Tweet
Originally posted by DominiBox
View Post
If you disagree, then post a link.
If you can't post a link, then stop whining, and go sit down in the corner
Originally posted by DominiBox
View Post
2.) Hatton was well-faded
3.) Hatton looked shop-worn before Mayweather
4.) Hatton even struggled ahanst Collazo and Urango
5.) Hatton was not a highly skilled boxer
6.) Hatton was not a highly skilled counter-puncher
7.) Hatton was not in his prime
8.) Hatton was not on top of his game
9.) Because of the above reasons, Hatton was at a disadvantage in that fight
But then, I guess you think that is not my own analysis either
Originally posted by DominiBox
View Post
Cotto was not on top of his game, he had begun to slide, he had no trainer to speak of, and was struggling with problems both in camp and at home relating to a family matter that affected his relationship with head trainer Evan Cotto.
Miguel was not on top of his game, and he most certainly was not in his prime..... plus, Pacquiao tried to drain him on the scales.
Listen to this reporter's take on the subject, shortly after the Clottey fight....
"I wasn’t exactly shocked to see Manny Pacquiao’s name being linked for a fight with Miguel Cotto after the Puerto Rican fighters disappointing performance last Saturday night against Joshua Clottey. As bad as Cotto looked in the fight, and believe me Cotto looked pretty awful, it seemed like a no brainer that Pacquiao would then select him as his next opponent.
But my question is why isn’t Pacquiao going after Shane Mosley or Paul Williams instead? Why the emphasis at fighting Cotto, when he was destroyed by Antonio Margarito last year? It seems to me the much better choice for Pacquiao would be to go after Mosley, since he beat Margarito a few months ago by a 9th round TKO.
Since Margarito has already stopped Cotto, the logical choice for Pacquiao to fight would be Mosley. That’s the bout that Pacquiao should be going after unless he wants to be considered a cherry picker."
Pacquiao saw that Cotto was ripe, so he jumped on him, but even the fact that Cotto had faded was not enough of an advantage for Manny..... so he demanded a catch-weight of 145lbs.
A catch-weight, for a title fight..... *** me, that is lame
Cotto of course, flatly refused. Miguel stated "147 if you want my title, but no-title if you need a catchweight". Of course, Manny demanded a catchweight and the title, it became a sticking point to get the fight made, so Cotto was forced to concede.
But even that was not enough for Manny, he demanded 143, even though his trainer Freddie Roach agreed to 144. Luckily for Miguel he stuck to his guns, or those cherry-picking ****s would have dragged him down to 143lbs.....
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/275865
Catch-weights.....
There are only two reasons to demand a catch-weight.....
1.) you are not good enough to compete with your opponent at his natural weight
2.) you are attempting to drain your opponent to gain an unfair advantage
Pacquiao tried to drain Cotto, because Manny had already fought at 147.
The 143lb demand was an absolute joke, they really tried to do a number on Cotto. Just because the bullet missed, does not lessen the intent.
Shame on Manny for cheating history, not once, but twice, because he did the same thing to Margarito..... Emmanuel Steward was correct when he said that Pacquiao is a cherry-picker who does not compare with truly great fighters.
How is my analysis coming along clownboy ?
Originally posted by DominiBox
View Post
1.) that is my analysis, you dopey kid
2.) even if it was not mine, that does not invalidate any of the points
3.) back up your childish whining kid, and post me a link showing that analysis posted by anyone else other than me, that's a good fella
4.) Just because you know nothing about boxing, and are incapable of writing a coherent sentence..... don't assume that nobody else is able to
Comment