Erik II is better than 39 Shane

**Va_BoriKua** · 05-05-2010, 04:10 AM

Originally posted by Castor_Troy

Shane Mosley's 2 losses to Vernon was because of Styles right?

How about his 2 losses to Winky? Because of styles right?

So Zaheer 'Fuc_king" Raheem is not a STYLISTIC Nightmare for Morales? Yes?

1 Year and 5 months after beating "ANTONIO MARGARITO" 39 Year Old Shane Mosley was convincingly beaten by FLoyd Mayweather

10 Months after beating "MANNY PACQUIAO" 29 Year old Erik Morales was kayoed in the 10th By Manny Pacquiao.

Erik Morales II Win was Greater than a Win againts 39 Year old Mosley! Pls refute this with reasoing.

considering the fact that morales was drained i mean they made him fight at 130 when he wanted it at 135 id say shane who just came off a win over the champ at that weight who was the number one ww is a better win

**Castor_Troy** · 05-05-2010, 04:14 AM

Originally posted by PrBoxing69

considering the fact that morales was drained i mean they made him fight at 130 when he wanted it at 135 id say shane who just came off a win over the champ at that weight who was the number one ww is a better win

I can respect that opinion.

But that Shane Mosley was a year and a half off from his last bout. That kind of inactivity negatively affects old fighters.

He looks on the decline againts Mayorga after snail ass margarito was handed to him. That win over Margarito was pretty over rated.

Morales was victorious againts Pacquiao just 10 months before.

**Ben_London** · 05-05-2010, 04:40 AM

I'd like people to re-watch the first round of Mosley-Margarito, then watch the first round of Mosley-Mayweather.

Just look at the difference in his legs, he looks totally different now. Please don't tell me it's cause Mayweather is so amazing, it's not just that. It's cause Shane is washed up now.

**RockyB** · 05-05-2010, 04:42 AM

its pretty even, but i gotta give the edge to Morales II.
and for the record: i like Shane more than i like Pacquiao.

**Kagami Taiga** · 05-05-2010, 04:47 AM

how about this, morales was coming off the biggest loss of his career and shane mosely was coming off of one of the biggest wins of his career. no way that win was better. morales was truly done by that time. he didnt win another fight after that raheem fight

**blank_frackis** · 05-05-2010, 05:22 AM

Originally posted by DempseyRollin

how about this, morales was coming off the biggest loss of his career and shane mosely was coming off of one of the biggest wins of his career. no way that win was better. morales was truly done by that time. he didnt win another fight after that raheem fight

Until his recent comeback he only fought one other fighter after Pacquiao (Diaz) and anyone who saw that fight knows he could easily have won the decision - one of the judges gave Diaz a 10-8 in a round the other two judges gave to Morales because he thought he saw a knockdown. How many more fights/wins do you think Mosley will have now anyway?

I know he had countless wars in the ring, but it's a stretch to say a 29 year old, less than a year after one of his biggest victories (Pacquiao) was "truly done" just because he lost one fight. Overall I'd say it's pretty even between Mosley and Morales.

**MaD RoBoT** · 05-05-2010, 05:27 AM

i agree that Erik was more "alive" that time compared to what Shane showed

i mean, Cotto could still beat that Shane who fought Floyd

**Castor_Troy** · 05-05-2010, 06:49 AM

Originally posted by DempseyRollin

how about this, morales was coming off the biggest loss of his career and shane mosely was coming off of one of the biggest wins of his career. no way that win was better. morales was truly done by that time. he didnt win another fight after that raheem fight

Mate

I like that post.

1st You said he lost to Raheem badly. I agree. in the opening post i said Mosley lost 2X againts Forrest and 2X againts Winky. Raheem is naturally bigger than Morales and the fight was @135 the 1st for Morales.

Styles makes fights... Raheem is all wrong for Morales as is Winky and Forrest were all wrong for Shane

2nd yes Margarito was a big win. but his style is what the tailor ordered for Shane. he's there to be hit and mosley's best asset isnt workrate or defense but his power.

3rd. You are wrong about Morales not winning again. He won his last fight againts a former lightweight titlist.

4th Morales was 10 yrs younger and coming off his biggest win just 10 months prior. Mosley was also coming off the Margarito win one and a half years prior. Morales was closer to prime than Mosley.

just analyse it mate. Morales II was better than 39 yr old shane who was off for 1 and 1/2 years.

**Castor_Troy** · 05-05-2010, 07:02 AM

Its too obvious that the Morales II win is being overlook because of persistent revisionist phrase such as Morales was done etc etc.

Listen to this if you haven watched the fight.

1. Morales has won at least 3 out of the 1st 6 rounds.

2. Body shot paid dividends in the 2nd half as morales' legs could hold up againts the right hook to the liver

3. Pacquiao's right hook was there.

Shane Mosley kayoed Margarito but is that better than what morales did in beating pacquiao? and that victory is closer chronologically to Pac-Erik II that margarito win to PBF-Mosley.

kindly explain your vote if you have the time

** Peace ))

Erik II is better than 39 Shane