Manny Pacquiao vs Lucas Matthysse

Enter your Manny Pacquiao vs Lucas Matthysse fan card
CONTROVERSY RATING: N/A
The percentage of fan cards that disagree with an official result. Exclusively on EYE ON THE RING.
Manny Pacquiao vs Lucas Matthysse
Fan Rating: 
0
Your rating: None
3.75
Average: 3.8 (4 votes)

Date: 
Sunday, July 15, 2018
Location: 
Malaysia
Rounds Scheduled: 
12
Contracted Weight: 
147

More:






Fan Cards: Manny Pacquiao vs Lucas Matthysse


scorecard by MATCHROOM
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
MANNY PACQUIAO
10
10
10
10
10
10
60
LUCAS MATTHYSSE
9
9
8
9
8
9
52


scorecard by MIKE25
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
MANNY PACQUIAO
10
10
10
10
10
10
60
LUCAS MATTHYSSE
9
9
8
9
8
9
52


scorecard by ADAMJO260
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
MANNY PACQUIAO
10
10
10
10
10
10
60
LUCAS MATTHYSSE
9
9
8
9
8
9
52


scorecard by CHAMPION97
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
MANNY PACQUIAO
10
10
10
10
10
10
60
LUCAS MATTHYSSE
9
9
8
9
8
9
52


scorecard by HTTP
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
MANNY PACQUIAO
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
70
LUCAS MATTHYSSE
9
9
8
9
8
9
8
60


scorecard by GOOSU
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
MANNY PACQUIAO
10
9
10
10
10
10
59
LUCAS MATTHYSSE
9
10
8
9
8
9
53


scorecard by BOXING KNOWLEDGE
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
MANNY PACQUIAO
10
10
10
10
10
10
60
LUCAS MATTHYSSE
9
9
8
9
8
9
52


scorecard by HAGLERGOAT
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
MANNY PACQUIAO
10
10
10
10
10
10
60
LUCAS MATTHYSSE
9
9
8
9
8
9
52


scorecard by GOLD
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
MANNY PACQUIAO
10
10
10
10
10
10
60
LUCAS MATTHYSSE
9
9
8
9
8
9
52


scorecard by MONAGFAM
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
MANNY PACQUIAO
10
10
10
10
10
10
60
LUCAS MATTHYSSE
9
9
8
9
8
9
52


scorecard by SALTNUTZ1
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
MANNY PACQUIAO
10
10
10
10
10
10
60
LUCAS MATTHYSSE
9
9
8
9
8
9
52


Comments

Champion97's picture

Prediction,

Surprised that this one is announced, should be a fun fight to watch!
Both these guys are past their primes, both are only going further into decline, but because they both are, and when you have two athletes like Matthysse and Pacquiao getting old, fading, it is all on a relative scale, and against each other, they are more than capable of giving the fans a tremendous battle.

Matthysse is a few years younger than Pacquiao, he is also coming off a possibly confidence building win, Pacquiao is coming off a loss, having said this, Pacquiao is the guy with the bigger, higher achieving career behind him, Matthysse was always a threat, very good at this level, but I think it is safe to say Pacquiao wasn't just very good, but based on the Cotto, Barrera victories, and the long winning streak, he was a great fighter.
I think a prime Pacquiao was a level above a prime Matthysse.

I think Pacquiao is a shot fighter, at 39, having been a professional since 1995, having lost 8 times, having been stopped 3 times, knocked out cold on one of those occasions, just year after year of tough fights, long, hard, gruelling camps and bouts, it is draining, after 23 years, Pacquiao couldn't not be run down. Ideally, Pacquiao would be happy with his fantastic career, and hang up the gloves, I think he is very unwise not to, especially considering his potential career in politics. Nevertheless, Pacquiao is still here, still fighting, and nobody can make him retire.

I think Matthysse is the most dangerous puncher in the welterweight division, he is a frighteningly hard hitter, and although I think skill wise, to say he is even fairly good at world level might be generous, he is always a threat, he can inflcit so much damage, that certain aspects of the sport which are usually important, don't matter.
I think Matthysse has been declining for a few years now, I think was at his best when he defeated Lamont Peterson, and was set to fight Danny Garcia (who he was expected to beat), but after losing to Danny Garcia, granted, he achieved a lot, he beat John Molina, Ruslan Provodnikov, but in these fights, he was dropped, and took a lot of punishment. When Matthysse lost to Viktor Postol in 2015, I think that was very bad for him, facical issues were a factor, but that was a very tough loss, and since then, after a layoff, he has had two fights, he won them both, and on both occasions, I thought his power, the damage he was doing to his opponents, really, was the real reason he won, and in other aspects, he looked poor, and compared to the fighter he once was, he has dipped.

This is very interesting, because there are a few different ways of looking at this fight.
Thinking historically, you sort of want to say Pacquiao wins, because at his best, he was considered the biggest threat to Floyd Mayweather Jr, and Matthysse was just a very good fighter who was still good despite losing more big fights than he won, but could punch for Argentina.

Pacquiao has a lot more good attributes than Matthysse, he has far more speed, he moves his head, moves in and out of range, consistently, for the duration of round after round, Matthysse is more static, and in terms of variety, Pacquiao is the less predictable fighter.

Although I still think the best Pacquiao was a class above the best Matthysse, looking at the timing aspect and circumstances, Matthysse is not only the younger fighter, but is probably not as far over the hill as Pacquiao is, and although he is not a big welterweight, he has never fought as light as 135, whereas Pacquiao has boxed at weight after weight, Matthysse's the bigger fighter I think really. When this fight happens, Pacquiao will have been out of the ring for almost a year, for Matthysse, it will have been 5 months.

I think Matthysse wins this, and I think by knockout.

Pacquiao can still produce a round of relentlessness like the Pacquiao of old, but when he gets up for the next round, the minute isn't enough, and he can't pick up where he left off, because Pacquiao has always been unconventional, he has always relied on his speed, fast flurries, aggression, it is very hard for him to adopt a successful style with a lower output, because that is not his style, it is as simple as that.
Pacquiao's flurries against Matthysse, for a certain period of time, might have the same power as ever, less speed, but still a lot of spite, the problem is his inability to sustain it, and when he is drained, after a round of offenisve bursts and flurries, that will allow Matthysse to chase him, and bully the older, smaller fighter, Matthysse isn't hard to pick off with sharp shots, he isn't a mobile target, but if you can't bring the punches out of yourself, and your legs become more heavy, Matthysse can fire away, and once that happens, you're in trouble.

Matthysse's concern about his eyes is a problem, he's always had facial problems I think, and fast blurring shots like the punches Pacquiao throws can often be the worst kind of shots to take. Matthysse's feet are very slow, and he isn't a natural welterweight, which doesn't help him, he has to make Pacquiao work, the early rounds are very important, because if Pacquiao can get himself out of harms way without taking too much out of himself, he can take rests, but if Matthysse goes forward like a sports car, he'll miss, and he'll run right into Pacquiao's trap, Matthysse has to sustain eductaed pressure. If Matthysse has Pacquiao lumbered, stationery, and struggling to let the shots go, I don't think Matthysse will even have to push himself that hard anymore, I think Pacquiao's punch resistance has been getting weaker and weaker, he can be hurt, and even the freshest of 39 year olds, I think couldn't withstand the power of Matthysse's punches, so I think once Matthysse has made it his type of fight, he can absolutely destory Pacquiao.

I think Matthysse wins by knock out, at some point in the middle rounds, I'd say round 6 or 7.

Gold's picture

It's possible this fight happens considering Top Rank and Golden Boy have a business relationship, but I wouldn't get your hopes up that this fight will happen at all. Pacquiao is just running his mouth trying to pressure Arum into making this fight, which he has done in the past as well, by acting like the fight is finalized. I honestly like Arum's idea of Pacquiao fighting Jose Ramirez if Ramirez beats Amir Imam for the vacant WBC Super Lightweight title more than this fight anyways.

Champion97's picture

I like the idea of Pacquiao doing what he should have done years ago, and retiring.

Gold's picture

As would I, but that isn't going to happen so we get a hobbyist boxer and a hobbyist senator right now which doesn't bode well for either of his jobs.

Gold's picture

I'm surprised this fight is actually signed. Will certainly be interesting.

Champion97's picture

Who you got?

Gold's picture

I will post my full analysis once it gets closer to the fight date, but my initial reaction is that I am pretty sure Pacquiao will win by decision. Pacquiao is shot but I think Matthysse is even more shot. Matthysse has slow hands and feet and not a lot of complex boxing ability. Pacquiao even at this stage has a lot better offense, defense and movement. I am not sure how good Matthysse's power is at this stage either at Welterweight. Kiram was not a legitimate test of Matthysse's level at all in my opinion and Pacquiao still has a good chin.

Champion97's picture

Predictions.

Robert Garcia - Pacquiao
Glen Rushton - Pacquiao
Jessie Vargas - Pacquiao
Shakur Stevenson - Pacquiao
Teofimo Lopez - Pacquiao
Jean Carlos Rivera - Pacquiao
Bernard Hopkins - Matthysse
Alex Ariza - Matthysse
Eric Gomez - Matthysse
Eddie Mustafa Muhammad - Pacquiao
Muhammad Waseem - Pacquiao
Devin Haney - Pacquiao
Lanell Bellows - Pacquiao
Dewey Cooper - Pacquiao
Daquan Mays - Pacquiao
Kevin Johnson - Pacquiao
Lamar - Pacquiao
Czarina McCoy - Pacquiao
Charvis Holifield - Matthysse
Ben Alvarez - Matthysse

Matthysse: 5
Pacquiao: 15

Champion97's picture

Tale of the tape

Matthysse
Height: 169
Reach: 175
Age: 35
Fights: 44
Wins: 39
Title fights: 15
World title fights: 3
Activity since start of 2017: 2 fights
KO percentage: 82
Lightest: 138
Heaviest: 147
Debut: 2004
Knockdowns suffered in career: 4
Been a world champion: once
World title wins: 1
Best win (opinion): Ruslan Provodnikov. MD. April 2015

Pacquiao
Height: 166
Reach: 170
Age: 39
Fights: 68
Wins: 59
Title fights: 40
World title fights: 22
Activity since start of 2017: 1 fight
KO percentage: 56
Lightest: 106
Heaviest: 147
Debut: 1995
Knockdowns suffered in career: 6
Been a world champion: eight times
World title wins: 16
Best win (opinion): Not easy to say. Marco Antonio Barrera, Erik Morales, Juan Manuel Marquez, Miguel Cotto.

Best opponents between them (opinion)
1. Floyd Mayweather Jr. Pacquiao lost, UD
2. Marco Antonio Barrera. Pacquiao won, TKO 11. Pacquiao won, UD
3. Erik Morales. Pacquiao lost, UD. Pacquiao won, TKO 10. Pacquiao won, KO 3.
4. Juan Manuel Marquez. Pacquiao drew. Pacquiao won, SD. Pacquiao won, MD. Pacquiao lost, KO 6
5. Danny Garcia. Matthysse lost, UD
6. Viktor Postol. Matthysse lost, KO 10
7. Miguel Cotto. Pacquiao won, TKO 12
8. Oscar De La Hoya. Pacquiao won, TKO 8
9. Ricky Hatton. Pacquiao won, KO 2
10. Tim Bradley. Pacquiao lost, SD. Pacquiao won, UD. Pacquiao won, UD

Gold's picture

Danny Garcia 2nd best opponent between Pacquiao and Matthysse and I DKSAB?

Champion97's picture

I sent you a message on your Berchelt vs Barros card, that is a very reasonable option, if you keep sending me stupid messgaes, you'll show me to be the bigger man than you, your choice.

Champion97's picture

After reconsidering, I think Garcia is 5th, not second, but he is a two weight world champion, I think he is top 5. Not sure he was better than a prime De La Hoya, Garcia, but he was better when he fought Matthysse, than De La Hoya when he fought Pacquiao.

Gold's picture

If you are just talking about name value, what they accomplished in their career regardless of their form versus Pacquiao/Matthysse I think the list should look something like this:

1. Floyd Mayweather Jr. (Beat Pacquiao UD) Obvious #1

2. Juan Manuel Marquez (Drew Pacquiao, Lost to Pacquiao SD, MD, Beat Pacquiao KO) Beat a list of relevant top-level names while winning titles in four weight classes, Pacquiao, Barrera, Casamayor, Diaz, young Salido, except for Floyd he was extremely competitive in almost every one of his losses and had arguments to win some, got robbed versus Chris John certainly. One of the greatest counter punchers of all times, a legend of the ring.

3. Erik Morales (Beat Pacquiao UD, Lost to Pacquiao TKO, KO) Beat some very good fighters in his career while winning titles in four weight classes, Pacquiao, Barrera, Zaragoza, Ayala, Jones, lost some incredibly close and competitive fights versus Barrera, Diaz, Maidana. Only was really beat by his own lack of motivation versus Rahim and Diaz in his prime. Extremely skilled boxer, a legend of the ring.

4. Oscar De La Hoya (Lost to Pacquiao RTD) Had a controversial career despite winning championships in five weight classes but is generally underrated today. Beat some very good opponents over his career, Vargas, Quartey, Hernandez, Molina, robbed Whitaker and Strum but got robbed by Mosley in the rematch and arguably by Trinidad. Only really was beaten decisively by Mosley the first time, Hopkins at too high of a weight and Mayweather late in his career. Extremely skilled boxer, I'd say he is a legend but he is pretty divisive.

5. Marco Antonio Barrera (Lost to Pacquiao TKO, UD) Beat some very good fighters in his career while winning championships in three weight classes but had some flaws, beat Morales, Hamed, Tapia, Ayala but inexplicably lost to Jones twice, got destroyed by Pacquiao and lost to Marquez. Very good boxer, he is a legend of the ring.

6. Miguel Cotto (Lost to Pacquiao TKO) Had a very good career but was behind the stars of the era in Mayweather and Pacquiao. Won championships in four weight classes, beat some quality opponents, Mosley, Judah, Clottey. Potentially could have had a better career, I believe Margarito was cheating versus him too which definitely put miles on him. His only inexplicable loss is to Trout and he fought tough losing efforts versus Margarito, Mayweather, and Canelo. A very good boxer, he had a Hall of Fame career but I wouldn't call him a legend.

7. Shane Mosley (Lost to Pacquiao UD) Had a very good career winning championships in three weight classes but with some bad losses. Beat Oscar in his prime, Margarito, Vargas but lost to Forrest and Winky twice as well as Cotto in Mosley's prime, robbed De La Hoya in their rematch. A very good boxer in his prime but doesn't have the greatest resume and has the steroids issue that may keep him out the Hall of Fame.

8. Timothy Bradley (Beat Pacquiao SD, Lost to Pacquiao UD twice) Had a very good career winning titles in two weight classes considering he didn't have a lot of physical talent, beat Peterson, Alexander, Vargas. Had some very questionable decisions versus Pacquiao, Provodnikov, and Marquez but both Marquez and Provodnikov were very close. A very good boxer in his prime but I don't think he is Hall of Fame level.

9. Ricky Hatton (Lost to Pacquiao KO) Had a good but short career at the top winning titles in two weight classes, beat an aging Tszyu, Malignaggi, Collazo, and old Castillo. Lost to the two top guys he faced in his career in Mayweather and Pacquiao. A good boxer but not Hall of Fame level.

10. Zab Judah (Beat Matthysse SD) Had a very strange career and definitely underperformed relative to his talent but still won championships in two weight classes. I guess his best win would be Corley, Matthysse or Spinks? He lost versus every great opponent he faced in his prime, Tszyu, Mayweather, Cotto. A good boxer in his prime but he could never put it together, not a Hall of Fame level guy.

Pacquiao has a 12-4-1 record versus opponents #1-9, Matthysse has a 0-1 record versus opponent #10

Opponents I left off that you have:

5. Danny Garcia, I think his resume is a lot worse in reality compared to how it looks on paper. His best wins are probably Matthysse and Khan, otherwise his wins aren't as good as the name value implies. Morales, Judah, and Malignaggi were all old fighters. He was comprehensively beat by Thurman and arguably should have drew or lost to Herrera and Peterson. Faced low level opponents voluntarily in his prime such as Salka and Vargas which devalue his resume in my estimation. I don't think he had as good of a career as Judah or Hatton.

6. Viktor Postol, he doesn't really have that good of a resume, he beat Matthysse which was good, beat Lundy and Mendy and fought closely versus Taylor but really not close to as good of a resume as Judah or Hatton.

I'm not sure the value of just ranking resumes when comparing head to head victories but it is an interesting exercise I suppose.

If you are talking about ranking the opponents based on how good they were when they fought Pacquiao/Matthysse within the context of their careers (basically who would be the best of these versions of opponents in a head to head if the weights were even) I think the list should look something like this:

1. Floyd Mayweather Jr. (Beat Pacquiao UD) Obvious #1

2. Juan Manuel Marquez (Drew Pacquiao, Lost to Pacquiao SD, MD, Beat Pacquiao KO) Marquez had a very long prime and was a top pound for pound level opponent. He was ducked by Hamed massively otherwise people would have known who he was before he fought Pacquiao the first time. Pacquiao struggled with JMM but I think he won the first three fights but they were very close and competitive. I think the fact that they were so competitive and Marquez was able to be the first and only person to really KO Pacquiao speaks to how good Marquez was.

3. Marco Antonio Barrera (Lost to Pacquiao TKO, UD) In the first fight Barrera was in great form, I think he lost versus Morales in the second bout but it was very close, he beat Hamed before that and beat Tapia and Kelly before he faced Pacquiao. Barrera was a big betting favorite and was widely considered to be one of the best pound for pound boxers in the world but Pacquiao came up in weight and destroyed him. Barrera showed he was still a top level fighter afterward beating Ayala, Morales and making numerous defenses of his new title before losing to Marquez and Pacquiao again which was the end of his career at a world level.

4. Erik Morales (Beat Pacquiao UD, Lost to Pacquiao TKO, KO) Morales was in great form in their first fight despite losing the close third match versus Barrera and was still a bottom of the top ten pound for pound boxer when he faced Pacquiao the first time. Morales boxed a near perfect fight and won a close decision. In their second bout Morales was again a bottom of the top ten pound for pound fighter despite losing to Raheem which a lot of people blamed on Morales being undertrained. Morales fought well but got knocked out by Pacquiao who looked improved. In their third bout Morales was definitely slipping, not a top win for Pacquiao but Morales still managed to fight a close decision versus Diaz and came back to fight closely vs Maidana and win a vacant title at Super Lightweight.

5. Miguel Cotto (Lost to Pacquiao TKO) Cotto had rebuilt himself after losing to Margarito by beating Jennings and Clottey. After people found out about Margarito's wraps versus Mosley there was a lot more doubt put on the legitimacy of Cotto's loss to Margarito. Cotto was considered a bottom of the top ten pound for pound guy when Pacquiao came up in weight and put a beat down on Cotto. Cotto rebuilt himself after that winning another title beating Foreman, Mayorga, and Margarito before losing again in a good effort versus Mayweather.

6. Ricky Hatton (Lost to Pacquiao KO) Hatton had rebuilt some form after losing to Mayweather at Welterweight, dropping back down and beating Malignaggi to retain his titles at Super Lightweight. Hatton was still considered a bottom of the top ten pound for pound boxer at this point and he got knocked out brutally by Pacquiao which essentially ended his career.

7. Timothy Bradley (Beat Pacquiao SD, Lost to Pacquiao UD twice) Bradley was a bottom of the top ten pound for pound boxer having beat Peterson and Alexander when he faced Pacquiao the first time and won via dubious decision, he then beat Provodnikov and Marquez in close and disputed decisions and was a top five pound for pound boxer before losing to Pacquiao in their second bout, in their third bout he was still considered a good opponent having beat Vargas and Rios but not a pound for pound level opponent and Pacquiao retired Bradley.

8. Jessie Vargas (Lost to Pacquiao UD) Jessie Vargas had beat Allakhverdiev and DeMarco before losing to Bradley in a relatively competitive fight where Bradley was in control but Vargas nearly stopped Bradley in the final round. Bradley rebounded by stopping Ali for a vacant title and lost widely to Pacquiao. After that Vargas fought a disputed draw versus Adrien Broner.

9. Danny Garcia (Beat Matthysse UD) Garcia's best win up to this point was stopping Khan who was a good but flawed opponent, Garcia looked good in a competitive fight versus Matthysse but went on to have some questionable performances versus Herrera and Peterson, eventually clearly losing to Thurman.

10. Joshua Clottey (Lost to Pacquiao UD) Clottey beat an older Judah to win a vacant title, lost a close fight to Cotto before getting shut out by Pacquiao which essentially ended his career as a relevant fighter.

Pacquiao has a 12-4-1 record versus opponents #1-8 and #10, Matthysse has a 0-1 record versus opponent #9.

Opponents I left off that you have:

6. Viktor Postol, he looked good versus Matthysse but Matthysse was supposed to win, after beating Matthysse he got destroyed by Crawford but fought competitively versus Taylor, to me this is not as good as someone like Clottey, Garcia, Vargas, etc.

8. Oscar De La Hoya, he was shot and weight drained versus Pacquiao

I think there is some argument to the bottom three guys but I think it is very difficult to say Matthysse fought more than one opponent that was better than Pacquiao's top opponents. Overall, the top guys Pacquiao fought (and usually beat) are way better than the top guys Matthysse fought (and usually lost to)

Champion97's picture

Before I say anything.
I respect you as an intelligent person, I will have discussions with you, but I will leave the debate before it gets nasty, because I don't enjoy all that pointless stuff, and I don't think you do either.

Two things to start.

1. My friend is a massive fan of Roy Jones Jr, Mike Tyson, he was a kid when they were at their best, my dad is a massive Ali fan, he was a kid when Ali was at his best, to me, Mayweather, Ward, these guys are just outstanding, what I'm saying is, you are defensive of Pacquiao, and all the greats of that era, and because you have good memories watching them fights, you struggle to comapre this era to that era, but someone who is more impartial might disagree. A two weight world champion being better than everyone between Pacquiao and Matthysse, bar Mayweather, was not misinformation, I think looking back, in hindsight, Morales, in his prime, Marquez and Barrera, hard to top that kind of class of a boxer.

2. I get what you say, like with the Lomachencko thing, but I just think you are spinning it in a one sided way, I get it, you are arguing for a side, but I think a lot of the time, there is irony in what you say.

What I said about all wins being up for criticism was right, you can sometimes find something easily, sometimes you have to really dig deep and research for something, like even, "Pacquiao just had a bad night against Mayweather, just simply wasn't his night", and ok, you tried to explain my examples, but I could think of a hypothetical reason to belittle every single meaningful victory out there, and for 90% of them, there would be a degree of validity, what is up to you, is what you want to emphasize, and who you want to defend.

Ok, those are the facts, at least most of those statements are facts, but if you were arguing for the opposing team, would you not be telling me how Cassamayor, Salido were never great?

Yes, Danny Garcia looked bad against Herrera and Peterson, let's be honest, he wasn't good in those fights, but let's look at his resume, Morales, Malignaggi, Khan, Guerrero, Matthysse, Holt, now, Matthysse was in his prime when he fought Garcia I think, he was 30, he was coming off a confidence, momentum building win, did you predict Garcia to beat Matthysse? Because I didn't, I was just a kid, didn't know that much about boxing, but I thought Matthysse was going to stop Garcia in 3 or 4 rounds, and a lot of people thought that. Khan was what? 25?, yeah he was doing great, coming off great performances against Judah, McKcloskey, he lost to Peterson, but against Garcia, he was young, he was active, and for 2 rounds, he looked so fast, sharp, but Garcia stopped him, that is a big, career defining win, was Khan mentally at a disadvantage? Was Khan making a lot of mistakes? That's speculation, did Khan make a big mistake at the end of round 3? Definitely, obviously, but would Garcia have been able to punish Khan for smaller mistakes as the fight went on?, would he have won anyway? In retrospect, I think it seems very likely that the answer to those last two questions, is yes.

Malignaggi
Boxing legend? That would be very generous
Two time world champion? Yes
Well past his prime? Yes
So far past his prime it was sad to see? I don't think so

Morales
Boxing legend? I think so
Former world champion? Yes
Beat Manny Pacquiao? Yes
Past his prime? Yes
Absolutely shot? Second time, yes, first time, no I don't think so.

For Marquez

Salido
Experienced at world level? I don't think so.
Already had 8 losses? Yes
Was ever a truly great world level fighter? No
Was beaten by a man you claim was the worst 3 time world champion of all time as part of your discrediting of Lomachencko's resume? Yes

My point is, if you want to be accurate, you can't make analyses so one sided, I do agree that Garcia's resume isn't as good as Marquez's, and that is part of the reason why I changed my mind. Boxing is about timing, and I put Cotto and De La Hoya below Garcia, because Garcia was near his prime against Matthysse, and De La Hoya, against Pacquiao, was well past his best, I know he wasn't that old, but that was not a prime De La Hoya at all, I don't think Cotto was at his best either, but to be fair, I might be wrong about that, and now I think about it, Cotto was having a good round 3? Was it?, but Pacquiao fought back with a knockdown.

I still think that if we'd seen Pacquiao vs Kiram in January, Kiram would have won, because I think the levels aspect, would have been outdone by the age, activity, size advantages, desire as well, I do not think it would have been the case if all Kiram's opponents were 2-38, and they were all 8 round fight at the most, but he was a PABA champion, defended 24 times, I think you should get a better idea of how continental level fighters can step it up at 25, how they can step it up, not saying Kiram wouldn't have benefited from fighting guys in betweem the level of Siwu and Pacquiao/Matthysse first, not saying it wasn't a real jump up in level, because it was, but Kiram boxed well against Matthysse, whether they were both bad or both good is absolutely unknowable, because they were only in against each other, their own challange is the only form of a tape measure, it is like with Joshua vs Parker? Did Joshua impress you? It just depends on how highly you rated Parker.

Champion97's picture

Before I say anything.
I respect you as an intelligent person, I will have discussions with you, but I will leave the debate before it gets nasty, because I don't enjoy all that pointless stuff, and I don't think you do either.

Two things to start.

1. My friend is a massive fan of Roy Jones Jr, Mike Tyson, he was a kid when they were at their best, my dad is a massive Ali fan, he was a kid when Ali was at his best, to me, Mayweather, Ward, these guys are just outstanding, what I'm saying is, you are defensive of Pacquiao, and all the greats of that era, and because you have good memories watching them fights, you struggle to comapre this era to that era, but someone who is more impartial might disagree. A two weight world champion being better than everyone between Pacquiao and Matthysse, bar Mayweather, was not misinformation, I think looking back, in hindsight, Morales, in his prime, Marquez and Barrera, hard to top that kind of class of a boxer.

2. I get what you say, like with the Lomachencko thing, but I just think you are spinning it in a one sided way, I get it, you are arguing for a side, but I think a lot of the time, there is irony in what you say.

What I said about all wins being up for criticism was right, you can sometimes find something easily, sometimes you have to really dig deep and research for something, like even, "Pacquiao just had a bad night against Mayweather, just simply wasn't his night", and ok, you tried to explain my examples, but I could think of a hypothetical reason to belittle every single meaningful victory out there, and for 90% of them, there would be a degree of validity, what is up to you, is what you want to emphasize, and who you want to defend.

Ok, those are the facts, at least most of those statements are facts, but if you were arguing for the opposing team, would you not be telling me how Cassamayor, Salido were never great?

Yes, Danny Garcia looked bad against Herrera and Peterson, let's be honest, he wasn't good in those fights, but let's look at his resume, Morales, Malignaggi, Khan, Guerrero, Matthysse, Holt, now, Matthysse was in his prime when he fought Garcia I think, he was 30, he was coming off a confidence, momentum building win, did you predict Garcia to beat Matthysse? Because I didn't, I was just a kid, didn't know that much about boxing, but I thought Matthysse was going to stop Garcia in 3 or 4 rounds, and a lot of people thought that. Khan was what? 25?, yeah he was doing great, coming off great performances against Judah, McKcloskey, he lost to Peterson, but against Garcia, he was young, he was active, and for 2 rounds, he looked so fast, sharp, but Garcia stopped him, that is a big, career defining win, was Khan mentally at a disadvantage? Was Khan making a lot of mistakes? That's speculation, did Khan make a big mistake at the end of round 3? Definitely, obviously, but would Garcia have been able to punish Khan for smaller mistakes as the fight went on?, would he have won anyway? In retrospect, I think it seems very likely that the answer to those last two questions, is yes.

Malignaggi
Boxing legend? That would be very generous
Two time world champion? Yes
Well past his prime? Yes
So far past his prime it was sad to see? I don't think so

Morales
Boxing legend? I think so
Former world champion? Yes
Beat Manny Pacquiao? Yes
Past his prime? Yes
Absolutely shot? Second time, yes, first time, no I don't think so.

For Marquez

Salido
Experienced at world level? I don't think so.
Already had 8 losses? Yes
Was ever a truly great world level fighter? No
Was beaten by a man you claim was the worst 3 time world champion of all time as part of your discrediting of Lomachencko's resume? Yes

My point is, if you want to be accurate, you can't make analyses so one sided, I do agree that Garcia's resume isn't as good as Marquez's, and that is part of the reason why I changed my mind. Boxing is about timing, and I put Cotto and De La Hoya below Garcia, because Garcia was near his prime against Matthysse, and De La Hoya, against Pacquiao, was well past his best, I know he wasn't that old, but that was not a prime De La Hoya at all, I don't think Cotto was at his best either, but to be fair, I might be wrong about that, and now I think about it, Cotto was having a good round 3? Was it?, but Pacquiao fought back with a knockdown.

I still think that if we'd seen Pacquiao vs Kiram in January, Kiram would have won, because I think the levels aspect, would have been outdone by the age, activity, size advantages, desire as well, I do not think it would have been the case if all Kiram's opponents were 2-38, and they were all 8 round fight at the most, but he was a PABA champion, defended 24 times, I think you should get a better idea of how continental level fighters can step it up at 25, how they can step it up, not saying Kiram wouldn't have benefited from fighting guys in betweem the level of Siwu and Pacquiao/Matthysse first, not saying it wasn't a real jump up in level, because it was, but Kiram boxed well against Matthysse, whether they were both bad or both good is absolutely unknowable, because they were only in against each other, their own challange is the only form of a tape measure, it is like with Joshua vs Parker? Did Joshua impress you? It just depends on how highly you rated Parker.

Gold's picture

I pretty much agree if we aren't going to agree on something it is going to be obvious, no use in wasting time.

1. The thing is that that era is closed, we can look back and see the great fighters that won or lost versus other greats, when you look at someone's resume like Lomachenko, Crawford, even though they have done very well so far you are still prospecting on if they will be able to beat the great challenges of their careers because neither really has had those challenges to this point.

No, there are some boxers out there that have objectively good wins and resumes, Casamayor and Salido were never Hall of Fame level guys but they were quality opponents that almost exclusively lost to only very good opposition.

Those names look nice but they need to be put into context, Garcia has never been rated as a top ten pound for pound boxer for a good reason despite being an undefeated two-weight champion with all of those names going into the Thurman fight. I thought Matthysse would win but I thought it would be competitive, Matthysse had a lot of issues with Zab Judah so I knew he could be boxed to an extent.

The thing about the Herrera fight is it was supposed to be a tune-up, tune-ups should not result in disputed decisions that make the favorite look bad. Peterson was a close fight but I think it showed the limitations of Garcia's levels.

Malignaggi was at the end of his career by the time Garcia fought him, had just been knocked out by Porter when he fought Garcia.

As I said, I don't really think Morales was a good win at all. When looking at Morales's comeback, I just think of it as showing how good he once was that even a shot version, going up two weight classes from where he last won a title, after a two and a half year layoff and losing four consecutive fights, was able to fight a competitive fight versus Maidana and win a vacant title versus Cano. By the time he fought Garcia, he was a 35-year-old fighter with a ton of miles on him, he had no business being in there with a young prospect like Garcia.

Khan or Matthysse is probably his best win, I pretty much agree with what you said about Khan.

Guerrero isn't a good resume name, I'm not really sure how he got the opportunity to fight for a vacant title when he hadn't won a meaningful fight in over four years and lost essentially every round versus Thurman not even a year prior. Guerrero did nothing after he lost to Garcia.

Matthysse, as I said, is arguably his best win, he was in really good form coming into that fight but he hasn't beat a really quality opponent since he lost to Garcia, his best win since that fight is definitely Provodnikov.

Holt wasn't terrible but he certainly wasn't good either, he lost to every championship level fighter he faced except for David Diaz years prior and Garcia fought him near the end of his career.

The thing about discussing Salido is that he was never supposed to be a good fighter, someone who could challenge and win world titles. That's why he had so many domestic losses before he ever got a title shot. Like I said, I don't think this was the best version of Salido but he beat some good opponents around this time. To say he he was never a truely great world level fighter, I guess it depends what your definition of great is? From 2009 to 2014 he won four titles in two weight classes and only lost to Gamboa and Mikey Garcia while beating JuanMa twice and Lomachenko. By the time Rocky Martinez, who yes is not a good win for a top pound for pound level fighter, fought Salido, Salido was 34 and had been in a lot of wars. If I wanted to discredit Lomachenko's resume using Salido, I'd simply say he lost to Salido as a massive favorite.

I agree about De La Hoya, he was weight drained and had a ton of miles on him when Pacquiao got to him. Cotto had good performances left after he lost to Pacquiao, stopping Foreman, Mayorga, Margarito, old Martinez and Geale while putting up good efforts versus Mayweather and Canelo. I personally think Welterweight Cotto would have stopped Danny Garcia.

I believe Kiram is a total can, you aren't going to change my mind and vice versa so I don't think its worth discussing.

I think it is more worthwhile to talk about is Danny Garcia a better opponent at that time than Hatton, Bradley, Vargas, etc.

Champion97's picture

Props to Pacquiao, Matthysse was poor, his resistance is gone, he used no survival skill, he looked slow, his rhythm was off, most of all, he couldn't make Pacquiao work, his inability, the biggest reason he lost, was that he couldn't control the pace, Pacquiao can't produce the level of intensity he used to, needs more recovery time, but when he has trained hard, is there to win like he used to be, you have to make him work, exploit his issues with being past it, and when you can't stop him taking the extra seconds to rest, when you are so predictable, and when you are unprepared for what Pacquiao throws at you, you might not do much better than you would have done against a prime Pacquiao. I expected a lot more from Matthysse.

I think Crawford vs Pacquiao will happen next, I think for Pacquiao, you have to say, not retiring just yet, is to be expected, after that win, it will always be a high profile fight, an opportunity for both, Crawford, to fight a legend, a great fighter of the previous and current decade, and Pacquiao, well however unlikely a win seems to us, it is another chance for him, a final opportunity, and an opportunity against a 3 weight world champion, possibly the best boxer in the world, so Pacquiao would get the best of opportunities.

Matthysse is done, he has to retire, it is that simple, he was very good in 2012-2015, but now, he's had his chips. I wasn't impressed with Joel Diaz, I don't think he did a great job of giving Matthysse the right advice, there was a certain predictability about Matthysse.

Gold's picture

It won't be Pacquiao vs. Crawford, he has made it clear for years he wants nothing to do with Crawford. It will likely be Lomachenko next at a catchweight as his final fight which has a lot better risk-reward than Crawford. Maybe Khan is possible too if the negotiations with Lomachenko don't work out. I wouldn't mind either of those fights considering he isn't going to retire after the Matthysse bout.

Champion97's picture

Well done to you, you got this one right.

Well Lomachencko then, whichever, one of the top 2 in the world (if they are the top 2 which I think they are) gets the opportunity to fight a historic legend, and Pacquiao gets to go out on the positivity of probably losing but only to the best.

Gold's picture

I honestly didn't think Pacquiao would look that good and Matthysse would look that bad even though I predicted Pacquiao.

Do you think Pacquiao has a chance to make it competitive if he fights Lomachenko?

Champion97's picture

I don't know, might be Pacquiao good, but a lot of Matthysse bad, that's for sure, failed to exploit any of Pacquiao's weaknesses.

Not really, I think he can still do better than most Lomachencko opponents, but I don't think he can give Lomachencko problems now. I think prime on prime, Lomachencko would beat Pacquiao, but that would be a 50/50 fight, in my opinion, but I know you disagree, and I understand why. I'm not just saying it because I don't like Pacquiao, or because I am bitter I was wrong about the Matthysse fight, but I don't think Pacquiao would have more than 2 close rounds against Lomachencko if that, and I think definitely, be would get stopped, that's my opinion, maybe even in 6 rounds. I do think Pacquiao can still have good bursts, nobody flurries like him, his speed-power, and angles, is outstanding, and he can still produce that, but the minute isn't enough for him anymore (Matthysse just couldn't exploit that), and maybe what used to be a 60 second long onslaught at a certain pace, is now 30, and against a Lomachencko, Crawford, they'd exploit all the weaknesses he's always had with getting countered, but more so, his age, and because timing is so important in boxing, that decade of 30-40 could be the differencd between a 50/50 fight, and nearly a mismatch. You?

Gold's picture

The way I thought about it is considering it will likely be a catchweight and Pacquiao will come in at his normal weight, how would this Pacquiao do versus the Linares that Lomachenko fought? I honestly think he would win with more ease than Lomachenko did. Lomachenko is taller than Pacquiao but Pacquiao is considerably more filled out, I think Pacquiao could have success because of his physical size and power. Pacquiao might not have a lot of pop versus legitimate Welterweights but versus a small Lightweight, I think it is going to be a lot different. I definitely don't think he will get stopped by Lomachenko for similar reasons, Lomachenko isn't a big puncher at Lightweight, he's definitely not going to be a big puncher at a 140, 142, 144 catchweight. I think Lomachenko would win by UD because Pacquiao won't have the stamina to keep up, but I wouldn't be surprised if Pacquiao made it a really close fight or even won. If Pacquiao fought Crawford I think he'd get KO'd after a few decent rounds, Crawford has a toxic style for Pacquiao and has a big size advantage.

Champion97's picture

In my opinion, you are underestimating Lomachencko a lot. I think Lomachencko has brought his power up to 135 nearly as well as Crawford has brought his power up to 147. I don't think this Pacquiao could beat Linares, I think the movement of Linares would be too much, I think Pacquiao wluld struggle to pin him down. I think you underestimate Lomachencko's ability to do damage, body shot KOs are more about methodical spite rather than power, often, but that's it, he can make you vulnerable, and Pacquiao's punch resistance can't be what it was, I just think Horn, a well faded Matthysse, it is not the same world to Lomachencko. Good point about the weight, but Pacquiao is 5'6, tiny welterweight, I just don't think he can make anything of it against Lomachencko. I don't believe his style is any worse for Pacquiao than Lomachencko's.

Moruti Mthalane is another one of these isn't he, beat Tete, beat Casimero, didn't do bad against a prime Donaire, just beat an unbeaten fighter, and a good fighter in Waseem, but nobody has a clue who he is, a shame. Very sad about what happened to Bin Lu, that was just simply too early, I think at 1-0, at 23, never been 3 rounds, you have a long way to go before a world title fight, and Canizales is a good world level fighter.

Gold's picture

Linares is skilled and a good offensive operator but let's not act like he is known for his defense, punch resistance or chin. Linares has shown through his career to have issues with pressure and southpaws. Linares doesn't have good enough defense and isn't consistent enough to be able to get away from effective offensive pressure fighters, that is why he has lost fights and had closer fights than he should have versus non-world class guys. It's also why Lomachenko was able to beat him and Pacquiao would beat him too. There is no real evidence Pacquiao's chin has gotten worse, that is just hearsay. Lomachenko is obviously a way better fighter than Horn and Matthysse, but Horn is a legitimate Welterweight, Matthysse a legitimate Super Lightweight, and Lomachenko is a smaller Lightweight. There is a big size difference. Pacquiao still has good hand speed and movement, the southpaw vs. southpaw matchup would be interesting versus Lomachenko, Pacquiao can get tagged by a straight right but that also opens Lomachenko up to Pacquiao's straight right. Lomachenko's vulnerabilities seem to be his physical size at 135lbs, he can be affected by bodywork, and he can be outboxed on the inside. Pacquiao can trouble him in all of those areas, doesn't mean he will, but it is intriguing enough that I'd like to see the fight even though I think Pacquiao is shot. Perhaps he actually is more motivated promoting himself and training with Buboy. The reason why Crawford's style is worse for Pacquiao than Lomachenko is that Crawford is considerably bigger than Pacquiao, can switch stances, has more power, better counterpunching and better ring IQ than Lomachenko. Pacquiao got roughed up by Horn and Horn got roughed up by Crawford. Lomachenko doesn't have the physicality or style to do that.

It's tough for Mthalane as an old Light Flyweight fighting out of South Africa. I wasn't very confident about Lu Bin but I figured the matchmakers saw a weakness if they were going to throw him in there. I suppose that was wishful thinking by myself and the matchmakers.

Champion97's picture

Basically, the difference is Lomachencko, I think he is better than Pacquiao ever was, has as good variety, much better footwork, better jab, better technical skill, you disagree because of the level of opposition and calibre of opponent Pacquiao won against, and you think Lomachencko has been made to look better than he really is, ok, different opinions, we won't convince each other.

Will Smith make it competitive against Munguia?

Gold's picture

Depends on what you mean by competitive I guess? Smith will look better than Ali, he is a tough guy and a real Super Welterweight. He will be a good building block for Munguia but I think Munguia's physicality and power will be overwhelming for Smith, I think Munguia will win by mid to late TKO/KO.