Comments Thread For: Thurman: Pacquiao Don't Deserve Mayweather Rematch

[aboutfkntime]

If Lewis "deserved" a rematch with Rahman and Ray leonard deserved a rematch with Duran... Manny DEFINITELY deserves a rematch against Floyd.

We act like it was a blow out... Like far less competetive fights in throughout history somehow deserved rematches.

Come on man..

Rahman was likely an underdog, even in the rematch.

Just like Marquez would be with Pacquiao.

We saw nothing to suggest that Pacquiao can beat Mayweather.

At least Lewis had a punchers chance.

Pacquiao got outclassed !

[brickcityboxing]

Haha you're wrong for that one ... Almost spit out my drank.

[Weebler I]

Ppl can always agree to disagree over the fight on May 2nd. Either way, Floyd won, doesn't matter if Manny was one armed, doesn't matter if you thought Floyd lost, truth of the matter is, his decision wasn't a gifted one, it depends on your love and opinions of boxing and what you enjoy. All judges are different.

I don't like Manny's style, do I enjoy a great brawl, sure, but outpointing someone and negating what they do best is a great neutralizer that not many boxers have, it's something I enjoy watching.

But either way, get over it, no one else is really clamoring for a rematch besides some of the Pacquiao media lovers, and his fans themselves. Most boxers/writers will be pretty blunt about Floyd outboxing Manny.

Manny's still a great fighter, and I truly do think 5 years ago, it would have been a more entertaining fight, but hey, I'm happy it got done, and it's over with. Funny how there is less hype over Manny after May 2nd, died down real quick.

To be honest, I'm not that high on Pacquiao's style any more. I wish he did brawl like the Pacquiao of old but he's more of a boxer now himself. Imo the Marquez KO put a lid on the old Pacquiao, he fears getting knocked out and fights more cerebrally and cautiously as a result.

What you had on May 2nd was effectively two boxers, one of which kept moving in and out of range and won the fight. It wasn't entertaining, and I don't think a rematch would be any different.

If Pacquiao wants a rematch then he has to make a case for it, show us the old Pacquiao is back against a Terence Crawford, attack and blitz him stopping him in devastating fashion. Otherwise don't bother, not interested.

Let the young guns have a go.

[lfc19titles]

How do you figure Pacquiao won by landing less then Floyd? It doesn't add up my friend. Landing only 81 punches to your opponents 146 isn't a win. You can't beat Floyd by landing only 19% of your punches.

Sigh another silly fan boy believing punch stats. It already has been disproven they are wrong. Pax actually landed the better shots in the fight and all of floyds shots that hit pacs gloves counted for whatever reason

[Showtime..]

That's whyb5 years ago it would had been a completely different fight. A swarmer-puncher vs. a more offensive, quicker reflexes Floyd.

Instead we got a technical battle between two old boxers. Whoever won, you get the name on the resume, but it's not a career defining win.

Also, how come it's never pointed out how good a counter-puncher Pacquiao is?

[moonshineman]

Thurman

It's not about deserve. It's about Gate. Pacquiao has gate, Thurman is a wannabe.

[hitking]

That's whyb5 years ago it would had been a completely different fight. A swarmer-puncher vs. a more offensive, quicker reflexes Floyd.

Instead we got a technical battle between two old boxers. Whoever won, you get the name on the resume, but it's not a career defining win.

Also, how come it's never pointed out how good a counter-puncher Pacquiao is?

You can't play the "past their prime" card when both guys are consensus elites. The fact that Pac had been recently KO'd takes away from the win. And te fact that Floyd and Pac were no longer the consensus 1 and 2 P4P in the world takes away from the win. But, Floyd was still pretty much the consensus P4P King. And Pac was still consensus P4P top 5. So it was still very much a career defining fight for both.

[aboutfkntime]

That's whyb5 years ago it would had been a completely different fight. A swarmer-puncher vs. a more offensive, quicker reflexes Floyd.

Instead we got a technical battle between two old boxers. Whoever won, you get the name on the resume, but it's not a career defining win.

Also, how come it's never pointed out how good a counter-puncher Pacquiao is?

But that just sounds like weak excuses to me.

5 years ago..... Pacquiao HAD to agree to USADA testing, he had no option.

Just like today.

Pac refused, so..... no fight.

Your insinuation that the 1000-punch Pacquiao that fought Clottey would have been different..... is wrong.

The 1000-punch (younger ) Pacquiao..... refused to be tested.

[Rome-By-Ko]

I won't lie I want May vs Thurman badly..Yet in all honesty if his is really Floyds last fight he can fight who he wants..He's earned it imo..

[Rome-By-Ko]

Sigh another silly fan boy believing punch stats. It already has been disproven they are wrong. Pax actually landed the better shots in the fight and all of floyds shots that hit pacs gloves counted for whatever reason

Wait you think Pac won the fight vs Floyd??