If Pac Loses Will You Question His 147 Wins

I think if he looses it will just show that he is getting older. Now if he if he gets caught using peds...then yes I would question all his wins at the higher weight classes. His wins over alot of fighters was just his overall relentless attack and speed and stamina as well, Its kinda like RJ, once he got older he lost his biggest weapon speed.

These questions are always stupid. No loss, no matter how devastating, changes what a fight did before that loss. I don't care if Pac gets knocked out by the first punch that hits him, it doesn't change anything he did before. Thats right it was still cherry picking at its finest and then draining them for insurance , take out the CWs and what do you have , NOT MUCH , so your right nothing changes if he lost he still scammed boxing when he went to WW with conditions on everybody .

good points that the pre welter pacquiao was the real monster. but who else do you think he should have fought at welterweight? ortiz? berto? cmon man you know what would happen in those fights. Doesn't mean they shouldn't have occured.

good points that the pre welter pacquiao was the real monster. but who else do you think he should have fought at welterweight? ortiz? berto? cmon man you know what would happen in those fights. Doesn't change that those fighters would have been better choices than the guys he has been fighting. Bradley is the only fight since Clottey that wasn't an awful choice.

These questions are always stupid. No loss, no matter how devastating, changes what a fight did before that loss. I don't care if Pac gets knocked out by the first punch that hits him, it doesn't change anything he did before.

Well, no. It's more about his opponent/style of choice than anything. Getting a few plodding, offensive guys with little defense can make anyone look a million dollars, especially if they're as good as Pac. I think people are overestimating Marquez now. It's gone the opposite way. People think he's going to come in looking as good or better than last time. He's now 40 years old, at 147. So what that he's done lots of weight training...He's not going to be sharper, faster or slicker, and most importantly younger, which is the only thing he ever needed to be to beat Pac. He's going to be slower again, his reflexes slightly eroded more and with the time of another year passing, his overall skills just that little bit diminished. It'll either look sort of similar or Pac will win easy this time. Marquez isn't going to suddenly be better than ever. Either way, none of that erases what he's done at 147.

What would lead anybody to believe reputable judges would rob the cash-fighter? It doesn't make sense, absolutely nonsense IMO. I think the argument would be that Manny's contract with Top Rank was coming to an end and therefore would be up for re-negotiation in the months following the fight. Therefore it would have been in Arum's interest to weaken Manny's negotiating position. Tinfoil hat stuff of course but nevertheless plausible given the influence promoters can have over judges. The counter-argument is that Arum would have been almost certain of renewing that contract in any case and it would only have hurt his own future earnings to have Manny take a loss. Who knows really. Personally I think the judges scores were fair, but it was undeniably strange that the big name fighter came out the wrong side of such a close fight.

And 120 other experts scored it for Pac, mostly really wide. A fair number of 118-110 and wider. None of these guys watching compubox or listening to hbo. It's pretty much been rubberstamped as a robbery, it's pointless to fight it. Especially using a "that kind of thing wouldn't happen in boxing" defense. What would lead anybody to believe reputable judges would rob the cash-fighter? It doesn't make sense, absolutely nonsense IMO.

I'm pretty sure Brian Kenny scored it for Bradley, and he knows his ****ing boxing. That fight was a difficult fight to score for me, because you had a typical "boxer" in Bradley who relies on technical skills, and you have Manny who's more of an ambush style, much more offensive oriented which can deceive the eyes into thinking he's winning rounds by simply throwing punches. Manny's accuracy that fight was abysmal, the compubox numbers were a joke (and this isn't the only fight where CompuBox was a sham, most of the fights where CompuBox is used have improper scoring of punches) do people really think those judges were part of some sort of robbery scheme, or some conspiracy against Pacquiao? lol And 120 other experts scored it for Pac, mostly really wide. A fair number of 118-110 and wider. None of these guys watching compubox or listening to hbo. It's pretty much been rubberstamped as a robbery, it's pointless to fight it. Especially using a "that kind of thing wouldn't happen in boxing" defense.

The wins get questioned all the time with the draining and such i'm just surprised that MUSCLEQUEZ has put more of a beating on PAC than anyone at the 147 limit. This shows the true skills of musclequez

Bradley has nothing to do with Marquez. According to a huge majority, Pac Bradley was a dominant performance, about 117-111 on average on press row cards: http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Manny_Pacquiao_vs._Timothy_Bradley JMM 3 was Pac's only non dominant performance since JMM 2, right, in mainstream opinion? It was still very close, just like 1 and 2, a textbook draw on press row cards: http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Manny_Pacquiao_vs._Juan_Manuel_Marquez_(3rd_meeting) I'm pretty sure Brian Kenny scored it for Bradley, and he knows his ****ing boxing. That fight was a difficult fight to score for me, because you had a typical "boxer" in Bradley who relies on technical skills, and you have Manny who's more of an ambush style, much more offensive oriented which can deceive the eyes into thinking he's winning rounds by simply throwing punches. Manny's accuracy that fight was abysmal, the compubox numbers were a joke (and this isn't the only fight where CompuBox was a sham, most of the fights where CompuBox is used have improper scoring of punches) do people really think those judges were part of some sort of robbery scheme, or some conspiracy against Pacquiao? lol

Lol Morales was already getting old before Pacquaio. He was winning so nobody cared. Don't pretend like Morales isn't a wartorn fighter. Pacquaio fought Morales when he was 28. Maybe you should explain yourself what do you mean by OLD? Pac has been with wars after wars more than Morales you can imagine and he is 34 year old this coming Dec. 17. Pacquaio must be a super old and super wartorn now in your standard, right ?

I hate questions like this before a fight. A lot depends on how a fighter looks. What if Pacquiao loses it overnight? Or looks old? A loss here could tell us nothing. Pacquiao's legacy is secure because of what he did in the lower weight classes. Those accomplishments made him a modern great. What he did after, beating Cotto specifically, in such an impressive manner, makes him an all-time great. That said, would a loss to Marquez weaken his 147lb resume? Aside from the Cotto bout, it isn't too impressive anyway. A De La Hoya who had bullet holes in his robe as he entered the ring. A Mosley who hadn't won a fight in eons. Clottey--not a has-been but sadly, a never will be. A loss to Bradley--and if you think he won then you probably think he lost to Marquez, which hurts him as well. Pacquiao's legacy is secure. The welterweight version, however, is nothing to write home about. Bradley has nothing to do with Marquez. According to a huge majority, Pac Bradley was a dominant performance, about 117-111 on average on press row cards: http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Manny_Pacquiao_vs._Timothy_Bradley Among the experts above, 120 scored the bout for Pacquiao, 1 scored the bout a draw, and 1 scored the bout for Bradley. JMM 3 was Pac's only non dominant performance since JMM 2, right, in mainstream opinion? It was still very close, just like 1 and 2, a textbook draw on press row cards: http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Manny_Pacquiao_vs._Juan_Manuel_Marquez_(3rd_meeting) Among the unofficial scorers above, 57 scored the bout for Marquez, 51 scored the bout for Pacquiao, and the remaining 36 scored the bout a draw.

Good fighter like Morales, Barrera, Cotto, etc were flatfooted. in your pea size brain...while if someone keep moving backward to avoid being knocked out and waits for you to punch first otherwise he won't punch a single punch is good for you. Lol Morales was already getting old before Pacquaio. He was winning so nobody cared. Don't pretend like Morales isn't a wartorn fighter.

the Post Margarito suspension catchweight JMW title fight was not impressive, at least not in my opinion oh I wasn't suggesting that all of his wins above 135 are impressive, but the ones that are; Hatton, Cotto, Marquez III will still be good wins regardless of the outcome of this fourth fight, which is what the TS asked

the wins that were impressive above 135lbs will still be so, but only really the Cotto win at WW is impressive

I hate questions like this before a fight. A lot depends on how a fighter looks. What if Pacquiao loses it overnight? Or looks old? A loss here could tell us nothing. Pacquiao's legacy is secure because of what he did in the lower weight classes. Those accomplishments made him a modern great. What he did after, beating Cotto specifically, in such an impressive manner, makes him an all-time great. That said, would a loss to Marquez weaken his 147lb resume? Aside from the Cotto bout, it isn't too impressive anyway. A De La Hoya who had bullet holes in his robe as he entered the ring. A Mosley who hadn't won a fight in eons. Clottey--not a has-been but sadly, a never will be. A loss to Bradley--and if you think he won then you probably think he lost to Marquez, which hurts him as well. Pacquiao's legacy is secure. The welterweight version, however, is nothing to write home about. good points that the pre welter pacquiao was the real monster. but who else do you think he should have fought at welterweight? ortiz? berto? cmon man you know what would happen in those fights.

It depends on how they both look in this fight and what kind of fight they both bring. This is something that can't be explained before hand.

he's not fighting flatfooted opponents anymore is bradley a flat footed come-forward brawler? no, and pac beat him easily.

Manny beat this skilled fighter 2 times and could have been 3 if not for the judge making a mistake in his scoring. You guys are looking at this all wrong. You said so yourself that Marquez is a skilled fighter. Now add that he is one of the best counter punchers around and one can easily deduce that this has more to do about styles than anything else. Ali had a tough time against Frazier. He even lost and was knocked down. It didn't diminish him in my eyes. It actually helped build his resume to what it was. it wasn't a 'mistake'. MANY judges refuse to go below a 10-7 round even if there are 3 or more KD's