Pacquiao: Mayweather Doesn't Want to Fight

[The Boxer]

I am very shock as to how everyone is looking past Cotto. I'm not a huge Cotto fan but i have watched him move up through the rank since he was damn there force fed to me by HBO. I don't know if it's Cotto lost to margarito thats cause this or not. Whatever it is i think it is unwarrented. Cotto is not only the bigger man in the fight but he is the better boxer. Maybe people are counting on Cotto be weight drained or something. Cotto has shown that he can rebound from being hurt and he can also give as good as he gets. I keep hearing about PAC's power but what about Cotto's.

If PAC loses do we still get a PBF PAC fight the same way we got a PBF Judah fight after Judah lost to Baldamir. I hope not.

[rjj tszyu]

hahahaahaha

"I am not DLH or Hatton" ??

Before those fights the name DLH and Hatton doesnt connote negative impression on fighters.


Can Cotto really say he can beat DLH and Hatton easily?

after the Cotto fight the next Pacquiao opponent wil say

"Im not DLH, Hatton or Cotto. im the Walrus!"

No "IF" he beats Cotto his next opponent will say "I'm not ODLH, Hatton or Cotto, I am "Pretty Boy" Floyd "Money" Mayweather and i'm the best fighter in the world . That is the difference.

[J_Undisputed]

At this point, I think Mayweathers probably pulling for Cotto. It's not that he doesn't want Pac. He probably takes either of them fairly easy. I think he outsmarted himself before. Taking Marquez and beating him better was a good way to get leverage for the Pac negotiations. If the public never believes you're better than a certain fighter, you might give up more to prove them wrong. Mayweather beating Marquez was good up to a certain point (no how many small man excuses are made for marquez) as Marquez was the measuring stick. Shutting out marquez was just a little counter productive to money the fight could be making. Mayweather was thinking about his share of the pac fight when he blew out marquez. But overall everyones share for that fight could be smaller now because many people will buy into the unvalid but every present transitive theory (if fighter A goes life and death with fighter B ... and Fighter C embarasses Fighter B... Then Fighter C will also beat fighter A pretty easily.)

A Cotto win shocks the world and everyone forgets his drubbing by margacheato and buys into the loaded glove theory.... He is given a clean slate by those outside of boxing, instantly labeled as the man that beat the man (in Pacquaio) and "legend killer" who's coming after Mayweather. Then they meet in the ring and we get Holyfield/Douglas Part 2.

[rjj tszyu]

At this point, I think Mayweathers probably pulling for Cotto. It's not that he doesn't want Pac. He probably takes either of them fairly easy. I think he outsmarted himself before. Taking Marquez and beating him better was a good way to get leverage for the Pac negotiations. If the public never believes you're better than a certain fighter, you might give up more to prove them wrong. Mayweather beating Marquez was good up to a certain point (no how many small man excuses are made for marquez) as Marquez was the measuring stick. Shutting out marquez was just a little counter productive to money the fight could be making. Mayweather was thinking about his share of the pac fight when he blew out marquez. But overall everyones share for that fight could be smaller now because many people will buy into the unvalid but every present transitive theory (if fighter A goes life and death with fighter B ... and Fighter C embarasses Fighter B... Then Fighter C will also beat fighter A pretty easily.)

A Cotto win shocks the world and everyone forgets his drubbing by margacheato and buys into the loaded glove theory.... He is given a clean slate by those outside of boxing, instantly labeled as the man that beat the man (in Pacquaio) and "legend killer" who's coming after Mayweather. Then they meet in the ring and we get Holyfield/Douglas Part 2.

Ok I buy your theory up until the comparison with Douglas/Holyfield. Cotto is a genuine world class fighter whereas Buster was in the right place at the right time and took Tyson when the time was right. I see it more as James Toney vs Roy Jones. Toney (a world class fighter) beat Michael Nunn (another even higher regarded fighter) in something of an upset, to become some people's number one fighter in the world then Jones (Who would be Mayweather in this situation) came along and schooled Toney (Cotto if he beats Pac).

[Wayne]

I was impressed by Pacquiao's victories over ODH and Hatton, though I did feel he would win both, but do you honestly think Cotto wouldn't handle either one of them in the same situation?

Mate

Oscar Dela was not not at his best but he will not lose to Cotto the way he lost to Pacquiao. Dela Hoya would land a few left hooks because cotto is not as slippery as pacquiao. and landing a few left hooks could mean a LOT in a fight im sure you'll agree.

on Hatton. same case, you think Hatton will get caught by right hooks a few seconds into the fight againts Cotto? If you look at the phase of PAC-Hatton. very few can keep up with that and Hatton got sparked because he's so aggressive and Pac is accustomed to that phase. in Cotto Hatton got a target that he can actually hit.

My answer is Cotto wouldn't handle either one of them in the same situation. 50/50 on both fights.

I can understand the logic behind ODH providing a reasonable test for Cotto, though I disagree with it. However, Cotto would absolutely murder Hatton. It might not end as quickly as the Pacquiao fight but the result would be the same.

Cotto-Hatton would be a slightly better version of Cotto-Gomez.

[Kirkland Laing]

The "he doesn't want to fight me" thing is just something to say. Neither of them are getting any younger and the pot for their fight could be $150 million and if Manny beats Cotto impressively there's going to be lots of dynamics all pushing to get the fight made. They're both going to make claims like this, both argue for a bigger share of the split, etc. etc., but the bottom line is they can make twice as much fighting each other than anybody else.

[rjj tszyu]

The "he doesn't want to fight me" thing is just something to say. Neither of them are getting any younger and the pot for their fight could be $150 million and if Manny beats Cotto impressively there's going to be lots of dynamics all pushing to get the fight made. They're both going to make claims like this, both argue for a bigger share of the split, etc. etc., but the bottom line is they can make twice as much fighting each other than anybody else.

That pretty much sums it up. I don't think the Cotto fight is a foregone conclusion though, could be a very tough fight for Pac, I certainly don't expect him to dominate in the way he did against ODLH and Hatton.

[C-Lo]

Mate

Oscar Dela was not not at his best but he will not lose to Cotto the way he lost to Pacquiao. Dela Hoya would land a few left hooks because cotto is not as slippery as pacquiao. and landing a few left hooks could mean a LOT in a fight im sure you'll agree.

on Hatton. same case, you think Hatton will get caught by right hooks a few seconds into the fight againts Cotto? If you look at the phase of PAC-Hatton. very few can keep up with that and Hatton got sparked because he's so aggressive and Pac is accustomed to that phase. in Cotto Hatton got a target that he can actually hit.

My answer is Cotto wouldn't handle either one of them in the same situation. 50/50 on both fights.

You obviously don't watch much Boxing.

You picked Taylor to win the "super six," right?

Thanks Fens! I gave Taylor a shot! Does it count if I wrote a disclaimer? I said he "had the ability to" win the Super Six if he stopped running out of gas. I actually predicted Kessler to win.

At this point, I think Mayweathers probably pulling for Cotto. It's not that he doesn't want Pac. He probably takes either of them fairly easy. I think he outsmarted himself before. Taking Marquez and beating him better was a good way to get leverage for the Pac negotiations. If the public never believes you're better than a certain fighter, you might give up more to prove them wrong. Mayweather beating Marquez was good up to a certain point (no how many small man excuses are made for marquez) as Marquez was the measuring stick. Shutting out marquez was just a little counter productive to money the fight could be making. Mayweather was thinking about his share of the pac fight when he blew out marquez. But overall everyones share for that fight could be smaller now because many people will buy into the unvalid but every present transitive theory (if fighter A goes life and death with fighter B ... and Fighter C embarasses Fighter B... Then Fighter C will also beat fighter A pretty easily.)

A Cotto win shocks the world and everyone forgets his drubbing by margacheato and buys into the loaded glove theory.... He is given a clean slate by those outside of boxing, instantly labeled as the man that beat the man (in Pacquaio) and "legend killer" who's coming after Mayweather. Then they meet in the ring and we get Holyfield/Douglas Part 2.

I can see Mayweather using the Marquez fight as his negotiation tool. But I think Pac's is still stronger. Money can say "I dominated the man that took Pacquiao life and death to beat." But then Manny can say "I dominated and knocked out someone you beat by split decision and someone you took 10 rounds to beat who I beat in 2."

I don't know, that's just me. I just think either way it will be a messy negotiation for a potential Pac/Mayweather fight.

[JazMerkin]

You obviously don't watch much Boxing.

You picked Taylor to win the "super six," right?

Thanks Fens! I gave Taylor a shot! Does it count if I wrote a disclaimer? I said he "had the ability to" win the Super Six if he stopped running out of gas. I actually predicted Kessler to win.

At this point, I think Mayweathers probably pulling for Cotto. It's not that he doesn't want Pac. He probably takes either of them fairly easy. I think he outsmarted himself before. Taking Marquez and beating him better was a good way to get leverage for the Pac negotiations. If the public never believes you're better than a certain fighter, you might give up more to prove them wrong. Mayweather beating Marquez was good up to a certain point (no how many small man excuses are made for marquez) as Marquez was the measuring stick. Shutting out marquez was just a little counter productive to money the fight could be making. Mayweather was thinking about his share of the pac fight when he blew out marquez. But overall everyones share for that fight could be smaller now because many people will buy into the unvalid but every present transitive theory (if fighter A goes life and death with fighter B ... and Fighter C embarasses Fighter B... Then Fighter C will also beat fighter A pretty easily.)

A Cotto win shocks the world and everyone forgets his drubbing by margacheato and buys into the loaded glove theory.... He is given a clean slate by those outside of boxing, instantly labeled as the man that beat the man (in Pacquaio) and "legend killer" who's coming after Mayweather. Then they meet in the ring and we get Holyfield/Douglas Part 2.

I can see Mayweather using the Marquez fight as his negotiation tool. But I think Pac's is still stronger. Money can say "I dominated the man that took Pacquiao life and death to beat." But then Manny can say "I dominated and knocked out someone you beat by split decision and someone you took 10 rounds to beat who I beat in 2."

I don't know, that's just me. I just think either way it will be a messy negotiation for a potential Pac/Mayweather fight.

It won't matter for shit about who beat who more effectively or who scored a KO quicker. What it will come down to is PPV figures. Because of the fact that Mayweather had significantly more viewers for his fights with ODLH, Hatton & JMM, the Pacquiao-Cotto fight will have to do at least 1m+ viewers for Pacquiao to be claiming an equal slice of the pie.

If you use the argument of effectiveness in winning, each could counter the other's argument for why their win over said fighter meant more.

[mnmc10]

id go for a one sided beating and a ko to finish it than to watch a boring fight with very little punches thrown.

[C-Lo]

You picked Taylor to win the "super six," right?

Thanks Fens! I gave Taylor a shot! Does it count if I wrote a disclaimer? I said he "had the ability to" win the Super Six if he stopped running out of gas. I actually predicted Kessler to win.

At this point, I think Mayweathers probably pulling for Cotto. It's not that he doesn't want Pac. He probably takes either of them fairly easy. I think he outsmarted himself before. Taking Marquez and beating him better was a good way to get leverage for the Pac negotiations. If the public never believes you're better than a certain fighter, you might give up more to prove them wrong. Mayweather beating Marquez was good up to a certain point (no how many small man excuses are made for marquez) as Marquez was the measuring stick. Shutting out marquez was just a little counter productive to money the fight could be making. Mayweather was thinking about his share of the pac fight when he blew out marquez. But overall everyones share for that fight could be smaller now because many people will buy into the unvalid but every present transitive theory (if fighter A goes life and death with fighter B ... and Fighter C embarasses Fighter B... Then Fighter C will also beat fighter A pretty easily.)

A Cotto win shocks the world and everyone forgets his drubbing by margacheato and buys into the loaded glove theory.... He is given a clean slate by those outside of boxing, instantly labeled as the man that beat the man (in Pacquaio) and "legend killer" who's coming after Mayweather. Then they meet in the ring and we get Holyfield/Douglas Part 2.

I can see Mayweather using the Marquez fight as his negotiation tool. But I think Pac's is still stronger. Money can say "I dominated the man that took Pacquiao life and death to beat." But then Manny can say "I dominated and knocked out someone you beat by split decision and someone you took 10 rounds to beat who I beat in 2."

I don't know, that's just me. I just think either way it will be a messy negotiation for a potential Pac/Mayweather fight.

It won't matter for shit about who beat who more effectively or who scored a KO quicker. What it will come down to is PPV figures. Because of the fact that Mayweather had significantly more viewers for his fights with ODLH, Hatton & JMM, the Pacquiao-Cotto fight will have to do at least 1m+ viewers for Pacquiao to be claiming an equal slice of the pie.

If you use the argument of effectiveness in winning, each could counter the other's argument for why their win over said fighter meant more.

I didn't even think about the PPV numbers. In that sense, it's a no-brainer Mayweather wins that argument.

[:::PSL:::]

hahahaahaha

"I am not DLH or Hatton" ??

Before those fights the name DLH and Hatton doesnt connote negative impression on fighters.


Can Cotto really say he can beat DLH and Hatton easily?

after the Cotto fight the next Pacquiao opponent wil say

"Im not DLH, Hatton or Cotto. im the Walrus!"

Yep. The "Angelo Dundee" syndrome.

[johnsebastianmiran]

He's got to beat Cotto before he can talk trash to Mayweather and stop reading those bullshit newspaper clippings calling him great because you are only as good as your last fight and you are as shaky as your next fight.