Pac full mitt workout! Looking mofofast!

Pac NEEDS a KO to win...trust me Didn't need it the first time. We'll see how much the knockout took out of Pacquiao.

Manny's been practicing at cutting off the ring, did it very nicely.

yeah of course...he was YOUNGER, LIGHTER, HUNGRIER and taking more RISKS. What I'm saying was younger Pac was faster than peak prime Pacquiao. Younger Pacquiao also made 2014 Pacquiao look like a faded Mosley speedwise. Kinda remind me of Jordan as a Wizard.

Younger Pac was a blur who hit the mitts with deadly furious intent. Roach was amazing keeping up. Starts at 2:30 yeah of course...he was YOUNGER, LIGHTER, HUNGRIER and taking more RISKS.

He still looks fast but not like compared before. There is something different about him with how he hits the mitts now. I can't seem to figure it out...especially when he throws his left. Here is peak prime pacquiao on mitts before the clottey fight. Manny Pacquiao on the mitts with Freddie Roach: http://youtu.be/q5cxoI9vmDM Younger Pac was a blur who hit the mitts with deadly furious intent. Roach was amazing keeping up. Starts at 2:30

Pacquiao is still one of the fastest fighters if not the fastest alive. IF fights were solely won on speed, he would be undefeated.

I apologise. For some reason, I honestly thought you said "dumb brawler" not "dumb guy". My mistake on that one. But that said, I've not once said he's a dumb fighter anyway. You can misconstrue me saying he's not smart to him being dumb but it doesn't mean that and I've not once said he's a dumb fighter. I can understand the opposing argument to what my view, I can agree that's up for discussion and can debate it. But I've not said he's a dumb fighter. Not once. Point taken. Understand.

he lost the first fight against morales, came back and beat him the 2nd and 3rd time, hm thats not called "adjusting"? and i knew u were gonna say marquez LOL. i knew this whole cant adjust thing was based around marquez u just didnt want to admit it until now. and regarding shane and clottey the turtle, what was pac suppose to do to a guy who covers up for all 12 rds? I wouldn't call it adjusting no because he fought the same way on all 3 fights. Well yeah obviously Marquez would be one example. It's not "based around Marquez" that's just an example. What he's supposed to do is use different approaches to be more effective than he was. He dominated both fights but he didn't look very impressive in doing so. Either way I think it's an agree to disagree situation here.

Pac cutting off the ring, well I'll be...Bradley in for a hell of a fight.

Why did you start inserting the term "brawler" or "dumb brawler" out of nowhere? I didn't say that and you know it. You, the guy who has spent all this time and energy trying to mince words and explain yourself? That's two posts in a row addressed to me where you're being completely false and non-genuine about your statements. Why? What's the point? I used the term "dumb" on my own facetiously paraphrasing what you guys were saying. Clearly I don't agree with you. As you can see from the reaction you've been getting people can very easily misconstrue repeatedly referring to somebody as "not being smart" as being "dumb." Does somebody need to explain that to you?? I seriously doubt it. Enough with the silliness. I apologise. For some reason, I honestly thought you said "dumb brawler" not "dumb guy". My mistake on that one. But that said, I've not once said he's a dumb fighter anyway. You can misconstrue me saying he's not smart to him being dumb but it doesn't mean that and I've not once said he's a dumb fighter. I can understand the opposing argument to what my view, I can agree that's up for discussion and can debate it. But I've not said he's a dumb fighter. Not once.

I don't see any of those posts that say he's a dumb brawler. Or even a dumb fighter at all, or a brawler at all. He's neither. Where does it say that? I've said he's not a smart fighter, I don't consider him a smart fighter. But he's sure as hell not a dumb fighter. There's more than just the two ends of the spectrum. Why did you start inserting the term "brawler" or "dumb brawler" out of nowhere? I didn't say that and you know it. You, the guy who has spent all this time and energy trying to mince words and explain yourself? That's two posts in a row addressed to me where you're being completely false and non-genuine about your statements. Why? What's the point? I used the term "dumb" on my own facetiously paraphrasing what you guys were saying. Clearly I don't agree with you. As you can see from the reaction you've been getting people can very easily misconstrue repeatedly referring to somebody as "not being smart" as being "dumb." Does somebody need to explain that to you?? I seriously doubt it. Enough with the silliness.

Again that's not my whole point they were just examples when asked. What I'm saying here is so simple. I can't see how you can't grasp it. Pacquaio usually doesn't need to adjust because he's that good. But when he's shown where adjusting would be ideal, like Morales, like Marquez, like even Mosley and Clottey where he looked less than stellar, he's often struggled to do so. Simple simple stuff. he lost the first fight against morales, came back and beat him the 2nd and 3rd time, hm thats not called "adjusting"? and i knew u were gonna say marquez LOL. i knew this whole cant adjust thing was based around marquez u just didnt want to admit it until now. and regarding shane and clottey the turtle, what was pac suppose to do to a guy who covers up for all 12 rds?

Again that's not my whole point they were just examples when asked. What I'm saying here is so simple. I can't see how you can't grasp it. Pacquaio usually doesn't need to adjust because he's that good. But when he's shown where adjusting would be ideal, like Morales, like Marquez, like even Mosley and Clottey where he looked less than stellar, he's often struggled to do so. Simple simple stuff. alot of what he did in the 4th marquez fight he was doing from rd 8 or so vs marquez in the third fight, bobbing and weaving to get close to marquez, leading with the lead left more, by rd 9 uppercuts to raise marquez's head up and a straight to clock him etc that's why going into the 4th freddie used pacquiao's gameplan in the morales fight it was his first fight at the weight and he was tired by the 4th, sustained a cut, went to war, ok, in the rematch he showed up with a right hook to stop morales' bullrushes on him, in the first fight with pacquiao and second marquez also didn't have the defense for pacquiao's left like he did in the 3rd sometimes you aren't completely aware during the fight and only come to realise things afterwards, majority of marquez's career also revolves around pacquiao, im sure him and nacho figured out alot but what would you like to have seen vs clottey exactly? he fought the perfect fight against mosley also, does he have to adjust to get a ko? pacquiao's more of a boxer now, he doesn't really seek and destroy anymore but he showed in spots when he wanted he could get to mosley and snapped his head back on occassion, but it's more energy, more effort and more risk, they went into that fight respecting mosley's power, he won every rd didn't he?

of course i need u to explain because ur whole point of pac not being a smart fighter is because he doesnt out-think his opponents nor does he adjust. then u said pac doesnt really need to adjust since his physical tools is more than enough for most of his opponents. so how do u come to the conclusion that pac is not a smart fighter because he cant adjust when u just said he doesnt need too? so im wondering how do u know he cant adjust and in what fight then? Again that's not my whole point they were just examples when asked. What I'm saying here is so simple. I can't see how you can't grasp it. Pacquaio usually doesn't need to adjust because he's that good. But when he's shown where adjusting would be ideal, like Morales, like Marquez, like even Mosley and Clottey where he looked less than stellar, he's often struggled to do so. Simple simple stuff.

The thing is this is a MEDIA DAY....he will not show off his stuffs and mostly there's a ploy for them to look "sloppy" because they don't want to feed the idea that he is back. But of course he has aged and slowed down but the main thing is about TIMING. If the timing are well synchronized, then the follow up would be fairly easy to land on a very mobile Bradley. The main thing is for Bradley to move about and never let Pacquiao come in to set up his combinations. Never let Pacquiao cut off the ring and throw some jabs and lead rights. So in this light, I would say IF PACQUIAO IS BACK (which I think he is), it will go down to distance and a UD or at most, a late TKO.

Evol still going on? Goodness. If u say something u better back it up. How is he gonna say manny is not a smart fighter since he can't out think his opponents nor can he adjust then a few post later he says manny doesn't really need to adjust since most of his opponents can't handle his physical tools.

Evol still going on? Goodness.

What do you need explaining? They were just examples I used. I don't understand why this needs explaining so thoroughly. Basically you think he's smarter than I do but neither of us consider him a dumb fighter. of course i need u to explain because ur whole point of pac not being a smart fighter is because he doesnt out-think his opponents nor does he adjust. then u said pac doesnt really need to adjust since his physical tools is more than enough for most of his opponents. so how do u come to the conclusion that pac is not a smart fighter because he cant adjust when u just said he doesnt need too? so im wondering how do u know he cant adjust and in what fight then?

no not really. i still stand by what i said and that is pac is a smart fighter. not a genius but a smart fighter. and u still didnt answer my other question regarding the fact that u said pac doesnt really need to adjust because most of the time his physical tools is too much for his opponents but u also said u define smarts by out thinking ur opponents and being able to adjust, which pac doesnt. so care to explain? What do you need explaining? They were just examples I used. I don't understand why this needs explaining so thoroughly. Basically you think he's smarter than I do but neither of us consider him a dumb fighter.

pac seems to be in really good shape ..hopefully that energy and speed translates in the ring..