Manny Pacquiao vs Julio Cesar Chavez at 135lb

[geribeetus]

Age has little to do with the prime of a boxers career.

anyone else laughing at this sentence?

back on topic though. i think pac's best shot is beating jcc on the cards. he throws more than chavez did, but chavez was more accurate. activity catches eyes though. both guys need to stay off the ropes. if chavez is the first to come forward in an exchange i think he wins it. he moves his head better than pac does getting inside. pac's footspeed would catch chavez off guard. when he leaps in he'd get the better of chavez. i see this looking a little like taylor-chavez(except mostly held in the center of the ring) until about the 10th. pac would finally have enough in the 10th. the ref would have to step in i think because pac wouldn't stay down. he'd be losing on the cards after multiple knockdowns in the last round, but would've won a round or two more up to that point.

[them_apples]

Hate Pac? You have no idea what you're talking about and now your nonsense has gone from lowly opinion to pure assumption.

Age has little to do with the prime of a boxers career. Barrera had been through hell and back and fought some 60-some professional fights. It's obvious he wasn't the same fighter he was in the early 2000's. He was licked before 30 and nothing since then has shown that he's a serious contender or was he near the prime of his career at 29.

But of course you would think that because a guy is only 30 he must still be in the prime of his career, because you lack that common knowledge. Most boxing fans would agree he was already on the downward slide, but you seem to think he was prime because you love Pac so much.

They were still good fighters, but they weren't fighters in the prime of their career, and I don't care who you are, if you're not at your best, you're not beating Pac. However, I do feel that Barrera was a better fighter than Pac in the prime of his career, and I feel the same about Morales.

I'm a bigger Pac fan than I am of those guys, but that's just what I believe, love aside.

Barrera was 29 and pretty cloe to his prime. Morales, he was 29? and he was considered on a downward slide. You must not have been following boxing. To me it's just excuses to write Pacquiao off. The man get's credit for nothing from some people. He goes in as the underdog, taxes ass then they write him off like it was a fluke because he's wreckless or something.

[Telepath]

Chavez's speed at 135 is very underrated, because most people remember him from 140 to 147.

Chavez's defense is also extremely underrated, for the same reason. As he grew older, a lot of the subtleties were gone.

Chavez in his prime wasn't just a guy who came at you senselessly and tried to trade blows. Ever watched his fight with Edwin Rosario? He just managed to keep up the pressure non-stop, while actually not taking much in return. And, when he did get tagged, he had what was probably the best chin pound for pound of all time in the sport, which was even explained medically, with CAT-scans showing him to have an abnormally thick skull bone.

At 135, Chavez would be too much for Pacquiao. He's the better infighter by far. His power is at least even, probably quite a bit more, and above all he uses it far more efficiently. Surely he was not as fast as Manny is, but he wasn't slow either - at least not at those weights.

I say Julio takes whatever Pac can throw at him, with most of it missing, and knocks him out late.

[cupuzz]

manny losed againts chavez?

[BennyST]

anyone else laughing at this sentence?

It actually makes perfect sense. How else do you explain the careers of Bernard Hopkins, Wilfredo Benitez, Archie Moore and Erik Morales?

Think about their ages and at what times they were peak. The majority of fighters start slowing by thirty and are done by thirty five.

[CarlosG815]

It actually makes perfect sense. How else do you explain the careers of Bernard Hopkins, Wilfredo Benitez, Archie Moore and Erik Morales?

Think about their ages and at what times they were peak. The majority of fighters start slowing by thirty and are done by thirty five.

That's too much for the dmx fanboy to understand.

Age is a delicate thing in boxing. I think it has more to do with what happens in your life outside of the ring, and how many times you've been in and the blows you've taken.

Look at Meldrick Taylor at 30 years old. Guy is punch drunk and brain dead, but I guess according to dmx up there he should be prime.

Tyson peaked at 20 and went downward from there on.

Manny Pacquiao is better at 31 than he was in his early to mid 20's.

Hopkins and Mosley are arguably still near the prime of their career and Hopkins is 45 and i believe Mosley is 39.

[Wukillabeez78]

That's too much for the dmx fanboy to understand.

Age is a delicate thing in boxing. I think it has more to do with what happens in your life outside of the ring, and how many times you've been in and the blows you've taken.

Look at Meldrick Taylor at 30 years old. Guy is punch drunk and brain dead, but I guess according to dmx up there he should be prime.

Tyson peaked at 20 and went downward from there on.

Manny Pacquiao is better at 31 than he was in his early to mid 20's.

Hopkins and Mosley are arguably still near the prime of their career and Hopkins is 45 and i believe Mosley is 39.

I agree with everything you said other than the last part about Hopkins and Mosley. They are both definitely past prime but neither one is shot. They can still go out and have great performances and look impressive (they have the experience/knowledge and also stay in phenomenal shape) but they are definitely not in their physical primes anymore.

[them_apples]

That's too much for the dmx fanboy to understand.

Age is a delicate thing in boxing. I think it has more to do with what happens in your life outside of the ring, and how many times you've been in and the blows you've taken.

Look at Meldrick Taylor at 30 years old. Guy is punch drunk and brain dead, but I guess according to dmx up there he should be prime.

Tyson peaked at 20 and went downward from there on.

Manny Pacquiao is better at 31 than he was in his early to mid 20's.

Hopkins and Mosley are arguably still near the prime of their career and Hopkins is 45 and i believe Mosley is 39.

I know age has little to do with prime..and I'm still saying Barrera wasn't "shot" or past it when he fought Pacquiao.

Morales was sliding, Barrera? no

[sonnyboyx2]

Meldrick Taylor was as fast as Pacquiao and caused Chavez problems as did Pernell Whitaker... This would be a great fight, so i will go for a 12rd draw

[CarlosG815]

I know age has little to do with prime..and I'm still saying Barrera wasn't "shot" or past it when he fought Pacquiao.

Morales was sliding, Barrera? no

The first fight, not so much, but the last meeting, Barrera was finished.