serious question..why did pacman fight morales after he lost to raheem??

[Bushidō]

Yeah he did, I just don't fell like going back, I believe it was after the Mosley fight.

I don't know if I ever heard Mayweather come out of Cotto's mouth but maybe Merchant said his name and he said "whoever the promoters want me to fight"

[MANGLER]

Damn, this ****in thread still goin?

[madsweeney]

where is morales now???

Where's Morales been vs Raheem?!? Point was perhaps shoulda fought him but in the big scheme of things who is Raheem? What did he amount to? His win over Morales was a fluke (Morales was old and took him too lightly) as shown in his following fights. Whats the point of saying Pac ducked a fighter who never amounted to much? Campbell, Bradeley ok you can say Pac probably should have fought one of them but he's moved on to bigger fish and is trying to fight PBF after Cotto. Can you really say he's still ducking slick AA fighters if he's hunting one of the best ones out there?

[PRINCSHERPY]

That fight was already sign before MORALES RAHEEM fight,you ****** ****.

[mikemurni]

The answer is simple...He fought Morales in a rematch because he lost in the first fight, and I believe he also exercised that rematch clause of the contract of the first fight that made the 2nd fight possible. It also helped that their fight was FOTY candidate in 2004, and that the demand for a second fight is still high despite Morales losing to Raheem.

They fought a rubbermatch because Pac had no choice since it was Morales turn to demand an automatic rematch (in this case a rubbermatch), which is specified in the contract of their second fight.

It had nothing to do with Pac ducking Raheem. Raheem lost to Freitas at the time when the Pac-Morales trilogy was concluded. So there was really no time for Pac to fight Raheem at any point after Raheem defeated Morales.

[larry x]

Where's Morales been vs Raheem?!? Point was perhaps shoulda fought him but in the big scheme of things who is Raheem? What did he amount to? His win over Morales was a fluke (Morales was old and took him too lightly) as shown in his following fights. Whats the point of saying Pac ducked a fighter who never amounted to much? Campbell, Bradeley ok you can say Pac probably should have fought one of them but he's moved on to bigger fish and is trying to fight PBF after Cotto. Can you really say he's still ducking slick AA fighters if he's hunting one of the best ones out there?

yet pacman fought him 2 more times

[larry x]

The answer is simple...He fought Morales in a rematch because he lost in the first fight, and I believe he also exercised that rematch clause of the contract of the first fight that made the 2nd fight possible. It also helped that their fight was FOTY candidate in 2004, and that the demand for a second fight is still high despite Morales losing to Raheem.

They fought a rubbermatch because Pac had no choice since it was Morales turn to demand an automatic rematch (in this case a rubbermatch), which is specified in the contract of their second fight.

It had nothing to do with Pac ducking Raheem. Raheem lost to Freitas at the time when the Pac-Morales trilogy was concluded. So there was really no time for Pac to fight Raheem at any point after Raheem defeated Morales.

thats a respectible answer

[kocface]

worse thread, y did mayweather fight marquez if he lost to pacquiao? u is pacquiao fighting cotto before mayweather? this guy is an idiot lolololol y is mosley ranked #1 welter, but floyd fought #1 lightweight and sed hes back. y does floyd say he wont fight mosley cuz he got 5 losses who cares if hes welterweight champ, but y did he fight baldomir with 9 losses then? y were top 4 welters wen he retired margarito cotto mosley williams but he didnt fight any of them? y are the top 4 welters right now mosley cotto clottey margarito, but he fought marquez? this thread is dumb