Post Manny v Mosley discussion

by Guest Sun 08 May 2011, 5:54 am

First topic message reminder :

Made me long for the heady days of Hopkins/Calzaghe!!!

Off to bed, no further comment to make on that snore-fest except to say that Mayweather should sign to fight Manny IMMEDIATELY

by Valero's Conscience Sun 08 May 2011, 1:56 pm

Anyone have a link for the punch stats?

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 1:57 pm

Y I Man wrote:Atom,
Someone contradicting themselves doesnt constitute being banned from the site.
Keep it on topic and civil please.

I'll PM you mate

by Scottrf Sun 08 May 2011, 1:58 pm

Bob wrote:
D4thincarnation wrote:
"I just fought the best fighter in the world. He has exceptional power. I've never been hit like that before." - Shane Mosley

For all those who never rated Pacquiao's power at welterweight.

Yup. Shane speaketh the truth. He's not just justifying his appalling efforts in a huge fight bu saying he was overwhelmed from the opening bell.

Bruce Seldon said something similar after fighting Tyson.

Tyson did have a bit of power to be fair.

by azania Sun 08 May 2011, 1:58 pm

prettyboykev wrote:
oxring wrote:Az - you're wumming. Stop it.

Manny is not a hype job. Anyone who says so is either an idiot or a WUM.

Manny's opposition as a fighter has been streets ahead of anything that Floyd has fought. The fact that we're still talking about Collazo shows how disappointing Floyd's career has been - its easy to look a million dollars if you're not fighting decent opponents. Your "too many question marks" is a pretty ignorant posts. there's been catchweight fights since the dawn of time - although I appreciate that your boxing history is a bit patchy - you should notice that there's been catchweights throughout boxing history. You complain about the extra pound against Cotto - but Sugar Ray Robbo was far more "divalike" than Manny's team have ever been with making advantages. Including demanding an opponent take a dive the first time around before they fight again. No-one questions SRRs status as an ATG - nor should they. You mention ODLH - which is stupid, given that ODLH PICKED manny. All the advantages that Manny had in that fight - were chosen by Oscar and his team. He ballsed it up and was destroyed.

Furthermore re: tailormade for Floyd - that's balls. If he was so "tailormade" the fight would have happened by now. What a win for Floyd - legacy enhancing, huge money. Yet he hasn't done much to make the fight. And he's currently negotiating with Ortiz. If only he shared your misplaced confidence.

There is a much more serious issue that Manny seems to have slowed down. Margarito was a mighty impressive performance - against a guy who outweighed him by a stone - but plasterhands was there to be hit - and Manny only hit him in bursts. Manny against Cotto was buzzsaw like throughout. Against Mosley - he only turned it on for a couple of rounds. If Manny'd fought Berto - he'd have destroyed him in a much better fight.

Manny and Roach will know if he can still pull the trigger. I'm not sure he can anymore. If he can't - he has to retire.

He isn't a hype job but his record isn't that much better than Floyds. It is better but not by as much as you seem to be suggesting.

You seem to be blaming Floyd for the fight not happening but both have put a stop to it on seperate occasions. How can you blame one unless you are actually being a WUM.

I was referring to their first attempting. The subsequent attempts when Manny agreed to everything, Floyd shifted the goal-posts. He takes responsibility there imo.

As has been alluded to above, I reckon Floyd will insist on a 60/40 split or a larger split. But I believe the pressure for them to fight will grow. Plus after this showing, Floyd will see this as even less of a risk.

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 1:59 pm

D4thincarnation wrote:When Marquez fought Lopez he was carrying a rotator cuff injury.

He didn't need to tell anyone everyone could see it by the way he was fighting.

No one picked up on Floyd's injury because it didn't exist

Much like no one would have picked up on Pacquiaos injury if they hadn't immediately used it as an excuse for a sub par performance

It's either and excuse for both or an excuse for neither, can't chop and change to suit your own views

by D4thincarnation Sun 08 May 2011, 2:04 pm

The Mighty Atom wrote:
D4thincarnation wrote:When Marquez fought Lopez he was carrying a rotator cuff injury.

He didn't need to tell anyone everyone could see it by the way he was fighting.

No one picked up on Floyd's injury because it didn't exist

Much like no one would have picked up on Pacquiaos injury if they hadn't immediately used it as an excuse for a sub par performance

It's either and excuse for both or an excuse for neither, can't chop and change to suit your own views

I can honnestly say I picked up on Pacquiao lack of lateral movement. He does like doing his 45s and he didn't do many of them last night.

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:05 pm

Of course you did and I picked up on Mayweathers injury too

by D4thincarnation Sun 08 May 2011, 2:06 pm

The Mighty Atom wrote:
D4thincarnation wrote:When Marquez fought Lopez he was carrying a rotator cuff injury.

He didn't need to tell anyone everyone could see it by the way he was fighting.

No one picked up on Floyd's injury because it didn't exist

Much like no one would have picked up on Pacquiaos injury if they hadn't immediately used it as an excuse for a sub par performance

It's either and excuse for both or an excuse for neither, can't chop and change to suit your own views

Yes I can just because fighter B claims to have an injury and it is letigimate, it doesn't mean every fighters that claims to have an injury actually has one.

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:09 pm

Well in my opinion Pacquiao wasn't injured but rather it was used an excuse for a poor performance much like Mayweather

by D4thincarnation Sun 08 May 2011, 2:11 pm

The Mighty Atom wrote:Well in my opinion Pacquiao wasn't injured but rather it was used an excuse for a poor performance much like Mayweather

Didn't you notice his lack of movement? Especially turning.

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:12 pm

Much like I noticed the lack of snap in Mayweathers jab against Castillo

Like I said it's an excuse for both or neither, which is it?

End of petty discussion

by Valero's Conscience Sun 08 May 2011, 2:13 pm

The Mighty Atom wrote:Well in my opinion Pacquiao wasn't injured but rather it was used an excuse for a poor performance much like Mayweather

Exactly! All other fights there was a ready made excuse in case he lost, this time none in the build up but wait someone saves the day with..........an excuse!

by Scottrf Sun 08 May 2011, 2:16 pm

How much of an excuse does he need for winning by an average of 12 rounds? OK it was below par but he wasn't troubled.

Mosley moved backwards every time Pacquiao threw, not sure how Pacquiao would make it exciting.

by D4thincarnation Sun 08 May 2011, 2:18 pm

Scottrf wrote:How much of an excuse does he need for winning by an average of 12 rounds? OK it was below par but he wasn't troubled.

Mosley moved backwards every time Pacquiao threw, not sure how Pacquiao would make it exciting.

Don't be to hard on Mosley at least he had the balls to get into the ring with Pacquiao.

by Valero's Conscience Sun 08 May 2011, 2:20 pm

Scottrf wrote:How much of an excuse does he need for winning by an average of 12 rounds? OK it was below par but he wasn't troubled.

Mosley moved backwards every time Pacquiao threw, not sure how Pacquiao would make it exciting.

It just that they always get an excuse in early when building up the fight and last night he won easily (as expected) but still his team had to add an excuse into it regarding his leg etc. It's just tiring to always hear.

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:21 pm

Shame can't say the same about Pacquiao 18 months ago isn't it

by D4thincarnation Sun 08 May 2011, 2:22 pm

Mosley just wanted to survive against Pacquiao, wanting to protect his record of never getting KO.

But does he lose more respect because of the way he fought.

In my opinion yes, at least Marg came to fight.

Some of Pacquiao opponents come to fight but that changes when they get hit, some come to fight but bail out, some done even come to fight and one doesn't even to come.

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:24 pm

So in short Pacquiao is clueless as to what to do when someone doesn't choose to engage?

by Scottrf Sun 08 May 2011, 2:25 pm

The Mighty Atom wrote:So in short Pacquiao is clueless as to what to do when someone doesn't choose to engage?

He won easily.

In short he doesn't look as good when his opponent has no intention of trying to win.

by D4thincarnation Sun 08 May 2011, 2:27 pm

Pacquiao is better defensively than Mayweather?

Mosley only landed 82 shot against him compared to the 92 against Mayweather.

by D4thincarnation Sun 08 May 2011, 2:29 pm

The Mighty Atom wrote:So in short Pacquiao is clueless as to what to do when someone doesn't choose to engage?

Clueless?

Only outlanding Mosley by 100 punches landing 182 in total and gave Mosley a devasting KD.

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:32 pm

Amounts to the same thing Scott, show him any sign of defence and he seems powerless to connect with any sort of regularity. You can get away with that against Clottey and a 39 year old Mosley granted

by SugarRayRussell (PBK) Sun 08 May 2011, 2:34 pm

D4thincarnation wrote:
The Mighty Atom wrote:So in short Pacquiao is clueless as to what to do when someone doesn't choose to engage?

Clueless?

Only outlanding Mosley by 100 punches landing 182 in total and gave Mosley a devasting KD.

Bit of an exaggeration their?

by Scottrf Sun 08 May 2011, 2:35 pm

It's a completely different thing making him miss and taking advantage of him missing. Mosley made him miss by getting out of range at which point he can't land for obvious reasons, and Clottey did it by covering up so obviously couldn't attack.

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:35 pm

D4thincarnation wrote:
The Mighty Atom wrote:So in short Pacquiao is clueless as to what to do when someone doesn't choose to engage?

Clueless?

Only outlanding Mosley by 100 punches landing 182 in total and gave Mosley a devasting KD.

At least post the full stats of how many they threw as well, there's a good boy

Having seen Mayweather absolutely dominate Mosley who was at least throwing punches, just goes to highlight my point really

by D4thincarnation Sun 08 May 2011, 2:37 pm

The Mighty Atom wrote:Amounts to the same thing Scott, show him any sign of defence and he seems powerless to connect with any sort of regularity. You can get away with that against Clottey and a 39 year old Mosley granted

Yes but he still won the rounds comfortablly. If he was losing the round you may have a point, but he is not.

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:37 pm

Scottrf wrote:It's a completely different thing making him miss and taking advantage of him missing. Mosley made him miss by getting out of range at which point he can't land for obvious reasons, and Clottey did it by covering up so obviously couldn't attack.

A great fighter should be able to overcome that which he didn't, he won and I use that term loosely because it had as much to do with Mosley deciding not to win as anything else

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:38 pm

D4thincarnation wrote:
The Mighty Atom wrote:Amounts to the same thing Scott, show him any sign of defence and he seems powerless to connect with any sort of regularity. You can get away with that against Clottey and a 39 year old Mosley granted

Yes but he still won the rounds comfortablly. If he was losing the round you may have a point, but he is not.

He's winning rounds showing terrible effective aggression by being made to miss time and time again

by Scottrf Sun 08 May 2011, 2:39 pm

The Mighty Atom wrote:A great fighter should be able to overcome that which he didn't

judge: Duane Ford 120-107 | judge: Dave Moretti 120-108 | judge: Glenn Trowbridge 119-108

by D4thincarnation Sun 08 May 2011, 2:39 pm

The Mighty Atom wrote:
D4thincarnation wrote:
The Mighty Atom wrote:So in short Pacquiao is clueless as to what to do when someone doesn't choose to engage?

Clueless?

Only outlanding Mosley by 100 punches landing 182 in total and gave Mosley a devasting KD.

At least post the full stats of how many they threw as well, there's a good boy

Having seen Mayweather absolutely dominate Mosley who was at least throwing punches, just goes to highlight my point really

As brother Nazim has said it doesn't matter about the punches that don't land, it is the punches that land that count.

Pacquiao showed that sometimes the best defence is a good offence. Mosley was scared to throw because of what might comeback.

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:40 pm

Scottrf wrote:
The Mighty Atom wrote:A great fighter should be able to overcome that which he didn't
judge: Duane Ford 120-107 | judge: Dave Moretti 120-108 | judge: Glenn Trowbridge 119-108

You can post the scorecards all you want Scott but doesn't change the fact it was a pretty woeful performance, against better opposition his lack of accuracy would cost him

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:42 pm

D4thincarnation wrote:
The Mighty Atom wrote:
D4thincarnation wrote:
The Mighty Atom wrote:So in short Pacquiao is clueless as to what to do when someone doesn't choose to engage?

Clueless?

Only outlanding Mosley by 100 punches landing 182 in total and gave Mosley a devasting KD.

At least post the full stats of how many they threw as well, there's a good boy

Having seen Mayweather absolutely dominate Mosley who was at least throwing punches, just goes to highlight my point really

As brother Nazim has said it doesn't matter about the punches that don't land, it is the punches that land that count.

Pacquiao showed that sometimes the best defence is a good offence. Mosley was scared to throw because of what might comeback.

Missing punches definitely matters or does it show effective aggression throwing wildly and missing?

by Scottrf Sun 08 May 2011, 2:42 pm

Possibly. We will have to wait for a defensive boxer who wants to return fire. I think Mayweather beats him but it's harsh to judge his accuracy against people whose only intention is to survive.

by D4thincarnation Sun 08 May 2011, 2:43 pm

The Mighty Atom wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
The Mighty Atom wrote:A great fighter should be able to overcome that which he didn't
judge: Duane Ford 120-107 | judge: Dave Moretti 120-108 | judge: Glenn Trowbridge 119-108

You can post the scorecards all you want Scott but doesn't change the fact it was a pretty woeful performance, against better opposition his lack of accuracy would cost him

Is it easier to hit a guy comming towards throwing punches, or a guy running away from you with his guard up?

Think about it before answering.

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:44 pm

Scottrf wrote:Possibly. We will have to wait for a defensive boxer who wants to return fire. I think Mayweather beats him but it's harsh to judge his accuracy against people whose only intention is to survive.

There's enough examples of boxers in similar positions over coming it to better effect, not as if Clottey and Mosley are the only two who have ever just done enough to survive

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:46 pm

D4thincarnation wrote:
The Mighty Atom wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
The Mighty Atom wrote:A great fighter should be able to overcome that which he didn't
judge: Duane Ford 120-107 | judge: Dave Moretti 120-108 | judge: Glenn Trowbridge 119-108

You can post the scorecards all you want Scott but doesn't change the fact it was a pretty woeful performance, against better opposition his lack of accuracy would cost him

Is it easier to hit a guy comming towards throwing punches, or a guy running away from you with his guard up?

Think about before answering.

Froch didn't do too badly against Abrahams did he D4?

You have to overcome these things and Pacquiao has yet to prove he can do anything but beat face first come forward fighters, show him some defence and he aint gonna hit you

by D4thincarnation Sun 08 May 2011, 2:48 pm

The Mighty Atom wrote:
D4thincarnation wrote:
The Mighty Atom wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
The Mighty Atom wrote:A great fighter should be able to overcome that which he didn't
judge: Duane Ford 120-107 | judge: Dave Moretti 120-108 | judge: Glenn Trowbridge 119-108

You can post the scorecards all you want Scott but doesn't change the fact it was a pretty woeful performance, against better opposition his lack of accuracy would cost him

Is it easier to hit a guy comming towards throwing punches, or a guy running away from you with his guard up?

Think about before answering.

Froch didn't do too badly against Abrahams did he D4?

You have to overcome these things and Pacquiao has yet to prove he can do anything but beat face first come forward fighters, show him some defence and he aint gonna hit you

Think you will find AA was not running away.

Can you answer the question?

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 2:55 pm

He held a very tight high guard that Froch had no problems getting through, he also hit Dirrell with more accuracy than Pacquiao did yesterday

Personally thinks it depends on the fighter, Pacquiao clearly needs an open defence to be able to penetrate it effectively whereas other boxers can land no matter what

by Rowley Sun 08 May 2011, 3:03 pm

I personally thought it was a poor performane. Dorian has to shoulder some of the blame because he did seem fairly happy to survive rather than take a few chances and try to win the fight. However don't feel it is unreasonable to criticise Manny to some degree. Let's be honest here he is in with a 39 year old guy who has looked poor in his last two outings.

Let's also be honest he did not do anything particularly cute in there last night, he held a high guard and backed up quite a lot. Would like to think a guy who we are told is an all time great and is the premier fighter in the world would be able to come up with the solution to such a tactic and turn in a slightly more impressive performance.

Whilst it is very difficult to look good against a guy who lacks ambition to actually win the fight can see why those who feel Manny's recent performances have flattered him as last night did appear to raise valid questions about his adaptability.

D4 - Does appear you were a little rash staking your reputation on this being fight of the year, wasn't even fight of the night. Guess the only saving grace is you has no reputation to start with so no real harm done.

by **oxring** Sun 08 May 2011, 3:05 pm

Az - that's utter tripe. Who else has beaten Cotto then Clottey at WW? Then fought Marg - still weighing at WW. Then fought mosley. And had the decency to beat the number 1 LWW in the world at his own weight.

If he's been manufactured - he's a rolex.

by ArchBritishchris Sun 08 May 2011, 3:12 pm

Pacquiao is being criticised a bit for not putting on a great performance. He did win every round on 2 of the scorecards, thats a very good result. Mosely came out and boxed defensively, using a strategy of containment. It wasn't a very open affair. Pacquiao did exactly what he needed to and won the fight comprehensvely.

Not every boxing match is exciting or a slugfest. Tactical displays or cagey performance can perhaps detract from the entertainment aspect. Thats part and parcel of the game. Some fighters barely participate in an exciting fight. At the end of the day the aim is to win the match, a number of boxers would take boring and successful.

The Cotto and Margarito fights were more exciting because of the fighting styles involved, but we are not always going to witness a 400 punch landing Pacquiao. While, Mosely and Clottey's strategies were defensive and therefore resulted in less a interesting spectacle, Pacquiao was still victorious at a canter. A fighter is always going to adapt to the opponent or boxing style he is encountering. I'm not reading to much into the fact this wasn't on the face of it Pacquiao's greatest performance. The boring 1-0 or 2-0 results are just as important as the 5-0.

In a boxing match there is always something to watch in the movement of the competitors, the clash of styles. The two fighters sizing each other up. A fight can still be interesting without lots of fast paced action.

by BALTIMORA Sun 08 May 2011, 3:14 pm

I see this thread's been ruined then...

by **oxring** Sun 08 May 2011, 3:16 pm

I think the most frustrating aspect of this is there's several camps.

There's those like Atom and Rowley - and I would include myself in this - who are rightfully criticising what was a poor and slow performance from Manny.

Then there's those who seem to be using what was a poor performance to state that Manny's entire career was a sham. Which is utter BS.

Then there's the fanboy-attitude - which is to try and persuade me that the horse dung I watched last night was, in fact, a honey cake - and I in all the world was the only man who failed to appreciate its flavour.

The 2nd and 3rd attitudes are painfully wrong - and will serve to ruin what could have been a good thread into the usual - "debate-the-poster" tripe.

Please try to be objective. Please try to debate the issues rather than the poster. Please do not WUM.

by Imperial Ghosty Sun 08 May 2011, 3:16 pm

oxring wrote:Az - that's utter tripe. Who else has beaten Cotto then Clottey at WW? Then fought Marg - still weighing at WW. Then fought mosley. And had the decency to beat the number 1 LWW in the world at his own weight.

If he's been manufactured - he's a rolex.

I agree they were probably the best fights to be made but in the grand scheme of things the Margarito, Clottey and Mosley fights mean very little, they don't add to his legacy in my opinion

by **oxring** Sun 08 May 2011, 3:28 pm

The Mighty Atom wrote:
oxring wrote:Az - that's utter tripe. Who else has beaten Cotto then Clottey at WW? Then fought Marg - still weighing at WW. Then fought mosley. And had the decency to beat the number 1 LWW in the world at his own weight.

If he's been manufactured - he's a rolex.

I agree they were probably the best fights to be made but in the grand scheme of things the Margarito, Clottey and Mosley fights mean very little, they don't add to his legacy in my opinion

They add a bit. Fighting anyone adds a little bit to your legacy.

And prettyboykev - I know that you're "an expert" on Floyd - but he hasn't been blessed with enough great opposition compared with Manny.

Floyd has great wins over Corrales, Castillo x2, Mosley. Good wins over Hatton et al.

Manny has great wins over Barrera x2, Morales x2, JMM (x2 IMO), Hatton, Cotto.

The resume's don't add up - and the recent criticism of Manny's resume is revisionism. Using revisionism I could tear apart anyone's legacy - but I'd have less trouble with Floyd than many other greats.

by **Fists of Fury** Sun 08 May 2011, 3:29 pm

All i have to say (and i don't like to use this phrase but..) Azanias statement that Judah would beat Pac...LOL

by Scottrf Sun 08 May 2011, 3:36 pm

oxring wrote:Floyd has great wins over Collazo, Castillo x2, Mosley. Good wins over Hatton et al.

Corrales.

by **Fists of Fury** Sun 08 May 2011, 3:41 pm

Just read through the whole thread, Azania you are embarrassing yourself in a big big way with your total ignorance and lack of knowledge. I for one will no longer debate with you on the subject.

by Rowley Sun 08 May 2011, 3:44 pm

Please try to be objective. Please try to debate the issues rather than the poster. Please do not WUM
______________________________________________________

Well said Ox, this is what winds me up more than anything about the whole Manny Floyd thing, the way the opinions have become so polarised and entrenched that ny criticism or praise of the fighters involved is seem as a weakening of their stance by certain posters. All this means is a valid and mature debate bout the topics becomes an impossibility.

Truth is last night was a lacklustre performance by his current standards by Manny, whether this was an off night, the result of ageing, Mosley's tactics or indication of a lack of adaptability in his game is a valid topic for discussion, but alas is one we have virtually no chance of having.

by **Fists of Fury** Sun 08 May 2011, 3:49 pm

Amen to that Jeff, well said.

by Sponsored content