BoxRec

Ezzard wrote:I thought it was a laboured win for Floyd...couple of moments...but not that much...had it fairly close but it seemed like Pac won his rounds because Floyd took them off or they were close enough to go either way...

Come on though... Floyd was on his bike in the last round...moving backwards from a bloke whose best days were as a featherweight.

I'd say I can't wait for him to retire but the yanks are already lining up Ward to replace him...thanks to God for quick drying paint.

Laboured? I thought it required concentration, but minimal effort. Floyd could probably have gone 20 rounds at that pace.

I totally agree that Floyd could have thrown a lot more, I don't think he was tired, I think he was just being ultra cautious.

Finn wrote:

tobyh5 wrote:bit of trivia, apologies if someone has already posted it but the night of the fight dressing room weigh in shows that Pac was the heavier guy in the ring as he weighed 152 and Mayweather 149

Surprises me that because they said manny was able to eat before the weigh in.

Me too but this came from Floyd

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-a5o7Stfw8

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Boxerbeetle wrote:

Ricky_ wrote:
Defense
Ring Generalship
Aggression
Clean Punching

Too many people get bogged down by Sky's deplorable commentry fawning over Floyd's elusiveness (legal and illegal). He offered nothing in the way of offense. Zero. By his own admission post fight he just kept moving and sticking the jab out. Defense accounrs for 1/4 of scoring. This is the fight game at the end of the day, not dressage or figure skating. It's time judges scored fights properly and reward action not inaction. if Pac employed the same tactics we'd have 12 rounds repeated of the first 3 mins of Haye v Audley.

But if you were to continue that very simplistic argument, Floyd was also superior in Ring Generalship & Clean Punching, so added to his Defence that makes 3/4. Which was pretty much reflected in the scorecards.

Actually it's 4 of 4 - it is EFFECTIVE aggression which is meant to be rewarded in scoring, not just wading forward. Pacquaio's aggression, aside from a handful of instances over the 12 rounds, was pretty much ineffective.

Nope, it's 1 out 4. Defense. He had no agrression. None. Not a forward step, nothing more than an arm punch thrown.
Clean punching... you really have to land something cleaner than a jab, his punches serve 2 purposes, to offset anything PAc threw and to 'score'. Floyd missed more than he's ever missed, and landed mostly jabs. The most effective and eye catching punches came from Pacquiao, at least he put something on them. Had it been an amatuer bout, Floyd's the clear winner.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Ezzard wrote:I thought it was a laboured win for Floyd...couple of moments...but not that much...had it fairly close but it seemed like Pac won his rounds because Floyd took them off or they were close enough to go either way...

Come on though... Floyd was on his bike in the last round...moving backwards from a bloke whose best days were as a featherweight.

I'd say I can't wait for him to retire but the yanks are already lining up Ward to replace him...thanks to God for quick drying paint.

Laboured? I thought it required concentration, but minimal effort. Floyd could probably have gone 20 rounds at that pace.

I totally agree that Floyd could have thrown a lot more, I don't think he was tired, I think he was just being ultra cautious.

Maybe...but I wouldn't give him the benefit of the doubt. He looked in control but did so little. If he really did have so much left then more shame on him.

Mayweather new exactly what he needed to do and executed it perfectly. Sign of a true great, especially when you consider the pressure that he would have been under, and the calibre of opponent (who has just come off a couple of very good wins, as Bradley and Rios are world class fighters in their own right, especially Bradley).

I remember watching an interview with Evander Holyfield before the fight where he said that Mayweather has underated power and if you notice, no one has been able to run him over, they all stop in their tracks -I thought that Mayweather stung Pacquaio in the first round with a couple of right hands which made him wary.

Accuracy is really underestimated. You don't have to be a big banger if you can land flush. Mayweather can do that.

Guys like Hearns and Tyson had both.

big lennox wrote:Mayweather new exactly what he needed to do and executed it perfectly. Sign of a true great, especially when you consider the pressure that he would have been under, and the calibre of opponent (who has just come off a couple of very good wins, as Bradley and Rios are world class fighters in their own right, especially Bradley).

I remember watching an interview with Evander Holyfield before the fight where he said that Mayweather has underated power and if you notice, no one has been able to run him over, they all stop in their tracks -I thought that Mayweather stung Pacquaio in the first round with a couple of right hands which made him wary.

I agree

I just can't believe there's any debate over this - does any proper boxing fan actually believe Pacquaio won?

I've had 3 casuals tell me in person that Manny won the fight. I couldn't help but laugh. Fight was a clear cut win for Mayweather. There is literally no debate over this. Pacquiao was using aggression but was it "effective aggression"? No. Floyd not only had a higher punch out put - Floyd landed more, Floyd owned the ring that night with his movement (Ring Generalship).


Listening to 'fans' claim Pacquiao won this fight is more ridiculous than the people who thought Bradley beat Pacquiao. Bottom line

Boxerbeetle wrote:I just can't believe there's any debate over this - does any proper boxing fan actually believe Pacquaio won?

Truly baffling,its no coincidence that a few people I know who watched the fight and know nothing about boxing thought Pacquiao smashed Mayweather

G0mez wrote:

Coco wrote:I think Jeff Powell and Kevin Mitchell have voted!lol
Mitchell's Guardian article is embarrassing, he must have written it high on coke and hookers!

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2 ... y-pacquiao

You mean this coco ?

Backside!! Must be the meth.

stujones wrote:

Fat Git wrote:I have to say, I didn't like 118-110.

I didn't like 'Money's' grabbing and running away, it pissed me off.

He won the fight though but 118-110 took me back to bag o'poo JoJo Guerra's scoring of Leonard over
Hagler (who was actually jobbed).

Anyway, I am hoping 900 of Pacquiao's hangers on leave him alone to enjoy what should be his last purse, he has earned his millions the
hard way.

The fight had some many similarities to Hagler vs Leonard.....Manny reminded me a lot of Hagler that night (the slow footwork to cut of the ring) and indeed if you think of their performances before their fight.

Similarly, the height and reach advantages that Leonard had over Hagler was mentioned post fight, now it is mentioned after this one (never mentioned before that) - but then this is part of the continued "piss on Floyd's legacy" that he had.... now he was always too big for Manny.... he wasn't always too big when the fight was mooted 5 years ago.

He was actually. I remember the fight being dismissed out of hand due to the size difference at one point, then Pac kept moving up...

Oh yeah, when he struggled to stop David Diaz all those years ago.... there was the claim (with some justification) that he had reached his optimum in terms of weight - but then when he destroyed Ricky at 140 and Cotto at 147, the mention of him being a small Welter were much quieter - and this is when Mayweather vs Pacquiao was at its peak for the boxing fans.... particularly after Cotto and Margarito.

Actually, on another thread a poster said something like "the fact he didn't destroy Algeri inside 2 rounds was testiment to his waning skills"...... Ricky and a shot Morales aside, who has Manny destroyed early since his Super Bantamweight days? I don't think people are overestimating his run between 2008-2011, but underestimating his performances a tad POST Mosley.

Algeri, Rios etc - yes limited, but every bit as good as David Diaz.... and actually the performances were one sided against all three. Tim Bradley at the stage when he fought Desert Storm was, Marquez aside, arguably as good as any of the fighters he fought - AT THE TIME HE FOUGHT THEM, since Barerra the first time.

Boxerbeetle wrote:I just can't believe there's any debate over this - does any proper boxing fan actually believe Pacquaio won?

No, people who know the sport know it was a very one sided victory for Floyd. The people who are saying PAC won are the sort of people who watch Rocky and think its real life. I like PAC and I really dislike Floyd, but he clearly won, I doubt it would even make it into his top ten toughest fights. It's no wonder he's saying he'll hang on for another year for a rematch. Easy money.

Terry Dooley wrote:If people are arguing that Mayweather only landed one or two significant shots, then surely that reflects badly on Manny, a high-octave pressure fighter who failed to beat someone who wasn’t throwing punches. That last bit sounds nonsensical, but the ‘Mayweather barely landed” line sets the tone for that (deeply flawed) statement.

How frustrating is it for you to read the views from Mitchell, especially considering he probably had an all expenses paid trip?

Or can you be happy for a tennis journalist?

Nightmare Roy wrote:

Boxerbeetle wrote:I just can't believe there's any debate over this - does any proper boxing fan actually believe Pacquaio won?

No, people who know the sport know it was a very one sided victory for Floyd. The people who are saying PAC won are the sort of people who watch Rocky and think its real life. I like PAC and I really dislike Floyd, but he clearly won, I doubt it would even make it into his top ten toughest fights. It's no wonder he's saying he'll hang on for another year for a rematch. Easy money.

Holyfield and Mosley did not bad considering their knowledge of the sport doesn't extend much beyond Stallone crying for Adrain then.

I think it's more to do with boxing snobs proclaiming Mayweather's pot-shot, powderpuff jab, clinch & run style as being the holy grail of boxing. Sure, he's elusive, perhaps the most elusive ever, but somewhere along the lines judges & the boxing snobs stopped giving a eff about offence. I guess throwing punches and showing aggression is too cliche. Let's leave that to the Provodnikov's & Froch's of this world.

99% of people in the boxing business believe Floyd won easily, I watched the fight again this morning at the very most PAC won 4 rounds. I think people are just blinded by their love for PAC and their hatred of Floyd.

i used a scoring app for first time and to be honest i had it close - 116 -115

that said i had 3 rounds even but i couldnt argue that those rounds were deserved by Pacman in anyway as nothing was happening .

i was suprised that i had it close as overall going into the last round i though floyd really deserves this.

Rounds - 1 / 2 / 5 / 11 / 12 to mayweather

rounds - 4 / 6 / 8 /10 - to pacman

Rounds - 3 / 7 / 9 -Even

Terry Dooley wrote:

freddydoesdallas wrote:

Terry Dooley wrote:If people are arguing that Mayweather only landed one or two significant shots, then surely that reflects badly on Manny, a high-octave pressure fighter who failed to beat someone who wasn’t throwing punches. That last bit sounds nonsensical, but the ‘Mayweather barely landed” line sets the tone for that (deeply flawed) statement.

How frustrating is it for you to read the views from Mitchell, especially considering he probably had an all expenses paid trip?

Or can you be happy for a tennis journalist?

I don’t get frustrated. He’s got his opinion on the fight, I just don’t agree with it and I imagine he didn’t agree with my article, if he read it.

Here’s my take for anyone who’s interested, and hasn’t been visiting BM Online: http://boxing-monthly.co.uk/stories/may ... to-school/

It’s his full-time job so I’ve not got any problem with him getting an all expenses trip over there. I’m happy watching fights at home with my other half TBH.

That's a good way to be. It annoys me when sports journalists from papers get a pass for a big fight when they barely give a mention elsewhere.

I know mitchell does it as well as tennis but guess his article and attitude to it after 'i know better i was there' has probably pissed me off more

Nightmare Roy wrote:

Boxerbeetle wrote:I just can't believe there's any debate over this - does any proper boxing fan actually believe Pacquaio won?

No, people who know the sport know it was a very one sided victory for Floyd. The people who are saying PAC won are the sort of people who watch Rocky and think its real life. I like PAC and I really dislike Floyd, but he clearly won, I doubt it would even make it into his top ten toughest fights. It's no wonder he's saying he'll hang on for another year for a rematch. Easy money.

Top post

I read Mitchell's article. I don't think there's anything wrong with it. He's paid to have a clear opinion that's not completely unreasonable. It's a good article that doesn't find a home with most. I had Floyd by 3 or 4...but agree that he rarely looked troubled...and looked like he could win every round if he chose to do so...I just don't think he always did.

Enjoyed Mr Dooley's excellent piece too (as always). Enjoyed it more than the fight itself...

Coco wrote:I think Jeff Powell and Kevin Mitchell have voted!lol
Mitchell's Guardian article is embarrassing, he must have written it high on coke and hookers!

I saw Jeff Powell on Boxing Matters last week - first time I'd seen him on tele and I found myself liking his take on things and he was knowledgable too.
Last night I read his preview which I'd saved. He'd gone Pacquiao by stoppage - in round 10 no less -so he was fcking miles out. He appears to have latched on to a couple of things such as Floyd's letter of impending redundancies to the chewing gum guy and the water bottle guy - as well as to Floyd Snr's advice to his son to retire soon before he lost - and in Jeff's head he's blown it up into something massive and decided that Floyd was in a rapid state of decline. Silly old duffer. Even when a plane's cruising at 40,000ft it takes it a while to descend.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing ... ision.html

Jeff Powell has written another article today

Coco wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing ... ision.html

Jeff Powell has written another article today

Nightmare Roy wrote:

Coco wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing ... ision.html

Jeff Powell has written another article today

Just contradicts its self, they worked out it could be scored 114-114 but he still thinks it could have been a UD for manny?