Roach Says Pacquiao Has To Start Fast in Round One

[prsi]

I wouldn't waste time on Pull counter in his mind he's always right and knows everything about boxing. Also, he can't accept the fact that Mosley lost to Cotto so that tells you something. As far as the weight is concerned Pacquiao may not be a true welter but Roach knows who's right for Pac, Only this time I think he made the wrong choice.

That's okay, Pullcounter joins the 5% of experts that saw Mosley win, not saying that he is an expert, but here is a another percentage, close to a 60% to 70% of boxing world (trainers, reporters, boxers etc..) choose Pacman to win but realize that Cotto can win also. Besides the opinion of these experts he insist that if Cotto loses it would be a shame for boxing and he should retire. That's another 3%-5% of group that he is joining.
That's how much Pullcounter know about boxing.

[Pullcounter]

Was I talking about the Clottey or Mosley fight?????

doesn't matter, I have proven my unbias. FFS I have cotto winning the fight in saturday.

Enough years to know that it has works both ways bigger men beating smaller men but SMALLER MAN BEATING BIGGER MAN also and that's the part you don't seem to get.

then we are at an impass on this argument.

On fight night he was at 143!!!!

answer the question... when was the last time cotto officially weighed 138 lbs? pac was officially 138 lbs this year in his last fight

By the way define small.

cotto has been fighting 140+ lbs for over what? 5-10 years? (i'm too lazy to look it up on boxrec). pac had his first fight above 140 lbs last year.

that's what too small means.

Having 10 lbs, disadvantage fight night while being 1/2" smaller but with the same reach????

So I guess that a 12lbs 1" height and 3" reach disadvantage that Cotto had against Clottey cualifies as a smaller man beating a bigger man.
If Cotto did it, why a "faster, better skilled boxer" (as you well call Pacman compare to Cotto) like Pacman can't be able to do it. Oh yeah right, I forgot, its because there is an old boxing adage that wont allow it GTFOH!!!!!

based on my definition, cotto is not smaller than clottey.

As an amateur Cotto faced better world class opponents than what Pacman faced as a pro for his 1st 6 years while he was facing bums until he arrived at 122 and if you still doubt that, name me 1 only 1 opponent better than Ivan Calderon, Kelson Pinto, Ricardo Torres or Muhammad Abdullaev who were fighters that Cotto faced as amateurs. Pacman accomplishments are great but from 106 to 122 he was facing "pro" boxers that would had not even had success as and wolrd class amateur. Some countries do not have the infracstructure to have a great amateur programs and some don't even have any program at all and are really poor, so this fighter become "pro" just to win $25-$50 per fight and just because of that they call the "pros"

you are taking this 106 lbs thing to literally... I'm just making the point that pac is too small.

You can be a stan of any particular boxer and follow him unconditionally but at the same time admire the greatness of others while realizing the chance and probability of victory that your boxers opponent might have. that's how you can formulate and unbiased opinion. But off course you wouldn't know nothing about that!!!

but you aren't objective because you cannot see past the flaws of the boxer that you are ****riding.

name 3 flaws of cotto that pac can take advantage of and I will say you are unbiased.

[Pullcounter]

That's okay, Pullcounter joins the 5% of experts that saw Mosley win, not saying that he is an expert, but here is a another percentage, close to a 60% to 70% of boxing world (trainers, reporters, boxers etc..) choose Pacman to win but realize that Cotto can win also. Besides the opinion of these experts he insist that if Cotto loses it would be a shame for boxing and he should retire. That's another 3%-5% of group that he is joining.
That's how much Pullcounter know about boxing.

lolz... 5% of experts once thought the world was round while the other 60-70% thought that the world was flat. another 3%-5% also thought the earth revolved around the sun...

just because the majority thinks something is right/true doesn't make it so.

[IMDAZED]

lolz... 5% of experts once thought the world was round while the other 60-70% thought that the world was flat. another 3%-5% also thought the earth revolved around the sun...

just because the majority thinks something is right/true doesn't make it so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLsHP94bvXs

[Pullcounter]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLsHP94bvXs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0

[prsi]

doesn't matter, I have proven my unbias. FFS I have cotto winning the fight in saturday.

Yeah you have chosen Cotto to win on saturday but you also have post saying that Pacman will win because Cotto wont handle Pamcan's speed, and will cut him up. 2 stans buddy

then we are at an impass on this argument.

Yeah because you fail to accept that good smaller guys can beat good bigger guys when it has been proven in boxing history plenty of time, and also the other way around which I did accept.

answer the question... when was the last time cotto officially weighed 138 lbs? pac was officially 138 lbs this year in his last fight
cotto has been fighting 140+ lbs for over what? 5-10 years? (i'm too lazy to look it up on boxrec). pac had his first fight above 140 lbs last year.
that's what too small means.

Forget about the past and wake up to the present both fighters have grown one faster than the other. You need to grow up to!!!

based on my definition, cotto is not smaller than clottey..

Once again showing how biased and pathetic you are, you know that the size disadvantage from Cotto-Clottey is greater than the size disadvantage for Pacman-Cotto but as per YOUR DEFINITION, Cotto is not smaller than Clottey but Pacman is smaller than Cotto. Even if the numbers in reach, height and weight say the opposite. QTFOH!!!! So YOUR DEFINITION is not biased or has any double standards in this case either right????

you are taking this 106 lbs thing to literally... I'm just making the point that pac is too small.

but you aren't objective because you cannot see past the flaws of the boxer that you are ****riding.

name 3 flaws of cotto that pac can take advantage of and I will say you are unbiased.

You are the one that brings up the 106 lbs as part of your literature always, but fails to reconize that Cotto also was at those weights during basically the same years. By they way I see that you didn't have any response to the quality of opponents of the 1st of Pacman as a pro compared to what Cotto faced as an amateur. What happened you couldn't find not only 1 opponent in that period that could match the quality of Cotto's opponents as a pro right???

I have mentioned the flaws over and over again even with you. I have clearly said that Cotto's stamina has not always been the best, his defense need to improve even though I know he has the skills to do so but being him a warrior he tends to brawl when he can fight more comfortable and that sometimes gets him in trouble. He seems is very week against uppercuts and he need to learn how to clinch every once in a while, but that's part of that brawler also.

The only reason I mentioned the flaws is to educate you because i do not have to prove my unbiased position to you. Just check my post and the people I debate with and you will learn what a unbiased person is

[prsi]

lolz... 5% of experts once thought the world was round while the other 60-70% thought that the world was flat. another 3%-5% also thought the earth revolved around the sun...

just because the majority thinks something is right/true doesn't make it so.

LOL....Yeah but those people didn't have video and had not explore nor seen at that time what they were talking about.

So this tells me that even if you would had seen and explored that the world was round you would still be in the 60-70% saying that it was still flat!!!!!

THERE IS NO WORST BLIND PERSON THAN THE ONE WHO DOESN'T WANT TO SEE EVEN IF HE CAN!!!!

PS
Post whatever you want in my absence since i'm going to sleep, and if you do so, make sure that you come back tomorrow to check my responses so I can continue to eductae and take you to school boy.
Good night buddy!!!!

[Pullcounter]

LOL....Yeah but those people didn't have video and had not explore nor seen at that time what they were talking about.

don't you get it? majority opinion is not always right.

So this tells me that even if you would had seen and explored that the world was round you would still be in the 60-70% saying that it was still flat!!!!!

nope. according to the analogy I'm the 5% that knows that the earth is round... you and the other 60% are the ones that think the earth is flat.

I'm the minority that is correct that mosley beat cotto, you are the majority that incorrectly think that cotto beat mosley. comprende?

THERE IS NO WORST BLIND PERSON THAN THE ONE WHO DOESN'T WANT TO SEE EVEN IF HE CAN!!!!

there is nothing worse than someone who doesn't get an easy analogy

PS
Post whatever you want in my absence since i'm going to sleep, and if you do so, make sure that you come back tomorrow to check my responses so I can continue to eductae and take you to school boy.
Good night buddy!!!!

lolz... you ain't schooling nobody...

Yeah you have chosen Cotto to win on saturday but you also have post saying that Pacman will win because Cotto wont handle Pamcan's speed, and will cut him up. 2 stans buddy

how many times I gotta post this!!!!

scenario #1: cotto pressures pac, backs pac up and KOs pac by the 6th

scenario #2: cotto pressures pac, hurts pac to the body badly before the 6th and finishes pac off late

scenario #3: cotto tries to be cute by boxing and counterpunching pac and gets sliced up... gases... and either quits or get KOed late.

Yeah because you fail to accept that good smaller guys can beat good bigger guys when it has been proven in boxing history plenty of time, and also the other way around which I did accept.

no we are at an impasse because we both have valid points that can go either way

Forget about the past and wake up to the present both fighters have grown one faster than the other. You need to grow up to!!!

lolz... answer the ****in question: pac was officially 138 lbs earlier this year, when was the last time cotto was 138 lbs!!!!???

Once again showing how biased and pathetic you are, you know that the size disadvantage from Cotto-Clottey is greater than the size disadvantage for Pacman-Cotto but as per YOUR DEFINITION, Cotto is not smaller than Clottey but Pacman is smaller than Cotto. Even if the numbers in reach, height and weight say the opposite. QTFOH!!!! So YOUR DEFINITION is not biased or has any double standards in this case either right????

omfg... you don't get it do you?

cotto has been fighting at WW for a long as ****ing time. clottey also has been fighting at WW for a long as ****ing time. therefore both are legit WW.

pac has been fighting below 130 lbs since last year for most of his career.

there fore cotto and clottey are both WW, and pac is not a WW. comprende?

You are the one that brings up the 106 lbs as part of your literature always, but fails to reconize that Cotto also was at those weights during basically the same years. By they way I see that you didn't have any response to the quality of opponents of the 1st of Pacman as a pro compared to what Cotto faced as an amateur. What happened you couldn't find not only 1 opponent in that period that could match the quality of Cotto's opponents as a pro right???

106 lbs is hyperbole for saying pac is too small. don't blow it out of proportion.

I have mentioned the flaws over and over again even with you. I have clearly said that Cotto's stamina has not always been the best, his defense need to improve even though I know he has the skills to do so but being him a warrior he tends to brawl when he can fight more comfortable and that sometimes gets him in trouble. He seems is very week against uppercuts and he need to learn how to clinch every once in a while, but that's part of that brawler also.

good... now I believe that you are unbiased

The only reason I mentioned the flaws is to educate you because i do not have to prove my unbiased position to you. Just check my post and the people I debate with and you will learn what a unbiased person is

wtf? I just come on here to post... I don't keep track of you cotto stans. I don't follow anyone's posts. I could really give a damn. In a future post I might ask you to prove your unbias again. I don't bother to know the usernames of you mofos.

[Doctor_Tenma]

Pull say Cotto isn't smaller then Clottey? o.O

[Beater_of_ass]

Pull say Cotto isn't smaller then Clottey? o.O

Yea... I'm still trying to figure that one out as well. Even using his logic that only weigh in numbers count, he was still a pound under he gets dumber and dumber by the post. Seems like typing all those letters are really starting to take a toll on what little brain he had in the first place.