It's a valid fight for Spence for at least 4 reasons:Syntax Error wrote: ↑18 Mar 2019, 08:43 Spence by dominant points win.
Pacquiao would have struggled to beat Spence when he was in his 20s and early 30s; he'd get nowhere near The Truth at 41 years old.
It's a real shame that a talent like Spence has to keep entertaining these pointless fights that no-one was clamouring before they were announced or mooted, when he is competing in one of the best era of welterweights since the late 1980s.
Spence will get little credit for beating up an aged Pacquiao and I just don't get why this has even come up.
* Pac is still a global legend, even in the waning years of his career. He's a guaranteed Hall-of-Famer.
* Pac has looked sharp in clearcut recent wins over Matthysse & Broner. He's better-known among casual fans than Garcia and will help Errol get more name recognition among casuals/general sports fans than any other current boxer. (Even Crawford is not as well-known among casuals as Pac)
* Pac is still a big enough live attraction that he & Spence could fill close to 60,000 seats, making it the biggest live crowd in US boxing in 40+ years (Ali-Spinks II did 63,000+ in New Orleans Superdome in 1978).
* At age 40 Pac will not be around as far into the future as Spence's more competitive matchups: Crawford (31), Thurman (30), Porter (31), Ugas (32), Danny G (30) & all the welter prospects even younger than them.