FAO: All Pacquiao haters

[OG Ballhog]

Morales was doing ok for the first 5 rounds, but after that he wasn't doing too great was he? And even in the first 5 rounds albeit he was leaing he wasn't dominating at all. He showed a clear level of decline they're were people like myself who would liked to have seen Morales consider retirement after that fight.

Take your revisionist history basket and go and throw "Morales was kicking Pacquaio's ass for the first half of the fight" because that is outright revisionist history right there.

Well, I actually said in my post that Morales was on a clear decline as early as 2004. 2004 was before the first Pacquaio-Morales fight which I presume you well know. So, not sure where you're going with your point #3.

He was past his prime for the first fight no doubt, like I said he was visibly past his best as early as 04 perhaps even before that but by the time the 3rd Pacquaio fight came along he was a corpse, he was literally done and in all honesty the last 5 rounds of the second fight were hard to watch as a long time Morales fan at that time.

So, just because they were 1-1 means a rematch was not only needed but warranted? Yeah, not really.

Like I said, I understand the business aspect to it and hand in hand I understand the casual audience having an interest in it but the hardcore audience? The ones that have followed the careers and can see where they are at in their careers? I have no clue why they would want to see it.

Back then, I didn't want to see it. Most of my peers didn't want to see it. As far as I was concerned Morales was done at the Top level and done on most levels.

And oh look, what happened. He only went and proved that, didn't he.

morales cleary controlled the 1st half of the fight.

yeah morales didn't too great in the 2nd half , some of that was pacquiao tiring him out too.

i'm done with you. you're either too ****** or too biased.

everyone wanted to see a 3rd fight. hence why it did so well.

you have 2 close fights. you have 1 win each for each fighter.

you do a rubber match. just how it is.

clown.

[IronDanHamza]

if people don't want to give pacquiao credit for winning the 3rd fight because morales was clearly past it......

that's fine.

but don't be a dumbass and bull**** about how there shouldn't have been a 3rd because no one wanted to see it.

that's just an outright lie.

and you either don't know how it was back then OR you're just talking out of your ass for some reason.


they had 2 good fights.

they both had 1 win each.

they made a ton of money on those 2 fights.

morales fans thought he could win the 3rd.

pacquiao fans thought he could win the 3rd.

pacquiao wore him down late but morales was controlling the fight in the beginning.

it'd be ****** not to have a 3rd fight.

My orginal post was about the actual fight and how he beat Morales corpse. Nothing about people wanting to see it. Then you jumped on it like it was some kind of untrue statment that Morales was done in the 3rd fight.

Yeahhhh, I know how it was back then. I was there. You're not the only person who's not new to Boxing here.

Hell yeah, Mexicans thought Morales would win. Of course they will.

Mexicans thought Barrera would win the second one with Pacquaio. Was that fight wanted too?

The same thing is happening with Cotto-Mayweather now. Does that mean Cotto-Mayweather should happen? How many people, mainly Puerto Rican fans think Cotto can win? A lot. To say the least.

Plenty, and I mean plenty of people didn't want to see Morales-Pacquaio 3. Morales was my second favourite fighter in 06 and I did not want to see Morales in the ring again. Let alone with Pacquaio.

[IronDanHamza]

morales cleary controlled the 1st half of the fight.

yeah morales didn't too great in the 2nd half , some of that was pacquiao tiring him out too.

i'm done with you. you're either too ****** or too biased.

everyone wanted to see a 3rd fight. hence why it did so well.

you have 2 close fights. you have 1 win each for each fighter.

you do a rubber match. just how it is.

clown.

How did he "control" the first half of the fight? That is revisionist history, again.

Everyone wanted to see a third fight? Again, not really. Perhaps you did. I didn't.

I don't even consider Pac-Morales a close fight I had Pacquaio sweeping 6-10 and in he looked terrible in those rounds.

Again, doing so well I imagine is down to the casual audience. I understand the business aspect and I understand the casual audience having an interest. I get it. Hardcore fans? Not so much.

I imagine Mayweather-Cotto will do great numbers. Doesn't mean everyone wants to see it.

[PACnPBFsuck]

dude, go back to sleep.

This^^^^^^^^^^^

[EMACULATE]

Watch Pacquiao vs Barrera 1+2, Pacquiao Morales 1+2+3, Pacquiao marquez 1+2'

If you're going to hate somebody, have a reason.

I have a su****ion the only fights Pacquiao trolls have seen were post De La Hoya.

I don't understand how any real boxing fan can dislike Pacquiao. He is without a doubt a real warrior, down to the bone.

Question number One.

Which one of the following fighters were in there prime when PAC fought them.
Barrera - I dont think so but he was a terrific fighter whom had been in wars with Morrales and shown up Hamed. Debatable but past prime in my book.

Morrales - This is a no brainer. After the second loss to Barrera and more importantly the loss to Raheem. He was struggling with weight and was way past his prime. Even then though he earned a victory in the first fight.

Marquez - Definetly not in his prime but the first time they fought he may have been very close to his prime. If not for some bad management and a better promoter, we could be referrring to Marquez as the fighter of the decade that Pac won, (Eventhough I thought Mayweather should have gotten the award).

Manny gets too much credit for these victories just like the Hatton and Delahoya win. Not to take anything away from Manny he is a great warrior and has provided some great fights but great match-making and timely ducks are scattered around his career just like Mayweather.

[AllEyesOpen]

...Not to take anything away from Manny he is a great warrior and has provided some great fights but great match-making and timely ducks are scattered around his career just like Mayweather.

Couldn't have said it better myself, Mayweather and Pacquiao are 2 of the best fighters of our time, and both know who to pick and when to pick'em to increase their chances of victory.

Pointless thread though; With success comes envy and hatred, aint a damn thing you can do about it, specially on NSB.

[IronDanHamza]

Question number One.

Which one of the following fighters were in there prime when PAC fought them.
Barrera - I dont think so but he was a terrific fighter whom had been in wars with Morrales and shown up Hamed. Debatable but past prime in my book.

Morrales - This is a no brainer. After the second loss to Barrera and more importantly the loss to Raheem. He was struggling with weight and was way past his prime. Even then though he earned a victory in the first fight.

Marquez - Definetly not in his prime but the first time they fought he may have been very close to his prime. If not for some bad management and a better promoter, we could be referrring to Marquez as the fighter of the decade that Pac won, (Eventhough I thought Mayweather should have gotten the award).

Manny gets too much credit for these victories just like the Hatton and Delahoya win. Not to take anything away from Manny he is a great warrior and has provided some great fights but great match-making and timely ducks are scattered around his career just like Mayweather.

I wouldn't say Barrera was in his physical prime in 03 but I think in terms of skills and as a complete fighter along with a lot left in the tank he was at his best in 03. IMO.

[rorymac]

Watch Pacquiao vs Barrera 1+2, Pacquiao Morales 1+2+3, Pacquiao marquez 1+2'

If you're going to hate somebody, have a reason.

I have a su****ion the only fights Pacquiao trolls have seen were post De La Hoya.

I don't understand how any real boxing fan can dislike Pacquiao. He is without a doubt a real warrior, down to the bone.

I love that Pacquiao. Obv he is a warrior + tremendous speed.

He used to be one of my faves around the time of the Diaz fight, but I've just been turned against him somehow.

[Shona Boy]

PAC is a great warrior a great fighter, and is a great sportsman. At least the Mayweather Haters have a reason to dislike Floyd, because he acts like a hooligan one day, then he acts like a sweet little boy the next. He beat up his girlfriend after dedicating a fight to all battered women of AMerica.

[ROSS CALIFORNIA]

Paquiao hater reporting. lol I think people hate on him for what he's done since De La Hoya. Winning world titles at catch weights and things like that. He can win a 154 lb title but refuses to fight at that weight. WTF?