BarryWashington wrote:
Who were better defenseman? Chavez or Pacquiao? Nelson or Pacquiao? I'll give you on hint on both: the answer isn't Pacquiao.
Add to the fact that the only time Pacquiao has faced a good defensive fighter (Marquez) - IMO had to rely on the points w/KD's to win both fights. Marquez gave him hell, Whitaker is a much more upgraded version of defensive "wizardry". Go back and re-watch that De La Hoya fight if you need further evidence. De La Hoya in his peak was a better fighter at 147 than Pacquiao and Whitaker made De La Hoya miss VERY MUCH in that fight. And that Whitaker was slightly past his better days, up in weight. You're telling me Pacquiao is going to do well against Whitaker? Really? The only thing that keeps Pacquiao in a fight against a peak Whitaker is his toughness & stamina. Otherwise his body is going to lit up and his exchanges are going to be mostly hitting air or the shoulders/gloves of Pernell. Sorry, bud Pacquiao is the wrong style against Whitaker.
Pacquao has a lot more speed and firepower than a welter Chavez or Nelson . . far more explosive and gave many more angles. It doesn't matter if you think Azumah was a better technical fighter, b/c he lacked the speed to make Pea think twice. DelaHoya DID and sure Pea made him miss a lot, but he was forced to fighting a safety-first, overly defensive fight and that's why he lost on the scorecards.
I am a huge die-hard for both men, always have been, but I don't see how anyone could say Whitaker dominated. A draw would've been fair. I had De La Hoya up by a point I think.
Diamond WEAPON wrote:I agree Barry. Pacquiao is so overrated it's sickening. Whitaker would've mind-raped Pacquiao. Manny's improvement has been entirely predicated on his fighting guys with no legs who just stand there and take a random wild swing here and there when Pacquiao is standing way out of range because when he punches they cover up because they're old, creaky, and scared.
Whitaker would've dodged all that horseshit and smacked Manny like a shoplifter because he isn't a statue like effing Clottey. Hurtado knocks Clottey into next week.
Hurtado's performance against Whitaker (albeit a past his better days Whitaker) was one of the best boxing performances I've seen in the past 20 years. It reminded me of Douglas-Tyson except Whitaker was able to successfully end Hurtado's great night.
...and Whitaker fans could legitimately say their man was past his best, instead of pretending he was washed-up, ala Tyson fans with the Douglas fight
dempseyfire wrote:So you don't think Oscar won b/c of his aggression? Even people who think Whitaker won only give it to him by a pt or so . .
No, I don't think Oscar won at all. But he certainly had the decision wrapped up before they ever entered the ring. And LMAO if that is what you would call aggression.
8-4 or 9-3 for Whitaker. He landed more, threw more and was in control of the fight the whole way. Terrible decision.
dempseyfire wrote:So you don't think Oscar won b/c of his aggression? Even people who think Whitaker won only give it to him by a pt or so . .
No, I don't think Oscar won at all. But he certainly had the decision wrapped up before they ever entered the ring. And LMAO if that is what you would call aggression.
8-4 or 9-3 for Whitaker. He landed more, threw more and was in control of the fight the whole way. Terrible decision.
I thought Pea won pretty easily as well, but maybe we were watching a different fight.
pac is doing great things & i just dont think you get better at his age for a small guy who's had the wars :!: & to now show the best form albeit v picked & boiled down opposition.
im really sceptical on him using enhancers, sorry.
