Pac-Thurman Theme/Promo

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • FredWreck
    Banned
    Silver Champion - 100-500 posts
    • May 2019
    • 303
    • 17
    • 0
    • 16,142

    #1

    Pac-Thurman Theme/Promo

    First, great fight we have here huh fellas?

    But I do find a few things interesting. The marketing/advertisement or background story is that:

    1)Pacquiao is 40 and too old/Pacquiao dominated last two fights

    2)Thurman didn’t look good in his last fight, ring rust, tune up, etc.

    I personally don’t believe in 100% in “tune up fights”.
    A great boxer/prize fighter doesn’t need to fight a lesser skilled opponent, just to “assess” his skills. That’s what a tune up practically is.
    Only reason for that is if somebody is coming off a terrible loss. Other than that, you’ll know if you’re injuries are recovered via training/practice.

    PAC on the other hand is being billed as “too old” “past his prime” etc.

    But let’s examine this really quick.

    In Pac’s last 11 fights, he lost 4.
    1)Bradley-Robbery Decision
    2)Marquez-KO Loss
    3)Mayweather-UD
    4)Horn-Robbery Decision

    When you look at those fights, if you actually did watch them as I did live as they happened, you’ll notice that absolutely NONE of those fights show that Pacquiao’s skills have diminished, nor do they indicate any sign of decline from his level of talent.
    Maybe he got older, not as fast, but that’s about it.

    Take the Horn & Bradley fight out because those were absolutely robberies, let’s keep it 100. No bias.

    Now we’re down to TWO.
    He lost to Mayweather. Okay.
    The same way, everybody lost to Mayweather. So it doesn’t say much. The fact they’re arch rivals just makes it seem so.

    So now you have Marquez 4.
    KO loss that came at the mistake of Pacquiao and Marquez timed it. Up until then PAC was dominating the fight and almost had him out. And I absolutely believe the recklessness PAC fought with that night was due to the robbery decision Bradley got the fight before.

    Now Thurman, has a better resume than his current peers, but hasn’t shown in even the slightest detail that he is/was ever Pacquiao level. Top it off, he came off a lay-off and then needed a “tune up fight” which he didn’t look too spectacular in.

    So my question is, how many of y’all actually believe in the narrative that these guys are pushing for this fight?

    I think they’re using to create interest/sell the fight obviously. Personally I think PAC takes this fight, and with less trouble than some of his previous fights in his prime.
  • Left Hook Tua
    VATNIK
    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
    • Apr 2008
    • 62306
    • 7,010
    • 1,581
    • 951,318

    #2
    Pac has declined

    Hes still fast but not as fast

    His pop is still there but the accuracy is down and less crisp

    But probably the biggest downgrade is neither power nor speed its stamina

    Old manny has to fight in spots and take rounds off

    The manny of old could throw all day and keep coming

    Manny is not as great as he use to be

    Hes old and past prime


    That said

    Has been > never was

    Pacquiao by ud or late tko

    Comment

    • FredWreck
      Banned
      Silver Champion - 100-500 posts
      • May 2019
      • 303
      • 17
      • 0
      • 16,142

      #3
      Originally posted by Left Hook Tua
      Pac has declined

      Hes still fast but not as fast

      His pop is still there but the accuracy is down and less crisp

      But probably the biggest downgrade is neither power nor speed its stamina

      Old manny has to fight in spots and take rounds off

      The manny of old could throw all day and keep coming

      Manny is not as great as he use to be

      Hes old and past prime


      That said

      Has been > never was

      Pacquiao by ud or late tko
      Yes he’s declined, but due to getting old. My point is that the losses on his record don’t indicate anything. Where’s as Thurman didn’t perform well in a “tune up” match.

      Comment

      Working...
      TOP