, none of them need it

It was Oscar De La Hoya that cherry picked Manny, not the other way around. Larry Merchant proposed the fight to Oscar and Oscar loving a big pay day thought he could beat the former flyweight champion. Let's not bullshit about that. In fact Oscar has a habit of making guys jump up 2 weight classes to fight him, see Shane Mosley. And since you brought out the weight draining process, he did the same to Bernard Hopkins.

Please... Hopkins walked around in shape close to 160 anyway... he had to lose something like 3 pounds? Oscar ended up coming down the best part of 10 pounds... so the two don't really compare for starters.

But whether it was 10 pounds or 3 pounds doesn't really matter - just because one fighter did one thing it doesn't make it a get out of jail free card for another fighter to do the same thing and have no questions asked...

ODLH may have nudged pacman to fight, but it was roach who set a weight and took it knowing that ODLH probably wouldn't be able to cut down to it, if he thought oscar would have been a threat at 147 then he would have asked for the fight to take place at 144-143 or something (why do you think they were happy to take Oscar at 147 but not Mosely or Cotto?...)

[generalbulldog]

triumphant return? he barely beat a shot fighter who was basically totally outclassed in his last fight against Katsidis and didn't listen to reason and retire, it was an extremely close fight as Jaz was saying and given the condition that Chavez is in now, that's not saying anything good for Diaz, he's garbage, and always has been garbage, any top 15 lightweight beats the shit out of him, how he is out of the ring has nothing to do with his abilities in the ring (which aren't many), it's brought up because while others are accused of cherry picking (Mayweather, Klitschko's, DLH, etc.), Pacquiao always is given an excuse (i say given cause it's usually not coming from him), 2 of his last 3 opponents have been cherry picked (a shot weight drained DLH, and the garbage that is David Diaz), and that's the point i'm making, now get off your high horse it has nothing to do with Morales, i don't bitch and make excuses for his losses, nor do i overhype wins, cause well lets face it, none of them need it

It was Oscar De La Hoya that cherry picked Manny, not the other way around. Larry Merchant proposed the fight to Oscar and Oscar loving a big pay day thought he could beat the former flyweight champion. Let's not bullshit about that. In fact Oscar has a habit of making guys jump up 2 weight classes to fight him, see Shane Mosley. And since you brought out the weight draining process, he did the same to Bernard Hopkins.

Please... Hopkins walked around in shape close to 160 anyway... he had to lose something like 3 pounds? Oscar ended up coming down the best part of 10 pounds... so the two don't really compare for starters.

But whether it was 10 pounds or 3 pounds doesn't really matter - just because one fighter did one thing it doesn't make it a get out of jail free card for another fighter to do the same thing and have no questions asked...

ODLH may have nudged pacman to fight, but it was roach who set a weight and took it knowing that ODLH probably wouldn't be able to cut down to it, if he thought oscar would have been a threat at 147 then he would have asked for the fight to take place at 144-143 or something (why do you think they were happy to take Oscar at 147 but not Mosely or Cotto?...)

147 is the correct weight to fight, what you expect Pac to fight at 154? lol
Name me 1 time in boxing history where a guy jumps 3 weight classes? It hasn't happened. If you guys complained about catchweights then complained about all of them, don't pick and choose which one to b-itch about. And I've said before it was De La Hoya that called out Pac, in a proposed bout by Larry Merchant.

[AdamGB]

Who is picking and chosing? I never justified Oscar asking for hopkins at a catchweight.

The only reason I compared the two was to point out your stupidity in comparing somebody dropping 3 pounds and remaining in their weight class to someone dropping ten pounds below their weight class.

I don't expect pac to fight at 154... why would I? That's completely besides the point.

What I do find amusing is that Pacfans still have not been able to work out (or rather don't want to - it's pretty simple) why Roach and Pac were more than happy to take on De La Hoya at 147 pounds but don't want to take on Mosely or Cotto at 147 pounds.

Why might that be?

[jahmez]

Everyone always considers the Mayweathers and Pacquiaos in the weight situations as being the bad guys. What about the fighters who accept the offers (noone made anyone come down in weight) knowing full well the significant effect it would have on their performance? It's hard to argue that De la Hoya and Marquez, both Hall of Fame fighters, with their ammount of access to sports science (perhaps not so much with Marquez seeing though he consumes his own piss for vitamins instead of just consuming more vitamins) and with history so stacked up against them were not aware how much their chances of victory would be crushed by agreeing to the catchweights. It seems the main problem here is greed. All parties are guilty. However I don't understand how someone can argue that Pacquiao is more of a coward than Mayweather in regards to the catchweight situation. De la Hoya had not fought at 147 in 7 years. Marquez had never fought above 135. De la Hoya had a 4 inch height and 15 cm reach advantage. Marquez had a 1 inch height and 13 cm reach disadvantage (all stats according to boxrec). On the official scales De la Hoya had a 3 pound weight advantage yet made weight. On the official scales Marquez had a 3 pound weight disadvantage while Mayweather did not make weight. I'll admit that I'm a massive Pacquiao fan but its pretty hard to shoulder roll counter right hand those facts. Alot of footwork or perhaps avoiding the exchange completely might do the trick. Or perhaps simply refusing to answer the question would be the best advice. "The numbers don't lie..."

[AdamGB]

Nobody disputes those numbers... or puts any blame on them... that's not the point... when millions are involved of course they're going to take the risk.

Sports Science is only ever predictive in matters such as this, faith and confidence further skewer a fighter's perception of his limits, but like I've said the deciding factor is always $$$.



It's not a case of who's to 'blame' for these fights happening... it's a case of assessing the circumstances objectivly and deciding how much credit you think the victor deserves based off the outcomes.

[JonnyFolds]

I guess this thread has as much to do abotu David Diaz as the next thread has to do abotu Pacquiao, Hopkins, ODLH, and Floyd Mayweather.

Let's try to keep our topics a little more separated. I'm sort of tired of reading about JUST the top names in the boxing.

[mnmc10]

do we have to mention pacs name everytime?

[JazMerkin]

I guess this thread has as much to do abotu David Diaz as the next thread has to do abotu Pacquiao, Hopkins, ODLH, and Floyd Mayweather.

Let's try to keep our topics a little more separated. I'm sort of tired of reading about JUST the top names in the boxing.

Aren't you the guy who made the Mayweather calls HBO racist thread with no link or footage, that seemed to serve no purpose other than for a few posters to go on about how hard life is as a white man. Glass houses aren't the best place to throw stones

[ElTerribleMorales]

Nobody disputes those numbers... or puts any blame on them... that's not the point... when millions are involved of course they're going to take the risk.

Sports Science is only ever predictive in matters such as this, faith and confidence further skewer a fighter's perception of his limits, but like I've said the deciding factor is always $$$.



It's not a case of who's to 'blame' for these fights happening... it's a case of assessing the circumstances objectivly and deciding how much credit you think the victor deserves based off the outcomes.

exactly, the point i was trying to make is that although his win over Hatton was a complete work of art, that's the only fight that he really deserves full credit in as of late, DLH was weight drained (and horribly at that) and Diaz basically confirmed what we all knew, that he's crap, don't see how he can be past it, when he really never got there to begin with

[jahmez]

it's a case of assessing the circumstances objectivly and deciding how much credit you think the victor deserves based off the outcomes.

My post regarding the respective "tale of the tapes" comprehensivley assessed the objective circumstances. I did not try to use the same old subjective opinions that so and so was damaged goods and so and so was not in their prime and so and so had slight flatulence the night of the fight. I only used official statistics to support my argument the very same way Mayweather and his fans often do (hence the cheesy references to Floyd). As for deciding how much credit the victor deserves? I leave that to the fans of each fighter because I'm not interested in standing toe to toe attempting to land haymakers in a brawl that is often reduced to a display of unintelligent low blows. "Well my pokemon can punch harder than yoursss!" "Well my pokemon can counter better than yoursss!".

And now for something completely different... If people don't want to read about Pacquiao or Mayweather don't. You see a thread that is obviously related to them, you read through every reply but instead of posting an intelligent comment like everyone else you roll your eyes and whinge like a little girl "aww do we always have to mention their name?". Some of you even get a little frownie wownie, stomp your feet and throw a tantrum, pottie mouth and all. If you don't want to hear about the two most popular boxers on the planet go and start a Peter Buckley thread.

[AdamGB]

^
So basically it comes back to not being allowed to make an assessment of a fighter if it's unpopular with his fans.

it's a case of assessing the circumstances objectively and deciding how much credit you think the victor deserves based off the outcomes.

My post regarding the respective "tale of the tapes" comprehensivley assessed the objective circumstances. I did not try to use the same old subjective opinions that so and so was damaged goods and so and so was not in their prime and so and so had slight flatulence the night of the fight. I only used official statistics to support my argument the very same way Mayweather and his fans often do (hence the cheesy references to Floyd). As for deciding how much credit the victor deserves? I leave that to the fans of each fighter because I'm not interested in standing toe to toe attempting to land haymakers in a brawl that is often reduced to a display of unintelligent low blows. "Well my pokemon can punch harder than yoursss!" "Well my pokemon can counter better than yoursss!".

Listen, if you want to base your analysis of a fight on nothing more than a fighter's "tale of the tape" stats then that's your call.

I find it ironic that you're talking about pokemon cards but by limiting the factors that you're using to assess the stock of a fighters victory to merely the tale of the tape you're essentially reducing boxing to a game of top trumps.

Factors such as Oscar de La Hoya being so drained it took an IV drip to rehydrate him are not opinions as you called them... but facts, unfortunately these facts aren't going to be popular with pac fanboys so they choose to ignore them because they want to milk as much out of a win as they possibly can
(it should be noted that Pac DOES deserve credit for beating ODLH... unfortunatly if you try to question exactly how much then pac fanboys will try and act like you are saying he deserves none at all... "but how many boxers have moved up this much" etc etc... that's not the point!)

I see nothing wrong with making your own, educated opinion of a fighter based on different factors. There's a lot of talk about agendas in this thread.. but the people with agendas are the ones who chose to omit certain facts from themselves to protect 'their' fighter.

ODLH being drained takes only a small bit of credit from Pac... so choosing to ignore facts like that stinks of either being scared to make your own opinion or simply not wanting to make one which wouldn't suit your fighter.

[jahmez]

I'm not interested in standing toe to toe attempting to land haymakers in a brawl that is often reduced to a display of unintelligent low blows.

Moron? Your a bum bum head!