Mayweather v Pacquiao (2 May 2015) | NO requesting streams/rivers etc in this thread

Who will win ?

  • Total voters
    184
  • Poll closed .
finneh said:
I like it.



I think Mayweather gets a harder time of it because he's been seen to cherry pick his fights for several years since he has had the profile to. Whereas Pacquiao has been known to not only take on the best fights available, but give fighters rematches who have caused him problems in the past. If Mayweather were in Pacquiao's shoes he'd have never given Marquez another chance (let alone 2) after he won the second fight. Likewise with Barrera and Morales.

I think Mayweather is trying to put that record right now as he realises once he's retired it's better to be seen as someone who's beat the best and fought and re-fought fighters that give you problems, rather than just retire with an "0" with those questions lingering. He gave Maidana a rematch after a very close fight and is now fighting Pacquiao, albeit arguably 3-4 years too late.

I think the majority of the boxing world would see Mayweather as a better fighter in a few decades time if he lost to Pacquiao and came back to win a re-match, rather than never fighting him at all. The "0" isn't hugely important in this sense - no-one see's Calzaghe as one of the best ever, as good a fighter as he was.
Click to expand...

I mean let's not act like Pacquiao hasn't cherry picked his fights. Anyone's resume can be broken down and scrutinised how it's done with Mayweather.

For Pac giving Barrera and Morales rematches made sense for him as they were the money makers, they were the lucrative fights. With the JMM fights, all first 3 fights were controversial and a rematch was required. Floyd gave Castillo and Maidana rematches after the first fight was controversial.

Floyd beat a better version of ODLH and in a weight class Oscar was comfortable in. Pac fought him at 147, Oscar hadn't fought at that weight for several years and looked drained. Pac fought Mosley, Oscar and the third JMM fight after Floyd had already dispatched of them. He's also had recent fights with the likes of Rios and Algeiri. Hardly fighting all comers. Also made Cotto come down to 145.

Anyone's resume can easily be picked apart, it's just Floyd (villain) is more scrutinised then Pac (good guy).
 
Oggmonster said:
In fairness to Mayweather though he is unbeaten and in them fights he's rarely been troubled. He's never officially been knocked down and rarely gets hit. He might cherry pick his opponents etc but his record is still very impressive and can't be dismissed.

Boxing has always been a game of talking yourself up. Mayweather has done that for years so it's not shocking really.



I think people decide based purely on public image. I agree with you, it seemed to work both ways but due to Mayweather's media personality people will 100% lay the blame on him. Realistically no one knew or knows about any negotiation between the 2 except themselves and their representatives. The way some people make out you'd think they were present in some of the meetings! I don't really get how people can be so adamant one way really.
Click to expand...

Bang on the money, and anyone who's promoter is Bob Arum, I wouldn't trust a word that comes from that side.

In Arum's own words "Yesterday I was lying, but today I'm telling the truth".
 
VanGaalEra said:
I mean let's not act like Pacquiao hasn't cherry picked his fights. Anyone's resume can be broken down and scrutinised how it's done with Mayweather.

For Pac giving Barrera and Morales rematches made sense for him as they were the money makers, they were the lucrative fights. With the JMM fights, all first 3 fights were controversial and a rematch was required. Floyd gave Castillo and Maidana rematches after the first fight was controversial.

Floyd beat a better version of ODLH and in a weight class Oscar was comfortable in. Pac fought him at 147, Oscar hadn't fought at that weight for several years and looked drained. Pac fought Mosley, Oscar and the third JMM fight after Floyd had already dispatched of them. He's also had recent fights with the likes of Rios and Algeiri. Hardly fighting all comers. Also made Cotto come down to 145.

Anyone's resume can easily be picked apart, it's just Floyd (villain) is more scrutinised then Pac (good guy).
Click to expand...

Absolutely they were money makers, but they were still the most dangerous opponents in the division at the time and any fighter who was more bothered about their record than their ability to be put on their backside would have avoided them. I think the point is that no matter how controversial the decision, would Mayweather would have given anyone another chance 5 years ago? The De La Hoya fight would suggest not. How many fights has Mayweather really had against the best fighters in their complete prime? Several less than he should have had is all I'd say.

I personally think De La Hoya won the fight against Mayweather (not unlike the first fight vs Castillo); but after his win everyone wanted to see a rematch. Mayweather then retired for 18 months which prevented the fight from happening, which depending on your point of view didn't look the best. I'm also not sure that the bolded is particularly relevant, given the difference in style, natural weights etc.

I also think because of Mayweather's financial pull, all of his fights are done completely on his terms, or not at all. The stipulations to make a fight with Pacquiao a few years ago aside; you look at Mayweather's fight with Marquez for instance and it was done at a weight totally uncomfortable to the latter, but he'd have stretched himself because of the finances on offer. There's no way Marquez should be fighting someone weighing in at over 145, particularly not back then.

Bear in mind that also that Pacquiao didn't really "make" De La Hoya come down to 147; this was the weight set for the Mayweather re-match and when the latter conveniently retired the contract basically just passed over. Pacquiao is also naturally a smaller fighter than Mayweather so fighting the likes of Cotto, De La Hoya and Margarito at all is pretty impressive and would be dangerous at their natural weight above 150.

Either way I'm hoping for a great fight. The fact that this fight is happening somewhat shuts up the "Mayweather ducks difficult fights" brigade, although It'd have been better to see it 5 years ago. I'm also hoping regardless of the winner we see a re-match, I certainly wouldn't want to see either fighter win a close fight and deprive the other of another shot.
 
finneh said:
Absolutely they were money makers, but they were still the most dangerous opponents in the division at the time and any fighter who was more bothered about their record than their ability to be put on their backside would have avoided them. I think the point is that no matter how controversial the decision, would Mayweather would have given anyone another chance 5 years ago? The De La Hoya fight would suggest not. How many fights has Mayweather really had against the best fighters in their complete prime? Several less than he should have had is all I'd say.

I personally think De La Hoya won the fight against Mayweather (not unlike the first fight vs Castillo); but after his win everyone wanted to see a rematch. Mayweather then retired for 18 months which prevented the fight from happening, which depending on your point of view didn't look the best. I'm also not sure that the bolded is particularly relevant, given the difference in style, natural weights etc.

I also think because of Mayweather's financial pull, all of his fights are done completely on his terms, or not at all. The stipulations to make a fight with Pacquiao a few years ago aside; you look at Mayweather's fight with Marquez for instance and it was done at a weight totally uncomfortable to the latter, but he'd have stretched himself because of the finances on offer. There's no way Marquez should be fighting someone weighing in at over 145, particularly not back then.

Bear in mind that also that Pacquiao didn't really "make" De La Hoya come down to 147; this was the weight set for the Mayweather re-match and when the latter conveniently retired the contract basically just passed over. Pacquiao is also naturally a smaller fighter than Mayweather so fighting the likes of Cotto, De La Hoya and Margarito at all is pretty impressive and would be dangerous at their natural weight above 150.

Either way I'm hoping for a great fight. The fact that this fight is happening somewhat shuts up the "Mayweather ducks difficult fights" brigade, although It'd have been better to see it 5 years ago. I'm also hoping regardless of the winner we see a re-match, I certainly wouldn't want to see either fighter win a close fight and deprive the other of another shot.
Click to expand...

No. He ducked a prime Pac. He probably still would have beaten him, but Pac isn't the same fighter he was years ago. Anybody who watches him can see that.
 
NM said:
No. He ducked a prime Pac. He probably still would have beaten him, but Pac isn't the same fighter he was years ago. Anybody who watches him can see that.
Click to expand...

That's why I said "somewhat" and also caveat-ed it. Bear in mind also that despite being a fighter that would naturally age better, Mayweather is more than 2 years older. So in theory Mayweather should be a little past his prime too.

I also believe if Mayweather narrowly wins on points as I expect, he will then dodge the re-match. This would also hurt his legacy in my opinion.
 
Oggmonster said:
In fairness to Mayweather though he is unbeaten and in them fights he's rarely been troubled. He's never officially been knocked down and rarely gets hit. He might cherry pick his opponents etc but his record is still very impressive and can't be dismissed.

Boxing has always been a game of talking yourself up. Mayweather has done that for years so it's not shocking really.



I think people decide based purely on public image. I agree with you, it seemed to work both ways but due to Mayweather's media personality people will 100% lay the blame on him. Realistically no one knew or knows about any negotiation between the 2 except themselves and their representatives. The way some people make out you'd think they were present in some of the meetings! I don't really get how people can be so adamant one way really.
Click to expand...

Mayweather is a superb fighter. He's a technical fighter who hardly ever gets hit and he has never lost a match in his career. You don't get to do this if you aren't a supremely talented fighter. He rightly deserves the 'best pound for pound for fighter' right now, but he's someway off being the GOAT. Guys like Ali, Sugar Ray Leonard all gave shots to difficult opponents and won well.

I also think Mayweather is a bit like Ronaldo, a bit unloved because of his antics. I'm not sure of Pacman is Messi, but you can see the point raised by people saying Mayweather is not the greatest.
 
fishfingers15 said:
Mayweather is a superb fighter. He's a technical fighter who hardly ever gets hit and he has never lost a match in his career. You don't get to do this if you aren't a supremely talented fighter. He rightly deserves the 'best pound for pound for fighter' right now, but he's someway off being the GOAT. Guys like Ali, Sugar Ray Leonard all gave shots to difficult opponents and won well.

I also think Mayweather is a bit like Ronaldo, a bit unloved because of his antics. I'm not sure of Pacman is Messi, but you can see the point raised by people saying Mayweather is not the greatest.
Click to expand...

I would agree he's not the best ever but it suits his personality to say stuff like that and I'm sure Mayweather himself could make a good argument for him being the greatest ever. Traditionally people will always pick heavyweights as being the "greatest" though and if not them they'd rarely pick someone like Mayweather as the best ever.

It's probably a good comparison. I'd say it's Mayweather's "money" antics which put people off, the fight is being billed as good vs evil in that regard which is good for casual viewers as it does add a subplot. For any boxing fan or even someone with a slight interest normally the fight sells itself though.
 
Sugar Ray Leonard also delayed his fight with Marvin Hagler up to a point where he believed Hagler had slowed down enough for Leonard to win. Leonard was the smaller man at the time though.
 
Kazi said:
Sugar Ray Leonard also delayed his fight with Marvin Hagler up to a point where he believed Hagler had slowed down enough for Leonard to win. Leonard was the smaller man at the time though.
Click to expand...

But he consistently tested himself against the best in the business. Again, this could be a sign of the market. Maybe if he boxed now, he'd take the Mayweather approach. I'm just commenting on what I think. I've never seen Sugar Ray Leonard matches, only highlights and what I read on the internet. I've only recently picked up Boxing as a sport to watch.
 
Oggmonster said:
I would agree he's not the best ever but it suits his personality to say stuff like that and I'm sure Mayweather himself could make a good argument for him being the greatest ever. Traditionally people will always pick heavyweights as being the "greatest" though and if not them they'd rarely pick someone like Mayweather as the best ever.

It's probably a good comparison. I'd say it's Mayweather's "money" antics which put people off, the fight is being billed as good vs evil in that regard which is good for casual viewers as it does add a subplot. For any boxing fan or even someone with a slight interest normally the fight sells itself though.
Click to expand...

Personally, I like Pacman. Boxing kind of needs this fight and it's rightly billed as the best fight for decades, and it's no surprise that it sells itself.

Regarding the GOAT comment, Maybe Mayweather gets a bad rap too, but the arguments against him picking his fights, his defensive techniques are valid points. People for aesthetics as well, Kind of Messi over Ronaldo arguments. I'm just hoping for a good fight.
 
fishfingers15 said:
Personally, I like Pacman. Boxing kind of needs this fight and it's rightly billed as the best fight for decades, and it's no surprise that it sells itself.

Regarding the GOAT comment, Maybe Mayweather gets a bad rap too, but the arguments against him picking his fights, his defensive techniques are valid points. People for aesthetics as well, Kind of Messi over Ronaldo arguments. I'm just hoping for a good fight.
Click to expand...

I don't mind either of them in all honesty. I think Mayweather does well to sell his fights and does have the record to back it up. Pacquiao is probably the more "entertaining" fighter. My bit about the fight being sold wasn't a dig at anyone or anything either, was more of just a comment. I'm not bothered if people tune in just for 1 fight and stop watching, I'm not massiveo n UFC for example and would only watch the "bigger" fights, it's the way sport works.

They're all valid points and criticisms of Mayweather of course, he has had some easier fights recently but he has still fought some huge names in boxing. My initial point was I found it odd people constantly accused Mayweather of ducking Pacquiao and not the other way round, just seems to suit an agenda of some kind.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
Nothing to do with him being a serial and unrepentant physical abuser of women then?
Click to expand...

Well I doubt it in the promotional videos they'll bill it as that.

Floyd "Money Serial and unrepentant Physical Abuser of Women" vs Manny "Pac Man" Pacquiao isn't exactly the best promotional tool.
 
Oggmonster said:
Well I doubt it in the promotional videos they'll bill it as that.

Floyd "Money Serial and unrepentant Physical Abuser of Women" vs Manny "Pac Man" Pacquiao isn't exactly the best promotional tool.
Click to expand...

I was saying that Floyd's 'evil' reputation comes from him actually being a scumbag, rather than him just being generally classless.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I was saying that Floyd's 'evil' reputation comes from him actually being a scumbag, rather than him just being generally classless.
Click to expand...

Fair enough but in terms of billing the fight they will play up to his arrogance in terms of the whole money personal rather than his actual real life demons which wouldn't exactly be a brilliant tool for promoting a fight.
 
Oggmonster said:
Fair enough but in terms of billing the fight they will play up to his arrogance in terms of the whole money personal rather than his actual real life demons which wouldn't exactly be a brilliant tool for promoting a fight.
Click to expand...

From a PR company perspective it isn't a tactic they would use. But we have seen many fighters in the past take the build up to a fight right into the gutter and it be great for the promotion. Freddie Roach has actually tried to do this already in the build up by saying that Manny wants to destroy Mayweather because he has a strong distaste for him because of that.
 
Kazi said:
Sugar Ray Leonard also delayed his fight with Marvin Hagler up to a point where he believed Hagler had slowed down enough for Leonard to win. Leonard was the smaller man at the time though.
Click to expand...

Calzaghe did the same with RJJ. I love Super Joe, but if he fought RJJ in his prime, he'd have been destroyed. RJJ is the best P4P boxer I've seen (I'm only in my mid 20s, though).
 
Showtime have uploaded the full HD coverage of Mayweather's last fight vs Maidana (2nd one). Available below (54mins long):

 
11100078_1587588998154014_2160667243499043970_n.jpg
 
Anyone know who the Sky commentary team will be?

Thinking with Ian Darke now working for BT we might not have to put up with him?
 
Rado_N said:
Anyone know who the Sky commentary team will be?

Thinking with Ian Darke now working for BT we might not have to put up with him?
Click to expand...

Adam Smith and Jim Watt I assume. Maybe they'll bring in Amir to do some colour commentary. Don't understand why they can't just use the American commentators. Both HBO and Showtime are using the same broadcast team.

Haven't watched it yet but it's probably brilliant...

 
I like how Pacquiao fans are getting their excuses in early - constantly stating the fight should have happened earlier because he has slowed down and isn't as great in the attacking department. Yes, this is true, but what about Mayweather being even greater defensively 3-5 years back? Let's not forget Mayweather is 2 years older either.

Also, what's all this talk about Floyd ducking Manny in the past. It isn't as one sided as people make it out to be. What about Manny claiming he feared needles? Was he afraid of being caught juicing or what?!

Neither wanted to be the 'B' side at the time, Floyd wanted the lions share of the cut, and the television networks couldn't come to an agreement either.
 
Pacquaio fans? EVERYONE is saying the fight should of happened 3-5 years ago, and it clearly should have. Would of been better all round then. The 5 years wait is clearly favoured towards to the defensive fighter. Though I was more sure than ever of a Mayweather points decision 5 years ago than I am now.....genuinely not sure how Manna and Roach gonna fight this weekend. Just hoping for a showcase.
 
GE said:
I like how Pacquiao fans are getting their excuses in early - constantly stating the fight should have happened earlier because he has slowed down and isn't as great in the attacking department. Yes, this is true, but what about Mayweather being even greater defensively 3-5 years back? Let's not forget Mayweather is 2 years older either.

Also, what's all this talk about Floyd ducking Manny in the past. It isn't as one sided as people make it out to be. What about Manny claiming he feared needles? Was he afraid of being caught juicing or what?!

Neither wanted to be the 'B' side at the time, Floyd wanted the lions share of the cut, and the television networks couldn't come to an agreement either.
Click to expand...

He has never tested positive for any banned substance, Mayweather had to pay an out of court settlement for suggesting Pacquiao was juicing. In terms of the blood testing, it was a case of not wanting to be weakened by giving blood the day of the fight, he was happy to be tested three days before and immediately after. In fact, when Mayweather dismissed that suggestion and walked away from negotiations Pacquiao came back and agreed to all testing, Mayweather still didn't want the fight. It was just a case of road blocks being put up by Mayweather. The fact we've had to wait this long is 90% his fault, if not 100%.
 
Dan Rafael at ESPN America, probably the best connected boxing journalist on the planet, says that most of the blame lies with Mayweather for the fight not happening. That is good enough for me.
 
Nobody will ever know for sure who or what caused all the delays, but one thing we can be sure of is that it wasn't 100% (or even 90%) down to one side. They've both fecked about and led to it happening years later than it should, and both have blamed each other all the way.

There are by far more Manny fans on here who basically take his word as gospel and think Mayweather lies everytime he opens his mouth, which is understandable but I'm sure they're both full of shit and the promoters on both sides seem like utter wankers, it's probably pretty much 50/50, with them both benefiting from the additional hype caused by all the delays.
 
evra said:
He has never tested positive for any banned substance, Mayweather had to pay an out of court settlement for suggesting Pacquiao was juicing. In terms of the blood testing, it was a case of not wanting to be weakened by giving blood the day of the fight, he was happy to be tested three days before and immediately after. In fact, when Mayweather dismissed that suggestion and walked away from negotiations Pacquiao came back and agreed to all testing, Mayweather still didn't want the fight. It was just a case of road blocks being put up by Mayweather. The fact we've had to wait this long is 90% his fault, if not 100%.
Click to expand...

In fairness, that means nothing. Virtually all the top heavyweights in boxing/MMA are juicing, as well as the top 100m sprinters, NFL players, Olympic weightlifters etc. It is incredibly easy to use PEDs and still pass a drugs test.
 
does anyone know anywhere decent to stream this from? i only have sky go as i can't have a sky dish on the side of the house due to olden times laws and can't find a local pub that's showing it. otherwise i'm going to have to go round my mummy's to watch it on sky box office.
 
rednev said:
In fairness, that means nothing. Virtually all the top heavyweights in boxing/MMA are juicing, as well as the top 100m sprinters, NFL players, Olympic weightlifters etc. It is incredibly easy to use PEDs and still pass a drugs test.
Click to expand...
Manny isnt a heavyweight

And I really do not think it is "Virtually All"

A problem for sure but not majority
 
Zen said:
Pacquaio fans? EVERYONE is saying the fight should of happened 3-5 years ago, and it clearly should have. Would of been better all round then. The 5 years wait is clearly favoured towards to the defensive fighter. Though I was more sure than ever of a Mayweather points decision 5 years ago than I am now.....genuinely not sure how Manna and Roach gonna fight this weekend. Just hoping for a showcase.
Click to expand...
Oscar De La Hoya has mollified me somewhat on this arguement. He says the fighting happening now means these guys wont quite have the legs to move around and such; I bealive this to be a slight in Floyd's direction rather than Manny's. This in theory should result into more aunthetic exchanges which should lead to an exciting fight.

http://m.thenational.ae/sport/manny...her-on-may-2-but-warns-filipino-about-referee
 
Last edited:
Rado_N said:
Nobody will ever know for sure who or what caused all the delays, but one thing we can be sure of is that it wasn't 100% (or even 90%) down to one side. They've both fecked about and led to it happening years later than it should, and both have blamed each other all the way.

There are by far more Manny fans on here who basically take his word as gospel and think Mayweather lies everytime he opens his mouth, which is understandable but I'm sure they're both full of shit and the promoters on both sides seem like utter wankers, it's probably pretty much 50/50, with them both benefiting from the additional hype caused by all the delays.
Click to expand...

Well I don't know if I should believe you or a guy who talks regularly to every important figure in American boxing. It is hard to decide.
 
Randall Flagg said:
Manny isnt a heavyweight
And I really do not think it is "Virtually All"
A problem for sure but not majority
Click to expand...

Not sure about doping in non-athletics/cycling......but if a few are, then it's likely most are unfortunately. As proven by cycling, if everyone chasing is doping can't catch.....however "clean" the leader is portrayed as being, he truly isn't.

I think Tennis is the next sport to be outed for it as a having a pretty big problem though. Although plenty share that thought too, ATP probably happy to keep it quiet given the riches.
 
Randall Flagg said:
Manny isnt a heavyweight

And I really do not think it is "Virtually All"

A problem for sure but not majority
Click to expand...

Obviously it is the case that virtually all athletes in certain sports are doping. The only way athletes can fail a drugs test is if their supply is contaminated or if they/their coaches feck up with the dosages, so it would be naive to think that it isn't rife in most sports, or even necessary in some.

As for Manny, it's true that steroids/PEDs aren't as important in the lighter weights as they are for heavyweights (where they are pretty much required), but they are still very common because the risk of getting caught is so small. Nobody can say for certain that Pac has used PEDs, but the fact that he has never failed a drugs test means absolutely nothing.
 
Floyd be like 'I wanna clean up the sport of boxing'

BRB two fighters from my own stable have been caught doping
BRB pumping my hands with xylocaine
 
You must log in or register to reply here.