160 has to be the absolute limit. I think he could beat Martinez, I really do.
160 has to be the absolute limit. I think he could beat Martinez, I really do.
It's possible for pac to weight drain any fighter enough to the point he can stick move and bust up just about anyone.......that's why catchweights suck.
Hidden Content Click clack ! Give up the purse.........or yetti will find you.
Last edited by Kel; 11-22-2010 at 12:47 AM.
anyone who doesn't think timothy bradley would give pacquiao hell at 140 is just nuthugging it to the extreme or doesn't know much about boxing. when was the last time pacquiao faced a younger, in his prime, fast boxer like bradley? again, for those of you who are offended by what i'm saying, relax, these are not racial comments. it's just that i don't see that pacquiao is so much more superior in skills than everybody else.
when was the last time pacquiao fought a grade A boxer with skills like bradley? the last time pacquiao fought a good boxer was when he beat barrera a second time. by that time, barrera was well past his prime and besides, pacquiao had already thrashed him a few years earlier. anyone who thinks bradley would be an easy fight for pacquiao just doesn't know anything about boxing. bradley is a very underrated boxer with great hand speed, movement and ring generalship. i will guarantee one thing, if pacquiao does beat bradley it's going to be alot more difficult a fight than most people think.
not taking anything away from pacquiao's last few victories but he fought either very slow (margarito), reluctant (clottey), weight drained (oscar) or ruined (cotto) fighters. everyone of these guys were not right that's why roach picked these fights. again, i do think roach has cherrypicked pacquiao's opponents in recent years and i would be very surprised if he picks a young, live, in his prime one.
If you notice only the anti pac or the floyd fans have problems with the recent catchweight fights. They act like every pac fight is a catchweight.
Cotto and Margarito are the only two catchweight. Oscar was at 147, pac went up two division and Oscar went down one division. 147 is not a catch weight it was the agreed weight division between Oscar and Pac.
Cotto was only required to lose 1 pound from his last fight night weight to try and equal pacs size who weighs in at 144-145.
Margarito should actually be glad he was given 3 pounds extra at 150. 147 is where Margarito had been successful and scary. Margarito terrorized the 147 division but yet they complain pac fought him above that division?
Oscar wasn't at a catchweight but it was still way under what he was capable of making. Oscar didn't look fine. Cotto had no punch resistance and looked slow and didn't have his usual power, same with margarito. No Pac's opponants didn't look 'fine'.
Getting a fighter from a higher weight class and getting them to fight at a lower one is just as bad as a catchweight.
Oscar wanted the fight at 147 because no one in their right mind would expect a guy who fought at 135 just once to move up a further three weight classes. Oscar made that fight on his terms and Manny agreed to them.
As for Cotto he looked no better at 154, he had to drop one single pound from his previous weight on the scales.
Gotta come up with better than that, sorry.
HAHAHAH weather oscar wanted the fight or not is irrelevant (and the answer is money BTW, oscar did it for money). Are you telling me that oscar wasn't weight drained on fight night? Are you telling me that oscar was 100% fit and capable and at full power that night?
Cotto was still a catch weight. The beating he got off margarito didn't help but cotto was not 100% at that weight.
i agree someones gotta come up with something better and it ain't me sunshine.
How high can Pac go? Depends on what kind of Shaboo he's smoking?![]()
so Rain, you're trying to say timothy bradley won't even be competitive against pacquiao? boy, in your own little world pacquiao can do no wrong, can't he? must be that one fighter effect, again!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks