Pacquiao is obviously better, skill wise and athleticism, but the size advantage is the huge difference, lol of course in a real fight no way pacquiao wins that obvious, but p4p if they were the same size? Kovalev might die, imagine a 175 pound, 6 foot 2 pacquiao with the same ferocity, speed, skill and stamina launching that missle left down the pipe? Damm scary.
By that logic, Butterbean is better than Roberto Duran. Hell The Big Show and Shaquille O'Neal are better boxers than Pacquiao.
Well everything in boxing is arbitrary. You say, well that guy is just bigger, not better. But what of the guy in the same division that has a 3" height advantage or a 4" reach advantage? Both of which can be just as devastating as a weight advantage, if not more so. What of the guy blessed with blinding speed, great reflexes, better instincts, or insert any other physical or mental attribute?
How good a fighter is Manny if you take away his speed?
How good a fighter is Kovalev if you take away his power?
How good is Floyd if you take away his reflexes?
And I could go on and on, but for whatever reason people have singled out weight as the one attribute to **** on.
He has a long way to go to prove it. There are similarities though. When I first saw Kovalev I described him to people as a LHW Manny Pacquiao. Speed and power in both hands. Favours the 2-1-2 combination and is relentlessly aggressive if his opponent is wilting.
For now there’s no comparison, but beating Ward would be a hugely significant win for Kovalev and would set him for HoF contention.
Yeah i saw the same as you, kovalec reminded me of pacquiao, now kova is aged, he no longer fights like that, he slowed down is more flat footed, doesnt string together combos anymore, he has gotten slow fast, it might be the weight cut combined with age, he sure is slowing down
Man i miss the 122-126 womanising party animal pacquiao... that missle left straight was awesome, he threw that bad boy like he was throwing a 90 mph heater fastball in baseball.
Well everything in boxing is arbitrary. You say, well that guy is just bigger, not better. But what of the guy in the same division that has a 3" height advantage or a 4" reach advantage? Both of which can be just as devastating as a weight advantage, if not more so. What of the guy blessed with blinding speed, great reflexes, better instincts, or insert any other physical or mental attribute?
How good a fighter is Manny if you take away his speed?
How good a fighter is Kovalev if you take away his power?
How good is Floyd if you take away his reflexes?
And I could go on and on, but for whatever reason people have singled out weight as the one attribute to **** on.
So how does any of that make Kovalev better than Pacquiao?
Greater size does not equate a greater boxer. Kovalev if nobody has noticed, is very simplistic with his attack and his exact boxing capabilities are often hidden behind his often simple but effective attack! Pacquiao shows his boxing capabilities all night during his fights.
P4P why the hell would a fight between a 6 foot Kovalev and a 5'5" Pacquiao even be thought of... And I think people are forgetting the true concept of P4P rankings. Not to be confused with who would beat who but who is the more skilled!! Pacqauio has shown more skill, while we have truly yet to see all of Kovalev's skill set.
So how does any of that make Kovalev better than Pacquiao?
It does'nt. I voted for Pac myself. My point Is that people want to discount a guys ability to beat someone just because of their size. When you can make the same argument about a guys reach, height, speed, instincts, etc etc etc.
In hindsight I probably should of quoted someone else, given what you said and the point I was making.
Comment