rao007

I think both used some sort of variant of PEDs that was undetectable. But Marquez is without a doubt a former user. Victor Conte even submitted that the acne seen on Marquez was not normal or natural. Max Kellerman threw some shade and doubt how a 40 year old man could look faster and stronger as he aged and noting that before these remarks never was a true supporter of pacquiao. The signs were there that Marquez was on something people just need to be objective about it.

FOOKIN BALDO---FOOKIN--MIR http://i67.tinypic.com/9hjgvk.jpg If this guy was able to go 12 rounds...you got to be kidding me if a guy like mcgregor, who walks around 170-180 can be stopped by mayweather...what a coon.

I considered the draw a robbery. :chomp::chomp: I might have to look back at the fight but technically apart from the first 2 rounds--Pacquiao would've only needed three more rounds out of the next 10 rounds to make a draw. But here's the thing--one of the judges scored the first round a 10-7 rather than a 10-6, which would've given Pacquiao the nod. So while Pacquiao lost more rounds to Marquez in the end the three knockdowns should've superseded it.

But honestly, this thread is pointless. It's like trying to garner validation for a certain group. It's the same thing if I made a thread saying "do we appreciate Mexicans, Brits, Panamanians, Americans, Columbians, etc?" just for the sake of ego stroking. You suck at making threads. That's no offense to Filipinos by the way.

First of all, I am not blind. Second I wasn't stating that all boxing fans dislike Cotto the problem is here in NSB. I mean come on there are a ton of peepz on here that diss Cotto daily. It's only a minority in Boxingscene who want to make it personal. Generally, posters in here are unable to be tactiful or respectful in their post to disagree without sounding like pricks. It has nothing to do with Cotto or Boricuas, it's people's inability to communicate.

For the short time I've been here. I see hate coming from both sides. Pacquiao fans complaining about the criticisms Pacquiao gets for his wins, which they then blow out of proportion. The same goes for Cotto or any other fightes from other nations; their fans whine about every little thing like kids.

No disrespect but they have set boxing back 15 years. If you can actually elaborate on this ignorant post--people would give you more credence.

David Diaz. The fight he had with Pacquiao was like a stepping stone towards Parkisons disease.

definitely 1) cotto will have 10 lbs on pac 2) cotto only struggled with huge WW 3) cotto is a real welterweight 4) pac is a blown up jr welterweight Pacquiao has been a full-fledged junior welterweight for a while now probably since the Marquez 2 fight which he looked drained in the weigh-ins and rehydrated 16lbs! afterwards and looked have been that way for the Barrera 2 too, which Jim Lampely commented about as well. To quote Nazeem Richardson:"All these guys underestimate Pacquiao thinking he's the small man. When I met Pacquiao, I wasn't saying how does this guy make welterweight? I was saying how in the hell was he making 130 and 135?"

He looked weight drained...new trainer...floyd ruined him..lazcano almost knocked him out...... Cotto...Maywetaher...and Mosley are GREAT wins.. Floyd Mayweather Sr. did not ruin Hatton--as many used the Malignaggi fight as benchmark how well Hatton would do against speedy guys. Hatton simply forgot EVERYTHING Mayweather Sr. told him when he faced Pacquiao that night and fought exactly the way he did against Mayweather Jr.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves people. As a pac fan I want to see him beat Cotto first before making any kind of comparison.

Sweet, the first question in the article was the one I sent to be asked. Awesome!!

1.Pacquiao challenged cotto not the other way around,So cotto does not have to move down-Fact 1 2.Cotto if to defeat Pacman,he defeated the best fighter in the world but a small man none the less so the fight is to not be braught up as a card for cotto if he is to go into another fight. let me clarify,You wont be able to say "well cotto beat pacquiao" because it will mean very little in the retrospect that pacquiao is not half the size of floyd,clottey or shane and deffinately not williams who needs to stop being a lil B*TCH and accept the fights from abraham and pavlik already,he freaking started at middleweight to begin with-Off point but you get the real point. roby_acer, Cotto did accept to go down because just like any other fighter--Cotto wants a big payday.

Why is Pac trying so hard to fight at WW if its not his best weight? Enough of letting Pac and his crooked team change the rules. You want to fight the man fight him at his own weight not YOURE weight or whatever weight you want him to be at. What rules are being changed?

ok. but she may pass for a brown filipina. several actresses back home look like her. Maybe from a far away distance--zoom in I don't see any pinay actress that I know of that looks like her.

If Cotto beats Pacquiao his stock rises obviously however from a different point of view--an unbiased view--a bigger, stronger fighter should beat a smaller man regardless of whether Pacquiao may have a slight advantage in boxing skills over Cotto. So it would be a good win for Cotto but not a GREAT win no matter how much the media tries to hype Pacquiao. If Cotto beat Paul Williams --now, THAT would be a great win.

Funny thing is he is watching the mosley vs cotto fight, cotto was not going to the body like he used to, now for this fight he should go to the body, so his game plan might be messed up, plus cotto will adapt in the ring He also said, he's watched the last six fights but paying particular attention to Cotto-Mosley fight.

Because underdog is a comment on perception not ability. Specifically it's based on betting odds. Remember Ali was an 8-1 underdog against Liston because no one thought he could survive Liston's power, looking back on it we can see Ali clearly out classed Liston but he was still the underdog. Granted that may be the case--why is that in a recent pole in this forum, which mind you had a signficant number of votes, had a result by large margin showing that a victory over Pacquiao would be a "great win"--yet, I'm sure that a large portion of those voters would decry, denounce, and denigrate Pacquiao's achivements. Peculiar if you ask me. They're willing to say it's a "great win" and say Pacquiao is an overhwhelming favourite. What they're doing is splitting hairs. It's either they give Pacquiao credit or not for his past victories. And if they're willing to cite valid reasons (size, strength, boxing skills) to explain a Cotto victory--why do they (in this forum) need to chastize every single Pacquiao bout only to say it would be a great win for Cotto? To me, I see idiots for both sides of Pacquiao and Cotto fan base.

I think people drain themselves making the weight--their chin is not as resilient. Khan took some direct shots on the chin from Kotelnik and he seemed fine.

how about this - if i could cure him, i would. i'm that type of guy; but just because he has Parkinson's doesn't autonomously put him beyond being made fun of because of it. fukk that! :fing02: What logic is that? If I could cure Roach- I would, but I cannot--therefore, I'll ridicule the disease he has because I don't like his comments. How exactly has Roach disrespected Cotto? How are you any different from the Pachuggers who insult Pacquiao's opponents? I don't see a difference. Peace.

What is wrong with you? I'm ok with his opinion, just tired of hearing him make predictions and the way he says things. If he says "i'll have Pacquiao prepared for anything cotto brings and we'll win fight" I'm ok with that. When he makes predictions and makes it seem like his fighter in invincible, that is annoying. If he believes it, i'm cool with that. Just tired of hearing him talk, still think he is a great trainer.:bottle: Well, it seems you didn't carefully read what you bolded. Roach: "I’m training Manny not to get hit." That's what every trainer does with their ward--train not to get hit. Mayweather Sr. anyone? That's obvious. And if Roach makes a prediction that he truly believes in --that's absolutely his own honest opnion on the state of his fighter's abilities. There's nothing wrong there.

What's equal to a Pactard are idiots who try to instigate thread wars with them. All of you act like 6 year olds. I'm out.

Well obviously, if this was a boxing match, Roy would make Anderson Silva his bitch; however, considering how stupid Roy is wanting to add kicks and elbows to make it more appealing for Silva to accept--then the spider would drop him. Cold.

NO, he has his right, same way Cotto's trainers tend to be more quiet and just take care of things in the ring. Trainers are different. Hopkin's trainer, cotto's trainer, mosley's trainer do things very different from each other. What are you talking about. If you ever truly watched Roach's interviews he always says how his fighters will perform-has he insulted Cotto like Mayweather Sr. did with "Coackroach" jokes or Freddie "The Joke" Roach and personal attacks. What is your problem if he believes Cotto's power won't be a factor? That's his opinion as a trainer.

no i'm just bored. I"m not six i got grown man money. Just wanted to say pactards are ridiculus fans and think boxing started when manny started fighting drained fighters and david diaz and club fighter ricky fatton I never got a straight answer everytime I asked this question. Who are these drained fighters? Oscar?--he was suppose to have entered in 160lbs during his match with pacquiao. He made an error by training at 147 too long so the results occured. Even Flody Mayweather Sr. supports this. So who's fault is it? David Diaz, Ricky Hatton, Oscar were they're to test whether or not Pacquiao could handle going up in weight-- and he passed with flying colours. And, no, I don't think boxing started when Pacquiao began fighting drain fighters (which I disagree with), no, I don't think Pacquiao is a god, no, I don't think I'm any generalization some people make about Pacquiao fans besides supporting him. I try to be objective about every fighter pacquiao faces. However, I do agree, they're morons who do support Pacquiao without giving a second thought about Pacquiao's opponent regardless of whether they may actually be good.

i didn't give it to him, man. And people say Pacquiao's fans are bad.

I hate to break it to the examiner but it was I who said Pacquiao could not have his cake and eat it too. Pacquaio wanted to fight Cotto and eveyone thought it would be at welter and then they began talking about 143-145 then it was for a belt that was not part of the contract and then Roach wanted Cotto to let his hair grow and prohibit him from plucking his eyebrows, then they were demanding that Cotto must hire Evangelista back, and on and on and on and on. Sorry Examiner, you fail. Ooopps to make matters even worse, they are set to make yet another trinket which no one has ever seen or heard about. Last time I checked, this belt was ment for Manny and not Cotto. Who is trying to make sure that Manny get's his cake and eats the whole damn thing too? That would be the WBO and WBC--the only thing Manny did was accept the title clause which he was notified about. Cotto agreed to the venue, split, etc. --so there's nothing to argue about in that respect.

Wait, I'm shocked at the percentage here. REALLY. I do not understand for the people who support or make an argument that it would be a great win if Cotto beats Pacquiao--how so? When a large portion of these people claim Oscar was weight drained, Ricky Hatton had no skills, David Diaz was the weakest--yet, voted that this would be a great win for Cotto. I understand Cotto's stock would rise, but having it be a great win when Cotto's is the naturally bigger, stronger guy against Pacquiao? Please don't use "everybody saying Pacquiao beats Cotto" argument. I'm talking about boxing skills here--something that everybody has been making an argument against Pacquiao to discount his achievements. Could somebody PLEASE explain this to me.

This articles fails for one reason--if these are indeed valid reasons--it doesn't really matter whether or not Cotto is damaged goods --he should be able to win regardless given these aforementioned reasons by the writer, right? So saying "Miguel Cotto is an underdog against Manny Pacquiao" is baseless and without merit. And the writer just contradicted himself: Ring Generalship "Cotto is an underrated boxer. He can box well from the outside, as well as fight on the inside. He makes good in-fight adjustments. In this fight, he will need to cut the ring off without taking too much damage. Cotto will need to corner the faster Pacquiao, and make him pay once on the inside." This whole paragraph infers that Cotto would have to be sound both body and mind to be an "underrated boxer" and to have ring generaliship. Don't you agree? So how exactly is Cotto an underdog because the general public says so?

Ring rust is always taken into account. Meaning, Floyd has alot more to overcome here then just a very skilled fighter in JMM. Floyd has Jr.Welterweight punching power. And again, skills pay the bills. JMM didn't get knocked out thus far because he is a great technician. Pacquaio is a bigger puncher than Floyd P4P and Floyd at 147 is much less powerful than at 135/140. Lets not act like Floyd is Miguel Cotto - a guy who struggled to make 140 and thus moved up to 147. Floyd moved up for the big fights (e.g. Fighting Judah for the Undisputed title before he knew he was gonna lose to Baldomir, and Delahoya). I'm not refering to ring rust. I'm taking your statement verbatim and basing it on skills--the long layoff is just added hurdle for Mayweather, nothing else. Mayweather has power, speed, and with his natural size--he assuredly has the capability to stop JMM or a clear UD. FLoyd shouldn't lose to JMM. EDIT: However, anything is possible. JMM might be able to defeat Floyd once you account for ring rust, but Floyd shouldn't, which is my point.