Comments Thread For: Thurman: I Had No Clue Pacquiao Fight Would Happen in 2019

[BoxingSensei]

Looks like Thurman had a change of mind as the fight's getting closer.

[Pennstate110]

[QUOTE=Bronx2245;19844493]Manny Pacquiao Will Beat Keith Thurman; Here's Why Freddie Roach Is So Confident

That’s one reason why Roach thinks Pacquiao (61-7-2, 39 KOs) will beat the undefeated Thurman (29-0, 22 KOs) when they meet on July 20 for Thurman’s welterweight title. Another reason why Pacquiao—who’s a slight +105 betting underdog and who will reportedly earn a $20 million payday—will be victorious in Roach’s eyes? The 30-year-old Thurman (a -135 favorite) is slowing down, while Pacquiao, a decade older, is still a fresh fighter.

“Thurman is definitely a good fighter, but you look at his last three fights,” Roach said. “He’s faded a little bit. He’s not doing quite as well. I’m not sure if he’s bored of the sport or if he’s not putting the hours in. You study tapes on him, and you can see the gradual slowdown. Manny is really fresh right now and is on top of his game. I don’t care how many years older Pacquiao is than Thurman. That doesn’t matter.”

Thurman, though, continues to win.

In 2016, he beat Shawn Porter by a close unanimous decision, and nine months later, he unified two of the 147-pound titles by eking out a split decision victory vs. Danny Garcia. But he then missed the next 22 months while recovering from arm injuries, and in his return to the ring last January, Thurman looked sloppy (and was badly hurt at one point) against veteran journeyman Josesito Lopez before winning by majority decision.

In Roach’s mind, that performance wasn’t the result of ring rust. It wasn’t an anomaly.

“Basically,” Roach said, “I think he’s slowing down.”


Yes cool article. If Manny was not in the picture tho, Spence Crawford and Keith would've been in the mix to compete for the top WW. So Spence or Crawford would've been fighting a "slowing down" Keith yet that would've been a super WW match. Amazing how people take credit away from a 40 year old fighting young champions. So now Spence is fighting Keith's leftovers in Porter and Crawford fought a 10+ ranked WW. Pacquiao gets full credit in my book just like how Spence or Crawford would if they would fought Keith which was highly likely if Pacquiao did not.

[Bronx2245]

[QUOTE=Pennstate110;19848677]

Manny Pacquiao Will Beat Keith Thurman; Here's Why Freddie Roach Is So Confident

That’s one reason why Roach thinks Pacquiao (61-7-2, 39 KOs) will beat the undefeated Thurman (29-0, 22 KOs) when they meet on July 20 for Thurman’s welterweight title. Another reason why Pacquiao—who’s a slight +105 betting underdog and who will reportedly earn a $20 million payday—will be victorious in Roach’s eyes? The 30-year-old Thurman (a -135 favorite) is slowing down, while Pacquiao, a decade older, is still a fresh fighter.

“Thurman is definitely a good fighter, but you look at his last three fights,” Roach said. “He’s faded a little bit. He’s not doing quite as well. I’m not sure if he’s bored of the sport or if he’s not putting the hours in. You study tapes on him, and you can see the gradual slowdown. Manny is really fresh right now and is on top of his game. I don’t care how many years older Pacquiao is than Thurman. That doesn’t matter.”

Thurman, though, continues to win.

In 2016, he beat Shawn Porter by a close unanimous decision, and nine months later, he unified two of the 147-pound titles by eking out a split decision victory vs. Danny Garcia. But he then missed the next 22 months while recovering from arm injuries, and in his return to the ring last January, Thurman looked sloppy (and was badly hurt at one point) against veteran journeyman Josesito Lopez before winning by majority decision.

In Roach’s mind, that performance wasn’t the result of ring rust. It wasn’t an anomaly.

“Basically,” Roach said, “I think he’s slowing down.”


Yes cool article. If Manny was not in the picture tho, Spence Crawford and Keith would've been in the mix to compete for the top WW. So Spence or Crawford would've been fighting a "slowing down" Keith yet that would've been a super WW match. Amazing how people take credit away from a 40 year old fighting young champions. So now Spence is fighting Keith's leftovers in Porter and Crawford fought a 10+ ranked WW. Pacquiao gets full credit in my book just like how Spence or Crawford would if they would fought Keith which was highly likely if Pacquiao did not.

First of all Pacquiao vs. Thurman is still a "super WW match." Secondly, are you saying that Freddie Roach is taking away Pacquiao's credit, by pointing out that Thurman has been fading in his lat 3 fights? Lastly, does Thurman get full credit if he beats Pacquiao, or will you say "he beat Pacquiao because he was 40?"