Comments Thread For: Zaragoza: Morales The Real Four Time Champ, Not Arce

[PRBOXINGJOTO]

make sense kid you forget that salido is holding on to juan mas belt the best 126 lb fighter right now and if you think cheato is going to win you dont know nothing about boxing becuase without plaster he is a bum and cotto is going to get his revenge WAR PUERTO RICO and morales is a bum fake champ like canela and julia chavez just cause their mexican they get away with fighting bums do you see juan ma doing that? no he lose to Salido then fight a tough fight against mike oliver ******. you forget about rico ramos to he is going to KTFO of rigo what has rigo done in his life? nothing he is not even good boxer ramos is goign to show him why PR is the best when it comes to every match up in boxing

[1Sham]

he got beat by Diaz and then got beat by Maidana all in the space of afew fights. In his very next fight he walks into another WBC title fight against an unknown.Morales is a legend. This isnt a go at him but just the politics of boxing...

Ok, so let's talk "politics of boxing." Morales outsmarted Diaz in every way, he's punches were crisp and accurate, Diaz came in wild, missed a lot, got knocked down in the 1st, kept throwing his elbow, forearm, and using his head ALL night, and was handed the decision because he was the home town boy who finally got that crack at history by defending against a legend. That's not 'POLITICS'?

And boxers talking tough ad nauseum but, when crunch time comes, finding excuses and backing down isn't 'politics' and 'business' rather than a sport where the best meet and real CHAMPS are crowned?

...Because if it is then the WBC did good in stepping in for once and stripping Bradley of his title, and letting Morales and Mathysse, two worthy contenders, fight for it instead (the Mathysee dropout was unforeseeable).

As for Maidana, give me a break! Morales gave him a boxing lesson! Granted it was closer than the Diaz fight, where Morales got COMPLETELY robbed, but when you consider the amount of fouling Maidana did, he should have had a few points deducted and Morales should have won. In both fights, none of the commentators gave the fight to Diaz or Maidana, most gave it to Morales.

What I'm getting at is this: Are we saying he's only a champion "on paper" because he lost fights "on paper" that, in truth, virtually all pundits agree he won? Notice the flaw in that reasoning?

Like I said previously --- I actually commend the WBC for bringing about a sense of POETIC JUSTICE!