WHY DO WE LOVE MANNY?

marbleheadmaui wrote:

dbudge wrote:Manny Pacquiao is just a phenomenal athlete. what he does he beyond recognition from only the boxing world. he is a consumate professional. he genuinely gives the fans what they want and he seems to use his fame for what he sees as being the right thing to do. i feel pity on those that attempt to diminish his achievements because it will be a long long time before anybody comes close to replicating them

Yup. Why someone would choose to do anything other than simply enjoy this is beyond me.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:Great read Marble...and all of it true. The only knock that may hinder some futurista's from bestowing the greatness that he deserves is, in my opinion, the catch-weights. Not just the weights themselves, but they way they were (obviously) negotiated in Manny's favor. I can just hear some wet-behind the ears wannabe journalist claiming that had Manny not forced his opponents to certain weight restrictions that the outcome may have been different. In retrospect, would he have spanked Cotto if the fight was at 147? I think so. Hell, he could've let Margo weigh 154, legitimized the strap they fought for & still whipped him. Thoughts?

I think when a guy is going into his tenth division and when he is really probably a lightweight anyway, complaining about catchweights is lame.

Just my view. I mean what is braver? Fighting in say three or five divisions or ten divisions with catchweights?

See, I agree with all of that. If only Freddie had that much confidence from the beginning. It's brave to move up in weight, but braver to fight a belt holder without restrictions.

Yeah, but it's also getting perilously close to foolhardy in my view.

Foolhardy, maybe, but that's what fighting is all about. Finding out what you can do, whatcha got? Arguello didn't ask Pryor to meet him at a lower weight. If I'm a belt holder & the little guy wants to test himself against me...c'mon up.

But the belts are meaningless. Who cares? Each of Manny's four lineal belts was won at the limit of the division.

flapanther2001 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:Great read Marble...and all of it true. The only knock that may hinder some futurista's from bestowing the greatness that he deserves is, in my opinion, the catch-weights. Not just the weights themselves, but they way they were (obviously) negotiated in Manny's favor. I can just hear some wet-behind the ears wannabe journalist claiming that had Manny not forced his opponents to certain weight restrictions that the outcome may have been different. In retrospect, would he have spanked Cotto if the fight was at 147? I think so. Hell, he could've let Margo weigh 154, legitimized the strap they fought for & still whipped him. Thoughts?

I think when a guy is going into his tenth division and when he is really probably a lightweight anyway, complaining about catchweights is lame.

Just my view. I mean what is braver? Fighting in say three or five divisions or ten divisions with catchweights?

See, I agree with all of that. If only Freddie had that much confidence from the beginning. It's brave to move up in weight, but braver to fight a belt holder without restrictions.

Yeah, but it's also getting perilously close to foolhardy in my view.

Foolhardy, maybe, but that's what fighting is all about. Finding out what you can do, whatcha got? Arguello didn't ask Pryor to meet him at a lower weight. If I'm a belt holder & the little guy wants to test himself against me...c'mon up.

But the belts are meaningless. Who cares? Each of Manny's four lineal belts was won at the limit of the division.

You know I'm just playing devil's advocate here & not diminishing Manny's achievements, right? So, I'll ask, was Cotto the only fight at a catch-weight? I believe it was (and I agree that 150 benefited Margo). Any world class fighter from any era would be proud of what Manny has accomplished. But to say the belts are meaningless? That's what they compete for. It's not Manny's fault that there are so many. If you challenge the Welterweight Champ or Middleweight Champ etc., to me (cause I'm old school) the fight should be at that limit. Just my opinion.

I actually think the Oscar fight properly understood was a catchweight. Oscar hadn't fought at 147 in five years. It just so happened the catchweight aligned with the welter limit.

I stand by my statement that the belts are meaningless. Does anyone think for a second that Manny's wins over David Diaz or Cott or Margs means manny was the best 135, 147 and 154 on the planet?

Here's the killer stat. In Ray Robinson's time there were 88 ranked fighters. Today there are 88 beltholders.

flapanther2001 wrote:I actually think the Oscar fight properly understood was a catchweight. Oscar hadn't fought at 147 in five years. It just so happened the catchweight aligned with the welter limit.

I stand by my statement that the belts are meaningless. Does anyone think for a second that Manny's wins over David Diaz or Cott or Margs means manny was the best 135, 147 and 154 on the planet?

Here's the killer stat. In Ray Robinson's time there were 88 ranked fighters. Today there are 88 beltholders.

This is exactly my point. If there was one belt per division his move up would have seemed more spectacular, ala Hank Armstrong. Asking a belt holder to meet you half way is indicative of some type of fear. I guess, to me anyway, catchweights are for non-title, big name fighters going against each other just to benefit the fans. Sadly, there is no answer in sight to fix this.

flapanther2001 wrote:

I actually think the Oscar fight properly understood was a catchweight. Oscar hadn't fought at 147 in five years. It just so happened the catchweight aligned with the welter limit.

I stand by my statement that the belts are meaningless. Does anyone think for a second that Manny's wins over David Diaz or Cott or Margs means manny was the best 135, 147 and 154 on the planet?

Here's the killer stat. In Ray Robinson's time there were 88 ranked fighters. Today there are 88 beltholders.

This is exactly my point. If there was one belt per division his move up would have seemed more spectacular, ala Hank Armstrong. Asking a belt holder to meet you half way is indicative of some type of fear. I guess, to me anyway, catchweights are for non-title, big name fighters going against each other just to benefit the fans. Sadly, there is no answer in sight to fix this.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:

I actually think the Oscar fight properly understood was a catchweight. Oscar hadn't fought at 147 in five years. It just so happened the catchweight aligned with the welter limit.

I stand by my statement that the belts are meaningless. Does anyone think for a second that Manny's wins over David Diaz or Cott or Margs means manny was the best 135, 147 and 154 on the planet?

Here's the killer stat. In Ray Robinson's time there were 88 ranked fighters. Today there are 88 beltholders.

This is exactly my point. If there was one belt per division his move up would have seemed more spectacular, ala Hank Armstrong. Asking a belt holder to meet you half way is indicative of some type of fear. I guess, to me anyway, catchweights are for non-title, big name fighters going against each other just to benefit the fans. Sadly, there is no answer in sight to fix this.

I absolutely agree with your first point. But your comment on catchweights generally just isn't historically accurate. MANY linear titles have been put on the line in catchweight situations.

flapanther2001 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:

I actually think the Oscar fight properly understood was a catchweight. Oscar hadn't fought at 147 in five years. It just so happened the catchweight aligned with the welter limit.

I stand by my statement that the belts are meaningless. Does anyone think for a second that Manny's wins over David Diaz or Cott or Margs means manny was the best 135, 147 and 154 on the planet?

Here's the killer stat. In Ray Robinson's time there were 88 ranked fighters. Today there are 88 beltholders.

This is exactly my point. If there was one belt per division his move up would have seemed more spectacular, ala Hank Armstrong. Asking a belt holder to meet you half way is indicative of some type of fear. I guess, to me anyway, catchweights are for non-title, big name fighters going against each other just to benefit the fans. Sadly, there is no answer in sight to fix this.

I absolutely agree with your first point. But your comment on catchweights generally just isn't historically accurate. MANY linear titles have been put on the line in catchweight situations.

Marble can you remember when catch-weights became prevalent? For some reason I can't really recall too many pre SRL era fights like that.

Soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

hardcorebee24 wrote:

gomez1012 wrote:Definition of fighter

When he taps his gloves, you know its on

He answers back with more

If I was an opponent I'd say "Oh shit!" when he does that. That's when he's mad.

Truth!

Did anyone else just love it when margo was acting like manny's punches were not hurting him and then he got drilled three times to the head.

Ring wrote:Adding to Manny's many accolades: I respect him because he overcame adversity early in his career, and fought his way out of poverty. He's also very likable, entertaining, and his fights are rarely disappointing.

Damn, we sound like a bunch of Pacquiao nuthuggers on this thread.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

Ring wrote:Adding to Manny's many accolades: I respect him because he overcame adversity early in his career, and fought his way out of poverty. He's also very likable, entertaining, and his fights are rarely disappointing.

Damn, we sound like a bunch of Pacquiao nuthuggers on this thread.

I'm not sure that's a bad thing anymore.

marbleheadmaui wrote:Is there something really unique? Well from a "big win" perspective Manny isn't the equal of Ray Leonard or Muhammad Ali. From a sheer talent perspective Roy Jones, Floyd Mayweather and Roberto Duran are certainly in his league. From a produces exciting fights perspective didn't Bobby Chacon, Aaron Pryor and Tommy Hearns do as much? Even moving through divisions, a stunning accomplishment, isn't unique and is it so different from Roberto Duran beating the formidable (He beat Alexis Arguello in his last fight) featherweight Ernesto Marcel and the formidable Iran Barkley (who beat Tommy Hearns twice) at 160?

Gumby wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:Is there something really unique? Well from a "big win" perspective Manny isn't the equal of Ray Leonard or Muhammad Ali. From a sheer talent perspective Roy Jones, Floyd Mayweather and Roberto Duran are certainly in his league. From a produces exciting fights perspective didn't Bobby Chacon, Aaron Pryor and Tommy Hearns do as much? Even moving through divisions, a stunning accomplishment, isn't unique and is it so different from Roberto Duran beating the formidable (He beat Alexis Arguello in his last fight) featherweight Ernesto Marcel and the formidable Iran Barkley (who beat Tommy Hearns twice) at 160?

What is unique about Manny is you need 4 or 5 great fighters to capture what he does. And recently he has done everything on the biggest stage possible, and somehow still exceeded expectations. There have been many special fighters who you can dissect and analyze and study, but with Manny all you can do is sit back and say "wow!". He's pure enjoyment between the ropes.