[Superthread] Mayweather vs Pacman **NO STREAMING REQUESTS**

efb

From BBC:

It is perhaps fitting that a fight which will divide opinion on it's entertainment value is taken, convincingly, by a man who has spent 19 years dividing opinion with each of his 48 fights.

But even the strongest of views can surely not deny the brilliance of the complex character inside the ropes.

Floyd Mayweather's footwork was at home on the sport's grandest stage, his awareness superb, and his educated strikes were timed to perfection. He was, quite simply, too good.

magma69

Some amount of cry baby Pac fans on twitter. "Mayweather is nothing but a runner" comments and putting pics of Ali saying he was a real champion that fought and didn't run. Obviously posted by someone who hasn't actually watched Ali fight because he moved around the ring more than Floyd does.

This is what happens when you're clearly better than all your competitors. People will find some reason to bitch, like "boring boring Chelsea".

myshirt

Big Ears, I hear you. I just do believe that something has be imposed on the negotiation of contracts such that say c. 30% of a fighters take from a fight has to be incentive based or no licence for the fight.

How much did this fight do? 300? They could have split 250 based on their market value, and left 50 for the winner to provide incentive. And each guy would forfeit 20 of his purse to the other if knocked out. Something like that. Instead of these guys just showing up and jostling for a half hour, taking their money and f#cking off.

The majority of the money can be earned before they get in the ring, but there needs to be money earned in the ring aswell.

Henno30

myshirt wrote: »

Big Ears, I hear you. I just do believe that something has be imposed on the negotiation of contracts such that c. 30% of a fighters take from a fight has to be incentive based or no licence for the fight.

How much did this fight do? 300? They could have split 250 based on their market value, and left 50 for the winner to provide incentive. And each guy would forfeit 20 of his purse to the other if knocked out. Something like that. Instead of these guys just showing up and jostling for a half hour, taking their money and f#cking off.

The majority of the money can be earned before they get in the ring, but there needs to be money earned in the ring aswell.

FFS.

Who is going to tell them to do this? Can you answer that question first.

messinkiapina

I don't think Floyd is dull at all. I love watching him, he's an artist. I also like watching the Mike Tyson/Micky Ward types. Floyd is different but no less fascinating.

He'll still always be slightly tainted for me, because I do belive he waited until Manny was done to take this fight. I think he'd have beaten him 5 years ago, but it would have been a lot more dangerous.

I'd love to have seen him fight in the 80s when it would have been impossible to duck and dive in a division full of great fighters. I'm sure he'd have done fine but he wouldn't be retiring with that perfect record he has been unfortunately obsessed with maintaining.

Talib Fiasco

myshirt wrote: »

Big Ears, I hear you. I just do believe that something has be imposed on the negotiation of contracts such that say c. 30% of a fighters take from a fight has to be incentive based or no licence for the fight.

How much did this fight do? 300? They could have split 250 based on their market value, and left 50 for the winner to provide incentive. And each guy would forfeit 20 of his purse to the other if knocked out. Something like that. Instead of these guys just showing up and jostling for a half hour, taking their money and f#cking off.

The majority of the money can be earned before they get in the ring, but there needs to be money earned in the ring aswell.

You just got to love the casuals :pac:

myshirt

Henno30 wrote: »

FFS.

Who is going to tell them to do this? Can you answer that question first.

Who sanctions fights? Who permits boxing licences? Who regulates boxing?

Just throwing it out there. Fight was disappointing. There was better within these two fighters, and you have to ask why we didn't see it. For me, there's little incentive to showcase it. The money was in the bag before first bell. Flyod didn't even listen to his father.

EazyD

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

You just got to love the casuals :pac:

Likewise the armchair "specialists"......cough

Talib Fiasco

EazyD wrote: »

Like wise the armchair "specialists"......cough

Why yes, yes I am loved... I am loved incredibly by many many beautiful ladies. Guilty.

myshirt

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

You just got to love the casuals :pac:

Jesus man, I'm just throwing the idea out there ffs. The point is simple and it applies anywhere. If a person's payment is incentive based, they behave differently. That's all. Look at bankers, who got paid the same money whether they drove the bank into the ground, or elevated it up to the Sky.

Sometimes payment has to be incentive based and linked to performance. That's been our lesson. It's not an outrageous idea.
And it's just an idea, so chill the f#ck out.

Henno30

myshirt wrote: »

Who sanctions fights? Who permits boxing licences? Who regulates boxing?

Just throwing it out there. Fight was disappointing. There was better within these two fighters, and you have to ask why we didn't see it. For me, there's little incentive to showcase it. The money was in the bag before first bell. Flyod didn't even listen to his father.

No one regulates boxing. As I said in a previous post, it's the wild west.

With all due respect, and I don't mean to be hostile, but learn a little more about how the sport works instead of sauntering in after watching one fight, and recommending sweeping changes to structures you barely understand.

Talib Fiasco

myshirt wrote: »

Jesus man, I'm just throwing the idea out there ffs. The point is simple and it applies anywhere. If a person's payment is incentive based, they behave differently. That's all. Look at bankers, who got paid the same money whether they drove the bank into the ground, or elevated it up to the Sky.

Sometimes payment has to be incentive based and linked to performance. It's not an outrageous idea. And it's just an idea, so chill the f#ck out.

This is sport, not sales. Floyd and Manny could have salsa danced for 12 rounds last night and although it would be uproar, they have more than earned the right to do what they want in the ring as they have worked their way up from nothing. The place they are now was their incentive back then, not some ridiculous proposition of money for being good complying little sports people. Floyd has broke practically every common sense and ethical rule in sport let alone Boxing but it has made him who he is.

It's akin to teasing a dog with a bone for him to beg for it... They're human beings, and Floyd and Manny are a lot more to the sanctioning bodies then they are to them. It's like telling a president elect that he won't get elected unless he makes the country the best in the world...it's simply an unrealistic demand.

Your last sentence is hilariously ironical.

willmunny1990

Some of the butt hurt going around is hilarious:D

I think people overestimated Manny and what he could do, same as Canelo, at the time it was supposed to be a dangerous fight for Floyd, the one to test him but in the end it proved a walk in the park, i think a lot are surprised how easily floyd dealt with Manny and are upset he didn't or couldn't make a better stab at it.

myshirt

Alright lads, I'm off to watch Rocky 1 through 4, so I'll let ye at it.

Talib Fiasco

I think one valid suggestion that would make Boxing more attractive to the average viewr and would make some sense overall is a change in the scoring system. There were many rounds that Mayweather was given (and many many other fighters in the past) that could arguably have been given any way but maybe one punch 'swung' the round which is non-sensical in my opinion. How can one punch decide a round if it's not a knockdown punch? There has to be more emphasis placed on scoring a round 10-10 for a complete barn burner of a round and a 9-9 for a round that was just a game of chess and maybe one solid punch landed in the whole round.

In terms of Manny fans, I can see why they're a little p*ssed off today...the rounds he won, he clearly won. Floyd won some clear rounds too but there's a good few rounds that could have gone either way and went to Floyd because Manny had less punch accuracy or Floyd landed one clean straight or something. I don't think that warrants winning a round at all. He did better in the round but 'winning' the round?..I'm not so sure.

If there was more emphasis on having each round as a 9-9 at the opening bell of the round and then change it to a 10 in favour of the clear round winner or leave it 9-9 if nothing impresses it'd be a lot better. I often feel judges tend to give rounds to some fighters on sort of a 'benefit of the doubt' that if the round lasted another minute he'd probably land a clean blow that'd win him the round. I also feel they feel under pressure to always award the round to one fighter at the end of each round. It's pretty rare you see a 9-9/10-10 round when frankly they occur in practically every fight.

It's something I'd love to ask a boxer like B-Hop who truly 'gets' Boxing

Bubolor

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

I think one valid suggestion that would make Boxing more attractive to the average viewr and would make some sense overall is a change in the scoring system. There were many rounds that Mayweather was given (and many many other fighters in the past) that could arguably have been given any way but maybe one punch 'swung' the round which is non-sensical in my opinion. How can one punch decide a round if it's not a knockdown punch? There has to be more emphasis placed on scoring a round 10-10 for a complete barn burner of a round and a 9-9 for a round that was just a game of chess and maybe one solid punch landed in the whole round.

In terms of Manny fans, I can see why they're a little p*ssed off today...the rounds he won, he clearly won. Floyd won some clear rounds too but there's a good few rounds that could have gone either way and went to Floyd because Manny had less punch accuracy or Floyd landed one clean straight or something. I don't think that warrants winning a round at all. He did better in the round but 'winning' the round?..I'm not so sure.

If there was more emphasis on having each round as a 9-9 at the opening bell of the round and then change it to a 10 in favour of the clear round winner or leave it 9-9 if nothing impresses it'd be a lot better. I often feel judges tend to give rounds to some fighters on sort of a 'benefit of the doubt' that if the round lasted another minute he'd probably land a clean blow that'd win him the round. I also feel they feel under pressure to always award the round to one fighter at the end of each round. It's pretty rare you see a 9-9/10-10 round when frankly they occur in practically every fight.

It's something I'd love to ask a boxer like B-Hop who truly 'gets' Boxing

There should be rounds that are scored 10-6 for example.

froog

i really really wanted manny to win like a lot of people. mayweather won this fight by a distance though. i thought he was superb to be honest. manny didn't look himself at all, chiefly when he was landing combos he would stop and back off for some reason, whereas the manny of old would have continued the flurry for 10 seconds more. he was way too cagey. the only way he was ever going to win this fight was by going all in. i have no real interest in a rematch either to be honest, i don't think there's any questions left unanswered.

Talib Fiasco

Bubolor wrote: »

There should be rounds that are scored 10-6 for example.

I think that's extreme unless one fighter scores three knockdowns...then it's okay. There have been instances of a 10-8 round without a knockdown which is okay at times but I think if they placed more of an emphasis not being afraid to give even rounds.

efb

myshirt wrote: »

Alright lads, I'm off to watch Rocky 1 through 4, so I'll let ye at it.

Probably better off with Hollywood

efb

If some of ye can't see why FMM won 8 of 12 rounds ye need to brush up on your boxing knowledge. 2 rounds were close, Manny shaded one, Floyd the other. So that would be 7-5 or 9-3.

I think 8-4 was the most correct decision.
Mayweather did all he had to do. Some hest think guys should be putting their lives needlessly at risk for your enjoyment.

Big Ears

Bubolor wrote: »

There should be rounds that are scored 10-6 for example.

If that's a reference to Pacquiao vs Marquez I then I tip my hat to you sir.
If not, then I'm quite disappointed.....

I suppose you could compare the fight to James Joyce's Ulysses. To those not too well educated in that area it's just impossible to appreciate. To those educated in the area, well even they're massively split over whether it's any bloody good.

It wasn't an exciting fight, but I did personally enjoy it, and unlike most I will actually be looking forward to Floyd's next fight in December (unless it's Cotto again).

efb

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

I think that's extreme unless one fighter scores three knockdowns...then it's okay. There have been instances of a 10-8 round without a knockdown which is okay at times but I think if they placed more of an emphasis not being afraid to give even rounds.

If a guy is down 3 times in the one round. I'd question why the fight was continuing

magma69

Who would you like to see Mayweather fight next?

Him v Cotto at a catchweight for the lineal 160 belt would be bullshít. Cotto could lose to Geale next anyways.

Thurman would be an awesome fight but I'm not sure if he's enough of a name yet.
Khan doesn't deserve a fight with Mayweather.
Brook would be a decent fight.
Danny Garcia doesn't do much for me. He's arguably lost 2 of his last 3 fights.
Bradley would give Mayweather a good fight I reckon.

Talib Fiasco

efb wrote: »

If a guy is down 3 times in the one round. I'd question why the fight was continuing

The three knockdown rule is bad in a way. Some guys just get knocked down very easily but are never really hurt. Marquez and Rigondeaux are two great examples.

Big Ears

efb wrote: »

If a guy is down 3 times in the one round. I'd question why the fight was continuing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx9jzsPv1l8

because Juanma's a ****ing hero !

Ian Darke early in the broadcast: You could of got a ticket for the equivalent of £28.....what a contrast !

efb

Big Ears wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx9jzsPv1l8

because Juanma's a ****ing hero !

Ian Darke early in the broadcast: You could of got a ticket for the equivalent of £28.....what a contrast !

Don't be a hero Billy

ebbsy

Had to laugh at Sting. Doubt he even knew who was fighting.

Freddie Roach has to take a good portion of the blame for last nights defeat. No point in letting Mayweather take control in the centre of the ring, or let your fighter throw a punch or two and then stop.

Talib Fiasco

efb wrote: »

In one round?

Marquez yes, Rigo not yet but the point being fighters should be given the benefit of the doubt. Rigo and Marquez have been down lots and I have never ever seen them badly hurt after a KD.

Martinez was another, knocked down three times but one was a clear slip. Even though Cotto ended up battering him, there would have been uproar had he lost on TKO due to that. I think the ref stopping a fight is a far more accurate measure as he judges his responsiveness and not his ability to not land on his @ss.

A great example from the past is Archie Moore-Yvon Durelle. Moore was knocked down three times in the first, another time in the fifth but came back to knowck Durelle out in the 11th. Some lads just cannot stay on their feet but it doesn't affect them too bad

RoryMac

ebbsy wrote: »

Had to laugh at Sting. Doubt he even knew who was fighting.

Freddie Roach has to take a good portion of the blame for last nights defeat. No point in letting Mayweather take control in the centre of the ring, or let your fighter throw a punch or two and then stop.

I'd love to hear Roach explain the game plan going into the fight and how they planned to close distance on Mayweather to get their shots off.

ebbsy

And now they are wheeling out the David Haye excuses, ie I have an injury.

Mmm wasn't that fight very similar in terms one fighter allowing the other to implement their plan to the full.

Chrissybhoy

ebbsy wrote: »

And now they are wheeling out the David Haye excuses, ie I have an injury.

Mmm wasn't that fight very similar in terms one fighter allowing the other to implement their plan to the full.

That fight was actually very similar

Ardent

froog wrote: »

i really really wanted manny to win like a lot of people. mayweather won this fight by a distance though. i thought he was superb to be honest. manny didn't look himself at all, chiefly when he was landing combos he would stop and back off for some reason, whereas the manny of old would have continued the flurry for 10 seconds more. he was way too cagey. the only way he was ever going to win this fight was by going all in. i have no real interest in a rematch either to be honest, i don't think there's any questions left unanswered.

Just re-watched the fight. It's quite clear that Pacquiao is past it at 36, he just doesn't have the legs or gas anymore to go all-in. And that's the biggest part of his game. I also think that the Marquez knockout may have left him a little gun shy.

Very clever by Mayweather to delay this match-up until now.

Chrissybhoy

Ardent wrote: »

Just re-watched the fight. It's quite clear that Pacquiao is past it at 36, he just doesn't have the legs or gas anymore to go all-in. And that's the biggest part of his game. I also think that the Marquez knockout may have left him a little gun shy.

Very clever by Mayweather to delay this match-up until now.

Very clear Mayweather is past it too hasnt got the power like he had early in his career or doesn't throw the combos and punches like he used too. Gets tagged a bit more these days. Still gets through fights easy says a lot for him

keeponhurling

I think what is really disappointing about this "super fight" is that one boxer was an almost unbackable favourite, and expectedly won with relative ease.

If this fight took place 5 years ago it would have been a tough one to call, no doubt would have manys a debate over who might win and why.

It may be possible to get past Floyd's defence with relentlessness and throwing combos with speed. But Manny of 2015 doesn't bring this to the party anymore.

At least with the likes of Eubank v Benn, you weren't sure who was going to win

Deiseboy01

RoryMac wrote: »

I'd love to hear Roach explain the game plan going into the fight and how they planned to close distance on Mayweather to get their shots off.

I wonder what the impact of Roach s condition is having on his ability as a trainer? He's looking very bad these days. Got a couple of seconds view of him last night taking Manny on the pads and Manny hit him and nearly spun him around. Surely has to be impacting, anyone know more, I'll admit I'm not as informed as I should be.

froog

Deiseboy01 wrote: »

I wonder what the impact of Roach s condition is having on his ability as a trainer? He's looking very bad these days. Got a couple of seconds view of him last night taking Manny on the pads and Manny hit him and nearly spun him around. Surely has to be impacting, anyone know more, I'll admit I'm not as informed as I should be.

i'd say he has plenty of lads to do the pads with him and roach only does it the odd time for the cameras.

dodderangler

Shoulder injury or not manny was never gonna knock mayweather out.
He was still the more aggressive fighter no doubt but mayweather knew what he was doing.
A boring but a well won bout.
Heard mayweather apparently made 3million dollars a minute

Kev M

Good performance from Floyd, he did enough to win comfortably. Regarding Manny's shoulder injury... it's nonsense and any other fighter would be slaughtered if they used that as an excuse. If Floyd had of lost and said that... forget about it.

In the build-up there was no mention of it - in fact Roach and Manny seemed confident of the KO...

Like I predicted earlier in the thread, Floyd took away his left hand, exposed his necessity to fight at mid-range, and out-boxed him when he was forced to start thinking. Overall I enjoyed the fight, and this rivalry finally being laid to rest, however Floyd is deteriorating before our eyes and I believe should hang it up now. Khan or Thurman would be dangerous fights....

The Diabolical Monocle

spent all day hiding from the result.

found a good long highlight reel on youtube,

one with none of the usual visit a link and download a virus in Russian and a thing that doesn't work bullsht.

good as the real thing, didn't cost 100 dollars, didnt have to stay up til 5am. All I had to do was hid under the bed all day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm4Z8imdxek

Talib Fiasco

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

spent all day hiding from the result.

found a good long highlight reel on youtube,

one with none of the usual visit a link and download a virus in Russian and a thing that doesn't work bullsht.

good as the real thing, didn't cost 100 dollars, didnt have to stay up til 5am. All I had to do was hid under the bed all day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm4Z8imdxek

You hardly lasted the whole day without not knowing the result? It was practically mentioned on every website today including YouTube. Fair play if you did though!

The Diabolical Monocle

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

You hardly lasted the whole day without not knowing the result? It was practically mentioned on every website today including YouTube. Fair play if you did though!

Yip.

made it, avoided all news sites. Saw one youtube thumbnail with a pic of mayweather holding his hand up in victory and thought fvck, but then saw another later with manny doing the same.

some small bits/clues got to me but overall the result was a mystery at the end. stayed offline for a lot of the day.

hard to do though. probably a lot harder on a weekday.

qwabercd

Mellor wrote: »

Mayweather won, I said after the final bell that 115-113 is the best Manny can hope for. So 116-112 is about right from two if the judges.

But 118-110 was a ridiculous score.

Such a lack of utter understanding. For me floyd win 8 rounds. You could argue 5 for manny but its really pushing it it. How someone could see 118 -110 as ridiculous is a simple lack of knowledge. There were quite clearly 8 rounds you could easily say mayweather won, and i say that begrudgingly.

Panic E

It wasn't a bad fight by any means but disappointing yes.

What are peoples thoughts on Pacquiao's shoulder injury?

It was never going to live up to the hype in any case but.

Mellor

qwabercd wrote: »

Such a lack of utter understanding. For me floyd win 8 rounds. You could argue 5 for manny but its really pushing it it. How someone could see 118 -110 as ridiculous is a simple lack of knowledge. There were quite clearly 8 rounds you could easily say mayweather won, and i say that begrudgingly.

118-110 is 10 rounds Mayweather, not 8.

I said in my post that 8-4 was prob the right score. I've no issue with giving Mayweather 8 rounds. That makes it 116-112.

Mellor

menoscemo wrote: »

I had it 118-111. I gave Manny the 4th and the 8th and a share of the 3rd and I put a Q mark at the 3rd to say if pushed I'd have given that to Mayweather too. I can see you could argue Pacman won 4 rounds but no more than that. The punch stats prove that IMO.

All 3 judges gave him the 6th (and the 4th).
I'm not say he deserved to win, he didnt. I'm just saying that only 2 rounds was harsh.
None of them gave him the 8th btw.

I haven't seen rd by rd puching stats yet. Have they been released?
If not that the overall punching stats are meaningless in terms of scoring rounds.

Panic E

I think the fight was closer than the scorecards for sure.

As for Manny 'not being humble' and thinking he won?

He did chase the bigger guy around the ring all night.

Panic E

Have to say I agree with every word of this

Charlie Haughy wrote: »

Congratulations Mayweather, you got what you wanted; a Manny Pacquiao that clearly is far past his prime and is a shell of his former self. You just got paid 200 million dollars to run and go backwards, and cherry pick a fight that should have happened 5 years ago, because you knew you would have lost. What a ****ing travesty for boxing fans. We were robbed of a fight we deserved, because you're so scared of that undefeated record being broken.

I'll admit, Mayweather did win this fight on the score cards, but I can't respect you at all. I can't put you with the greats. Anyone who thinks this is "defense" or being a "technician" is a ****ing idiot. Sure, dancing around and running will win you decisions, but you're still a bitch. How can anyone root for this man or think he's great? He's a pussy. Congrats on ducking Manny until you knew you would win.

That's not boxing to me, there's more than just winning and a great record when it comes to being a great, you have to go toe to toe and actually fight other greats to solidify yourself as better thant hat man. And I watched it, Flloyd was his same old self. He is scared to go toe to toe. Sure, what he did is smart to win on score cards and keep that undefeated record, and logically the objective is to win; but I can't respect that strategy or put him up there with the greats. Anyone who thinks that was a good fight or Mayweather was great is fooling themselves.

I won't lie, Manny looked awful also, his former self had fury in his punches and was just as fast as Mayweather. Pacquiao used to be active and move his feet. It's sad to see such a great look so bad, but Flloyd knew this would happen and ducked all these years. It's no secret that he avoided him when they were in their prime, that's well documented. I'm just pissed for myself and all boxing fans, we were robbed of a great fight.

Except for half of the last sentence, no emotion here. I'm glad the fight was made and glad it's over now.

I have been pissed the last 5 years though. Someone said the comment was borne of jealousy, lol at that.

Chrissybhoy

Can anyone see that Floyd is a shadow of his former self. It's all if he took the fight 5/6 year Mayweather was a better fight then as well and would of beating manny even more convincingly

rebelomar

Chrissybhoy wrote: »

Can anyone see that Floyd is a shadow of his former self. It's all if he took the fight 5/6 year Mayweather was a better fight then as well and would of beating manny even more convincingly

Amazed by the lack of respect Floyd has gotten after the fight. I genuinely feel people both fans and people in the game wanted Pacman to win so badly that it has seriously clouded their judgement.

Deiseboy01

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

I think that's extreme unless one fighter scores three knockdowns...then it's okay. There have been instances of a 10-8 round without a knockdown which is okay at times but I think if they placed more of an emphasis not being afraid to give even rounds.

I was thinking about the current scoring system and it is too dependent on winning rounds not the fight if you get my drift. The likes of Floyd can pick up rounds with one or two jabs which leads to boring fights.

At present all rounds are equal, barring a knock down, this is clearly wrong, I know rounds can be marked 10/8 without the knock down but how often are they? You can win a round on one exchange or on ten but by the end of the fight its still 19/19 when you count them up.

What if judges were asked to score rounds on five criteria, effective aggression, ring generalship, defensive ability etc. Ten points for each. Then a fighter winning a round convincingly would reap the rewards. It would also incentivise fighting rather than running and holding.

Im sure there are many flaws, would be interested to get opinions from the more knowledgeable on here.