BoxRec

Super fights are as they are remembered. How super will this fight be?

I've thought a bit about it. Duran v Leonard? Hearns v Hagler? Ali v Frazier I, II, or III?

I'm thinking Leonard v Hearns II, except the first fight never happened.

Leonard vs Duran II

Duran v Hagler

It was more like John Ruiz-Hasim Rahman than any of the fights listed above.

There was nothing super about it.

A little less than Hagler/Leonard.

fergusg wrote:The Mayweather-Pacquiao fight was intriguing, but clearly not a toe-to-toe trench warfare type fight.

The skills that Mayweather demonstrated was quite simply sublime... and will only be appreciated by boxing purists, neutrals and fans of Floyd.

To everyone else (i.e. Pactards), their eyes will by tear-filled and deeply saddened about the one-sided and seemingly "boring" nature of the bout.

No bias whatsoever in your post.

fergusg wrote:The Mayweather-Pacquiao fight was intriguing, but clearly not a toe-to-toe trench warfare type fight.

The skills that Mayweather demonstrated was quite simply sublime... and will only be appreciated by boxing purists, neutrals and fans of Floyd.

To everyone else (i.e. Pactards), their eyes will by tear-filled and deeply saddened about the one-sided and seemingly "boring" nature of the bout.

I am not a big Pac supporter, but the event was pretty uneventful. The only time a Floyd fight is exciting is when there is either controversy, or Floyd is getting worked. And it's not boring because it's one sided. Lomenchanko fought a one sided fight and did it excitingly. GGG runs over opponents and is exciting doing it. Floyd is super efficient and safety first. Sure, the defensive boxing purist will look at Floyd's moving, holding, efficiency, and lack of engagement pretty to the eyes, but it's not what the masses yearn to see.

JeanClaude Van Damme wrote:

LOL, is that all you got? Your boy lost by a huge margin, even further than the BS judges who gave him a 112 score.

KBB wrote:

JeanClaude Van Damme wrote:

LOL, is that all you got? Your boy lost by a huge margin, even further than the BS judges who gave him a 112 score.

Yes, I've only got one account. You've had what, 114?

actually that little video clip of Mayweather running AND Pac just standing there doing nothing summed up the fight. Horrible display by both.

fergusg wrote:

Ian1973 wrote:

fergusg wrote:The Mayweather-Pacquiao fight was intriguing, but clearly not a toe-to-toe trench warfare type fight.

The skills that Mayweather demonstrated was quite simply sublime... and will only be appreciated by boxing purists, neutrals and fans of Floyd.

To everyone else (i.e. Pactards), their eyes will by tear-filled and deeply saddened about the one-sided and seemingly "boring" nature of the bout.

No bias whatsoever in your post.

It may seem that way, but I've noticed a trend... and I'm not biased.

Those bitterly complaining about the "boring" nature of the fight are typically those that supported Manny before the bout and accused Floyd of being a coward.

I'm not trying to gain revenge or anything childish like that, but we all knew that Floyd was a boxer... and if he was to win, he had to outbox Manny and not trade with him.

I don't know why this simple fact shocks and angers some people, when most of us knew that the fight could have played out this way!

Manny had a horrible game plan coming into the bout. No one is outboxing Floyd.

MP wrote:actually that little video clip of Mayweather running AND Pac just standing there doing nothing summed up the fight. Horrible display by both.

Precisely.

Hagler vs Leonard.

Thought it was dull for the most part as it lacked drama. Yes the level of skill on show from Mayweather was high but high level of skills don't automatically make things exciting. Lomachenko showed a high level of skill and was fun to watch.

I thought Mayweather would win, but his total lack of offense really put a damper on the whole night. I figured that he'd outbox Pac, and land a few good shots to show that he was one of the greatest.
I also expected Manny to atleast try a little harder to connect. He seemed lethargic out there too.

This fight will show very poorly for both of these good fighters and drop them both from a talk of "greatest".

I think people will remember this fight as a big, steaming pile of buyer's remorse.

Super fight my arse. It ain't even the fight of the last six months.

People really need to stop listening to all the hype shit.

it will be not remembered at all. there were
many big fights in history that didn't live up
to expectations and nobody cares about them
a month later.

it will take some time until it will be matched
financially, that's all.

Utterly forgettable. Pacquiao did not show up for the occasion and looked out of his debt. Mayweather was his usually self. Nothing to write home. On the other hand it will be remembered as commercially the biggest fight in history. BTW Mayweathers entire carrier might suffer the same fate. lol

I had more sympathy for Pacman as a person, but also admired Mayweather for his skills. Hence I was completely neutral.
The fight proved that Mayweather is way beyond Pacman. He decided how the fight would be fought. He was always in complete control. He opted for making it a controlled efficient outpointing of the limited Pacman.

That's why the fight itself won't be remembered at all. It will be remembered that Mayweather proved without a shadow of a doubt that he is much better than Pacman, nothing more nothing less.
An all-time classic fight needs more than perfect technical boxing. It needs an interesting dramatic composition, a back and forth, ups and downs. Ali-Foreman was a horrible fight, most rounds even boring and slow. The fight still became a classic because of the dramatic changes in fortune.

Mayweather vs. Pacman ranks somewhere below Cory Spinks vs. Mayorga. Kind of like a Lewis vs. Tyson without the knockout.

This fight will be forgotten within a couple month's.

Nothing happened Floyd proved he can run around a ring better and Manny proved he couldn't catch him.

A farce of a fight.

A bit Leonard -v- Hagler (five years too late).

A bit Leonard -v- Duran 3 (disappointing & not in the least bit memorable).

A bit Tyson -v- Spinks (supposedly evenly matched with one man winning convincingly).

Syntax Error wrote:A bit Leonard -v- Hagler (five years too late).

A bit Leonard -v- Duran 3 (disappointing & not in the least bit memorable).

A bit Tyson -v- Spinks (supposedly evenly matched with one man winning convincingly).

Tyson-spinks may be overstating it a tad.

JeanClaude Van Damme wrote:

It did not reach the level of FMJ v Maidana, leave alone Hearns v Leonard II.

This should have been Pac v FMJ II. In the end we were all punked by the boxing syndicates. Pac and FMJ were allowed to cash out with a semi choreographed, kissing cousins, dry hump before the last round, insult labeled a super fight.

This was more like two retired greats producing an exhibition for nostalgia's sake.

Neither fighter's legacy benefited beyond $$$ from this theatrical romance.