i've noticed that since saturday's massacre, various boxing sites are now taking a closer look at manny's record. duh, i was questioning it long ago! pactards have accused mayweather of ducking, cherry picking, and other nonsense, but now that floyd has destroyed a big, strong, talented true welterweight, now people are saying "hmmm, manny never fought shane mosley, and except for that punching bag clottey, manny made oscar de la hoya and miguel cotto come in drained, so what her he really accomplished?" "and hatton and oscar had already been beaten down by floyd, so what does that really mean?" "and did pacman really deserve a decision and a draw over juan manuel marquez"? i have been saying on this forum ad nauseum that it does not matter how many awards manny has won. this is a fickle sport. i recall after hagler was outboxed by leonard, as controversial as the decision was, and no matter how dominant a middleweight champ marvin was, i did hear "well, marvin's biggest wins were over smaller guys, like mugabi, hearns and duran". sorry pactards, that's just the way it is.
sorry, "kiss my jones", from real, non partisan boxing fans and sites.
sorry, "kiss my jones", from real, non partisan boxing fans and sites.