Floyd Mayweather vs. Manny Pacquiao

Title says it all really...
Rain Dog
Expatriate
Posts: 694
Joined: Thu May 29, 2014 4:40 pm
Reputation: 29

Re: Floyd Mayweather vs. Manny Pacquiao

Post by Rain Dog »

I could not bother to watch the fight again, but interesting to see this ESPN writer as well as Evander Holyfield score the fight for Pacqiao.

http://espn.go.com/boxing/story/_/id/12 ... er-rematch

No doubt boxing's brutal beauty lies in the eye of the rooting beholder. You thought from the start your man Floyd Mayweather dominated Saturday night's fight. I thought my pick, Manny Pacquiao, ultimately won seven of the 12 rounds.

Heart over head? From the bottom of mine, I do not believe so. I scored the fight round by round on Twitter and had Pacquiao winning seven rounds to Mayweather's five --115-113, PacMan.

And that was before news broke that the left-handed Pacquiao fought with an injured right shoulder that required surgery for a significant tear of his rotator cuff and a recovery period of nine to 12 months.

Yet now, Manny Pacquiao is being as unfairly vilified as any superstar athlete I can remember. Instead of being lauded and applauded for his courage, he's being sued by irate fans convinced he duped them into shelling out a hundred bucks for a letdown of a showdown.

If Pacquiao had taken an obvious dive in Round 1, no doubt he would deserve this class-action wrath.

But he fought his guts out for all 12 rounds with basically one hand tied behind his back! He constantly chased Mayweather, who's the greatest escape artist in boxing history -- a sensational athlete who has mastered the art of defensive elusivity: bobbing-weaving-running-dancing-holding-headlocking-potshotting and turning fights into swing-and-miss eyesores! Pacquiao even told reporters from his country, the Philippines, that Mayweather knew his shoulder was hurt and kept pulling on his arm!

But did any outraged customers consider suing Mayweather for turning the fight into what one litigant called the Sleight of the Century? No, like the three judges, they were blinded by "Money" Mayweather's diamond-studded mystique.

So what would you have done if you had been in Pacquiao's shoes about three weeks ago? He had campaigned for this fight for five years -- partly for the potential payday, but more so because he believed he could beat the man who calls himself TBE (The Best Ever) and who had accused Pacquiao of PED use and posted a racist rant about him. Finally, Pacquiao had dared and goaded Mayweather into fighting him before Mayweather's planned retirement this September.

But according to a source in the Pacquiao camp, he injured his shoulder while sparring about two and a half weeks before the fight. A cortisone shot eased some of the inflammation and pain, but it appeared surgery ultimately would be required. So why not just let a surgeon show the media an MRI of the torn rotator cuff and ask for a postponement?

Because Pacquiao feared he would give Mayweather one last excuse -- that Mayweather would simply say no way he could wait an entire year and turn 39 before fighting Pacquiao. Postponing would be risking Mayweather would fight the final fight on his contract this September and retire undefeated.

So Pacquiao fought.

Is it possible this was all one big plot to perhaps set up a disgustingly lucrative rematch? In boxing, anything is possible. But Pacquiao a one-armed bandit? I'm not buying that.

Did Pacquiao risk perjury and suspension by instructing his representative to not disclose the shoulder injury on the Nevada State Athletic Commission form at Friday's weigh-in? Maybe. But my source says that was nothing but a blunder. The medications listed on the form indicated an injury. And failure to disclose cost Pacquiao the opportunity to take another painkilling shot just before the fight. When Nevada officials denied Pacquiao's fight-night request to take that shot, he suddenly lost a psychological security blanket and probably opened the door for Mayweather's camp to be informed of Pacquiao's request. Double jeopardy.

No, triple.

For me, the biggest shock of the night was the way the three American judges judged the Filipino boxer. They treated Pacquiao as if he were an unknown underdog whose best (if not only) chance to win rounds was by knockdown or by drawing blood or by at least turning Mayweather into a punching bag. Silly me, I judged Pacquiao and Mayweather as equals.

The first fight I covered (for the Los Angeles Times) was Ali-Spinks II in New Orleans in September 1978. As I wrote about many title fights through the '80s, insiders taught me that absent a knockdown, the aggressor usually wins the round. Force the action and a judge will usually give you the 10-9 edge in close rounds.

Of course, that's what's so intriguingly wrong with boxing: It can turn into Olympic figure skating, too often fraught with shockingly and suspiciously inexplicable judges' scores. I should've known: If Mayweather-Pacquiao was devoid of knockdowns and didn't end in a knockout, Pacquiao had no chance. If his fate in a 12-round fight fell to the judges, home-ring advantage would prevail.

Las Vegas resident Mayweather has no doubt generated billions in income for Sin City.

I predicted a seventh-round Pacquiao knockout in part because a month ago sources in Pacquiao's camp said Pacquiao was convinced he could take out the 38-year-old Mayweather "early" with his quickness and power. So of course I was stunned and disappointed when Pacquiao came out tentatively in Round 1. I did not know about the shoulder.

Of course, I gave the first round to Mayweather, writing on Twitter it was "not a good start" for Pacquiao. Little did I know how much damage that first impression had done to his chances.

It was immediately clear Mayweather (no surprise) was taller and longer. But in Round 1, he also looked younger and quicker. I could almost hear the many Floyd fanatics out there saying, "See! Told you!" I definitely could hear analyst Roy Jones Jr. all but saying this fight was a mismatch.
Manny Pacquiao, with promoter Bob Arum, has been under fire since losing his fight with Floyd Mayweather on May 2. AP Photo/John Locher

Twice before the fight we had Roy on First Take. Both times he refused to make a pick because he was commentating on the pay-per-view telecast. But both times it became clear he's a Floyd fan and thought Floyd would win pretty easily. So his tone during the fight was "told you so," which surely influenced the perception of millions of casual fans or even nonfans who had been intrigued enough to pay a hundred bucks.

Many of those folks paid to see blood, knockdowns, a knockout -- and they got no bang for their bucks. They got bored. They got angry.

I got lost in trying objectively to view the competition from round to round. In Round 2, Pacquiao eased into the action and was clearly the aggressor. Same for Round 3. In Round 4 Pacquiao caught Mayweather on the ropes and pummeled him. I thought he could've dropped Mayweather but let him off the ropes and hook. Some in Pacquiao's camp thought he further injured his shoulder and had to back off.

Still, Pacquiao was clearly the aggressor in seven of the 12 rounds -- in 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12. I gave Mayweather an extremely close Round 9 just "to be objective." No doubt over 12 rounds Pacquiao landed more significant blows than Mayweather. Mayweather's father/trainer Floyd Sr. sure sounded concerned before late rounds as he continued to yell at Mayweather to take the fight to Pacquiao. The three judges scored it 118-110, 116-112 and 116-112 -- a unanimous decision for Mayweather.

Pacquiao sounded genuinely stunned when interviewed in the ring, saying matter of factly: "He didn't do nothing."

Exactly. What Mayweather did best was act like he was winning easily. He shook his head "no" after Pacquiao flurries. He preened and posed and no doubt out-styled little Manny. He blinded judges and Floyd fans with his reputation.

But he did not win.

Former heavyweight champ Evander Holyfield told ESPN he thought Pacquiao won because he was the aggressor.

Now the poor man is being sued as he has surgery. Only in America.

Naturally, Pacquiao wants a rematch. Wouldn't you? I (for one) was surprised and excited Mayweather texted my debate partner Stephen A. Smith during our Tuesday show and said bring it on. How about a "home" game for Pacquiao this time, Floyd -- say in Macao, China's Vegas? How about some international judges?

No, I do not love it that if they fight again, Mayweather will be 39 and Pacquiao 37 and coming off major surgery. And no, I am not trying to fool you into buying it again.

But I will. This time I'd pay double to see it. Pacquiao deserves a rematch. And he will win.
Again.
Taxi, we'd rather walk. Huddle a doorway with the rain dogs
The Rum pours strong and thin. Beat out the dustman with the Rain Dogs;
User avatar
Jamie_Lambo
The Cool Boxing Guy
Posts: 15039
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2015 10:34 am
Reputation: 3132
Location: ลพบุรี
Great Britain

Re: Floyd Mayweather vs. Manny Pacquiao

Post by Jamie_Lambo »

exactly how i judged the fight, i always give rounds to the aggressor, unless the defensive fighter is clearly out boxing the aggressor, which in my eyes he wasnt
:tophat: Mean Dtuk Mean Trei, Mean Loy Mean Srey
Punchy McShortstacks School of Hard Knocks :x
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 97 guests