A Question about the Proposed Pacquiao-Margarito Matchup...

[Vito Corleone]

Bob Arum has said that Margarito is the likely opponent if the Mayweather fight falls through.

Previously, Pac said that Foreman was too tall for him. But isn't Margarito:

As tall as Foreman.
More rugged than Foreman.
Better chin than Foreman.
Harder puncher than Foreman.
More experienced at high level than Foreman?

As they purely counting on the fact that Margarito is relatively slow and easy to hit?

[S H A R K B O Y]

Money makes the world go round.

[Boxing Scene]

Foreman didn't stand still one bit in that fight with Cotto, Margarito will be there taking every punch Pac throws at him, and after about 4 rounds of getting hit with every punch Pac has, he'll get knocked out in my humble opinion. That is the difference in a Yuri Foreman/Margarito fight.

In hindsight, I'm sure Roach and Pac know now that they could have easily beaten Foreman.

[2501]

so basically, what your saying is, you would have given Pacquiao **** for fighting Foreman at 154, claiming he was "cherry picking history" going for that title and going for the "weakest belt holder" at 154. So you're admitting that no matter what, you'd give him **** for any decision he would have made. If he would have fought foreman, he would be cherry picking. since he didn't fight foreman, he ducked him. Right.

[MACAQUEINBLACK]

Originally Posted by Vito Corleone

As they purely counting on the fact that Margarito is relatively slow and easy to hit?

Absolutely.


And I think he's been an intended opponent for some time.

I don't think Pacquiao's team have ever had a sincere intent to fight Floyd.

Would love to be proven wrong and to see Mayweather-Pacquiao made.

[MACAQUEINBLACK]

Originally Posted by 2501

so basically, what your saying is, you would have given Pacquiao **** for fighting Foreman at 154, claiming he was "cherry picking history" going for that title and going for the "weakest belt holder" at 154. So you're admitting that no matter what, you'd give him **** for any decision he would have made. If he would have fought foreman, he would be cherry picking. since he didn't fight foreman, he ducked him. Right.

Where does he say that? Anywhere?

You love to put words in posters' textboxes. Gives you a little buzz.


I may be mistaken, but IIRC the OP has spoken well of Foreman in the past.

[MACAQUEINBLACK]

Thought so,

Originally Posted by And Still

Dude,

Foreman is going to school Cotto. Watch. Miguel will be verrrry fortunate to get out of there with a close decision victory.

From that, and a couple other comments, I got the sense the OP was somewhat of a Foreman appreciator.

He appears to have a small partiality to the up and coming, hardworking New York based fighters (Salita is another).





2501 being silly and dramatic. Who'd have seen that one coming?

[Miburo]

Foreman doesn't bring money to the table.

[Fighting Marine]

Originally Posted by 2501

so basically, what your saying is, you would have given Pacquiao **** for fighting Foreman at 154, claiming he was "cherry picking history" going for that title and going for the "weakest belt holder" at 154. So you're admitting that no matter what, you'd give him **** for any decision he would have made. If he would have fought foreman, he would be cherry picking. since he didn't fight foreman, he ducked him. Right.

you're talking **** mate.....

learn how to read

[Dominicano Soy]

Originally Posted by 2501

so basically, what your saying is, you would have given Pacquiao **** for fighting Foreman at 154, claiming he was "cherry picking history" going for that title and going for the "weakest belt holder" at 154. So you're admitting that no matter what, you'd give him **** for any decision he would have made. If he would have fought foreman, he would be cherry picking. since he didn't fight foreman, he ducked him. Right.

This usually happens to me when I'm too sleppy