BoxRec

IKSRTFO wrote:Kostya Tyszu
Ricky Hatton
Chavez
Camacho
Mayweather Jr
Pacquaio
Judah

BoxBuzz wrote:

mrshot wrote:pryor beats them all,

....to the rehab clinic....

Darling wrote:Randy looks to me like he is contemplating what a guy like you is really doing on a boxing forum, Buzz.

BoxBuzz wrote:

Darling wrote:Randy looks to me like he is contemplating what a guy like you is really doing on a boxing forum, Buzz.

I'm here to read the various exchanges between you and bazza. That I may gain "Boxing clue 1" which should get me up and running toward my eventual goal of "Boxing Clue 2" Sadly bazza is still waiting for your reply to his last inquiry. However I'm sure you continue to give it ongoing reflection and will be ready with your answer before Rahmadan. Once available I will immediately open a boxing blog and cut and paste your answer into it as my first entry.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Diamond WEAPON wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:I don't see it that way. People were absolutely laughing --- doubling over, I remember it clearly --- at the prospect of Pacquiao ever sharing a ring with Hatton as little as 12-18 months before it happened. A fight with De La Hoya? Totally, totally unthinkable --- a mismatch of epic proportions. Cotto was only on your radar as a Pacquiao fan if you were a card-carrying member of an asylum.

I certainly acknowledge De La Hoya, Hatton & Cotto wer past their peaks. Only one was shot (De La Hoya, & while the draining played a significant part in his downfall, I won't make excuses for my man --- he was thoroughly whipped) & Hatton & Cotto, in different manners, were totally devastated.

I sometimes feel Pacquiao's ease of victory sullies these results, like the opponents are so unbelievable, they must've been shot or washed-up for Pacquiao not only to win, but to cruise by them. I think it has more to do with Pacquiao's brilliance than their states.

No argument on Arguello, for sure --- but Pryor is relatively-light beyond him. Had a great career, but it isn't a patch on Pacquiao's. Not even close.

Well one easy signifier is what they did before and after the bout in question. Before he fought Pacquiao Hatton struggled to reach the end against Juan Lazcano before pounding on a tailor-made Malignaggi and since losing to Pacquiao has done nothing but attack buffets. Before he fought Pacquiao DLH got his face busted up so badly by Steve Forbes you'd have thought he was fighting Jermain Taylor, he showed up drained below Pacquiao's own weight, and he retired afterward. David Diaz was poop who nearly lost to a guy in a non-title fight that Bob Arum set him up with, that fight was an absoulte farce. I give his win over Cotto the most credence of his recent victories because Cotto's reflexes and skills actually resembled this thing we call pro boxing and he's since moved up and beaten down a legit champion in Yuri Foreman, a guy who Pacquiao's team refused to fight based on his style.

Manny Pacquiao benefitted quite a bit from career-timing.

I won't discount career-timing playing its part --- I just think, when I weigh that up against the likelihood of a former Bantamweight titleist beating guys like De La Hoya, & Hatton, & Cotto, & what that would mean --- that career-timing takes a backseat to the enormity of those accomplishments.

I read your post with interest. It's compelling to see the way two different people view the same thing. I felt Hatton looked shaky after Mayweather, but my verdict on his fight with Malignaggi was that it was (almost) the Hatton of old. I even picked Hatton (pensively, & call me a fool if you must) to beat Pacquiao. I thought, among other things, he would want it more than Pacquiao. I also saw De La Hoya-Forbes as a complete walk-in-the-park for De La Hoya, with no real trouble to note.

Regarding what they did afterward, De La Hoya's retirement is at least partly creditable toward Pacquiao. At least partly, & considering that came from this tiny dude, that's impressive. Hatton was damaged irrevocably by Mayweather, but Pacquiao deserves his due --- he effectively finished Hatton altogether. Again, when I think of this little guy coming up & doing that, & in his debut at the weight, fvck me.

Ultimately, "career-timing" doesn't weigh as heavily with me when assessing Pacquiao climbing division after division, & not only beating guys I (& many others) laughed at the thought of him sharing a ring with, but completely devastated them, at different weights, back-to-back, it totally defies belief.

What will your take be, out of interest WEAPON, if Pacquiao beats Margarito at Jr. Middle? What will your take be if he loses?

Goodnight, Irene wrote:WEAPON...

"Depends on Margarito's fate afterward. If Pacquiao wrecks Margarito nd Tony continues to his career operating at an elite level Pacquiao deserves a lot of credit. If Margarito shells way and retires or becomes a stepping stone that gets demolished by the likes of Angulo, the win won't mean as much..."

Aren't you seeing a pattern there, though? De La Hoya retires afterward. Hatton has done nothing since. If Margarito is beaten & falls away, the win is somewhat discredited. The common theme is Pacquiao, & the beating he has given (& may give) these guys. Doesn;t his performance come into the equation at some point?

"...It aso annoys me when people calls Pacquiao a "little guy". Yes he's jumped a number of weight classes with success, but much of that success came from the fact that he was draining like a maniac to make weight from 112-130. It's not like roberto Duran who effectively ate his way to 154 and 160 and was looking like a bigger version of Juan DIaz in there, Pacquiao has been a ripped 140+ for most of the decade, even though much of it was spent "fighting at" 130 lbs. To me it seems like people make out Manny's accomplishements to be so great it's as though he could still make 126 if he wanted but simply chooses not to, which absolutely isn't the truth. He certainly didn't look like he was being dwarfed by Hatton and Cotto, whereas he was almost always the clear heavy fighter at 130 and below."

Take a look at this recent picture, featuring Pacquiao alongside natural Jr. Welterweight, Amir Khan. Pacquiao ain't that big a guy, that's for sure...

Goodnight, Irene wrote:There just ain't enough beyond Arguello to compete with Pacquiao's resume, though. Not for my cash.

It's Arguello vs. Morales, Barrera, Marquez, De La Hoya, Cotto, Hatton.

IMO, Pacquiao has him beat hands down.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Prypr/Arguello 1 was one of the greatest fights in history. But the mileage he gets off those wins is too much. Arguello was still formidable, but lets not pretend 140 was his best weight. It's odd that beating Hearns twice hasn't made a world beater out of Barkley. I suppose it's because Aaron had an "0" before his cracked out comeback against Young.

I was a Hawk fan from the time he fought Asprilla on Sportsworld until I had to cheer against him vs Alexis. He could go, picking him in mythical fights is understandable. But his resume isn't all time stuff by any stretch of the imagination.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Prypr/Arguello 1 was one of the greatest fights in history. But the mileage he gets off those wins is too much. Arguello was still formidable, but lets not pretend 140 was his best weight. It's odd that beating Hearns twice hasn't made a world beater out of Barkley. I suppose it's because Aaron had an "0" before his cracked out comeback against Young.

I was a Hawk fan from the time he fought Asprilla on Sportsworld until I had to cheer against him vs Alexis. He could go, picking him in mythical fights is understandable. But his resume isn't all time stuff by any stretch of the imagination.

Pacquiao & Pryor...who'd you put your money on?

Goodnight, Irene wrote:There just ain't enough beyond Arguello to compete with Pacquiao's resume, though. Not for my cash.

It's Arguello vs. Morales, Barrera, Marquez, De La Hoya, Cotto, Hatton.

IMO, Pacquiao has him beat hands down.

Grimm wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:There just ain't enough beyond Arguello to compete with Pacquiao's resume, though. Not for my cash.

It's Arguello vs. Morales, Barrera, Marquez, De La Hoya, Cotto, Hatton.

IMO, Pacquiao has him beat hands down.

Not saying that I disagree on the resume part but if you are going to count De La Hoya then you must count Kid Cervantes who had much more left.

Grimm wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:There just ain't enough beyond Arguello to compete with Pacquiao's resume, though. Not for my cash.

It's Arguello vs. Morales, Barrera, Marquez, De La Hoya, Cotto, Hatton.

IMO, Pacquiao has him beat hands down.

Not saying that I disagree on the resume part but if you are going to count De La Hoya then you must count Kid Cervantes who had much more left.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I don't think that Mosley was more accomplished and I don't get the comparison. It's not like they were the same size.

Diamond WEAPON wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I don't think that Mosley was more accomplished and I don't get the comparison. It's not like they were the same size.

They both fought at 154 for a time. My point is just because one guy is more accomplished doesn't mean he'd beat another in the ring by the same margins that their careers have.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote: But his resume isn't all time stuff by any stretch of the imagination.