Floyd and Roy fought the same guy???..and Roy: inactive fighters wear in later rounds

I dont factor any of pacs losses before 122, youll never see me bring it up like it matters, but im saying this, if his losses before 122 serve as the years where he was coming up, then the wins dont mean much either. I dont think people can have it both ways. Mayweathers career is the same, he was an adult by 130, same with pac to me at 122, for me personally, Morales was his first true loss in his adult form, its really the only loss that matters. So then we would all have to agree that his career started at 122+, right?

fine can we factor in floyd's losses in the ams too? he was about the same age. pacquiao turned pro at what 15? barely 16? a person's resume at the age is viewed probably the same way as hopkins' and foreman's resume is viewed at the end of their careers. losses for foreman and hopkins are dismissed due to them being past their prime while every win and accomplishment is magnified because they won at such an old age and clearly past their prime. the same holds true for guys at the beginning of their career. pac's losses are minimized because he was a teenager but winning a belt at 19-20 yrs. old with no amateur background is somewhat magnified. let me ask you this.....if floyd loss one of his pro fights in his teens would you hold it against him? no because he was a kid. get it? i don't even know why that moron brought it up anyway. this thread has nothing to do with manny. I dont factor any of pacs losses before 122, youll never see me bring it up like it matters, but im saying this, if his losses before 122 serve as the years where he was coming up, then the wins dont mean much either. I dont think people can have it both ways. Mayweathers career is the same, he was an adult by 130, same with pac to me at 122, for me personally, Morales was his first true loss in his adult form, its really the only loss that matters.

manny just turned 17 2 months earlier when he fought torrecampo. not 21. you gonna hold a 17 yr. old BOY's loss without an amateur background against him for losing to a 24 yr. old MAN? lol This is what i have a problem with, i agree with you when you say this, but if thats the case, why do we have to awknowledge that pac "came up" from 106lbs, if those fights at this weights didint mean much and his body didint mature. Pacs "adult" weight seems to been 122. So would you say that we shouldnt count the legitimacy of the wins prior to that, in which case wed have to factor in the losses?

how can you say a guy is not an exciting fighters with knockouts like these. His last fews fights have been more tactical thats all. Somebody tell me where pacman was at when floyd knocking people out, oh yeah he was getting knockout Floyd doesn't seem as fast or agile...nor does he throw the same amount of punches. Oh, and did you notice the quick jab.

obv. fought in the amateurs. Yes, I figured by it was crazy to hear

well at the time of this fight (floyd's 6th) manny was 15-1 despite being a few years younger. too bad manny didn't have an amateur background to learn his craft before turning pro. Torrecampo had Manny's number, amatuer pedigree or not :dance: 21 year old Floyd >>>21 year old Manny :D

how can you say a guy is not an exciting fighters with knockouts like these. His last fews fights have been more tactical thats all. Somebody tell me where pacman was at when floyd knocking people out, oh yeah he was getting knockout

great vid!...

Watch video obv. fought in the amateurs.