Jack Slack breaks down Manny Pacquiao (must read)

slimpickenz84 said:
Bullshit. Go check WatchMeDoMe's post history and come back here and say that again. Or goldenboy saying Manny was a one trick pony. That's just two examples. If you seriously don't think there's been others, then you either lying or have selective memory.

Wanker
Click to expand...

Yeah, because WatchMeDoMe and goldennboy are to be taken seriously. They're as bad as Wanderlei4Life is.

Go die in a fire.
 
The Batkilt said:
Yeah, because WatchMeDoMe and goldennboy are to be taken seriously. They're as bad as Wanderlei4Life is.

Go die in a fire.
Click to expand...

Ooh so it's only who you deem to take seriously?? You forgot to mention that. Sorry.

Now go make me a sandwich.
 
LogicalInsanity said:
LOL...ahhh yes...are Boston fans as crazy as their reputation?
Click to expand...

Yeah, pretty crazy. I think the people who wear Yankee hats around here are the ballsiest people alive. They also suck balls for being Yankee fans.
 
slimpickenz84 said:
Ooh so it's only who you deem to take seriously?? You forgot to mention that. Sorry.

Now go make me a sandwich.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I figured it'd be taken as a prerequisite that the forum mongs didn't count.

Go and make your own sandwich, you absolute waste of life.
 
thugpoet said:
Yep and it doesn't bother me at all. Its the name of the game.

Is fighting Oscar at 147 when Oscar hadn't faught there in a decade not stacking the deck, or weight draining cotto, clotetty, or picking Brandon Rios after the ko?

Pac is a good sometimes great fighter, but people only love him because he isn't mayweather and he just so happens to win.

Jacks article is biased under the glow of praise.
Click to expand...

Slack's technical observations are pretty much beyond reproach. There is some glowing praise about Pacquiao as a defining fighter for a generation, but you can't dispute his technical breakdown.

I wrote a similar article several weeks before:
http://a-neutral-corner.blogspot.ca/2014/03/my-two-cents-part-one-meditations-on.html
 
Decent article per his norm but there is some fanboyism in there.

But meh, we all show our bias when writing about our favorites.
 
PUO3 said:
Decent article per his norm but there is some fanboyism in there.

But meh, we all show our bias when writing about our favorites.
Click to expand...

I wrote a poem about Mike Tyson in the 3rd grade. (no joke)

There was serious fan boyism in that one.
 
LogicalInsanity said:
I wrote a poem about Mike Tyson in the 3rd grade. (no joke)

There was serious fan boyism in that one.
Click to expand...

I get a couple drinks down and Ill argue to the death that he is the greatest of all time.
 
He started off a tad hyperbolic, but it wasn't a bad read. I also found the bit about his calves being a big concern going forward to be a bit of an odd thing to say. I know he supposedly had cramps in his calves once or twice, but that hardly sounds like something that's putting his career in peril.
 
A very good read. I enjoy Jack Slack`s articles.

I liked his bit about Pac's weaknesses.
 
Last edited:
Seano said:
Sounds like the typical over enthusiastic Pac fanboy trying to point out things everyone knows.

Manny Pacquiao is just one fighter who "defines" this generation of boxers.
Click to expand...

Let me guess. TL/DR?

Missed this part I guess:

Pacquiao, like any fighter, is still limited. He is a movement-based fighter who likes to be followed. It's part of why he's done so well against men who dwarf him. He gets them to chase, he hammers them with a combination and he angles off before they can touch him.

What Pacquiao is not good at is cutting off the ring. When he is forced to chase, Pacquiao throws himself off balance with his left hand. He can get extremely wild, as he did when he got knocked out by Juan Manuel Marquez who was floundering at the time. If you chase a good counterpuncher, you're normally going to get hurt.
Click to expand...
 
Rozwell said:
Let me guess. TL/DR?

Missed this part I guess:
Click to expand...

Wow, what scathing criticism! He says he's limited and then goes on to describe how he's not limited in the next sentence.
 
Interesting read, but as usual Jack simply talks too damn much.
 
Why is someone not allowed to be a fan without being a "fanboy"? Just once I would like to see a thread about Manny (or May for than matter) where it didn't degenerate into this shite.

Now on to a rebuttal of various points

1. Jack Slack most definitely knows who sweet pea is. Sweet pea is one of my all time favorite fighters and a great fighter but he didn't use angles like Manny does. Whitaker was elusive mainly because of his fantastic head and body movement, as well as his great reflexes. Manny is elusive because of his footwork and foot speed.

Edit: you could make the argument that Tyson was a southpaw that used angles but he was a southy who fought orthodox so that would be stretching the definition.

2 "His lack of discipline is what got him KO'd by Marquez." obviously you didn't read the article completely. Here is the relevant section.

Pacquiao, like any fighter, is still limited. He is a movement-based fighter who likes to be followed. It's part of why he's done so well against men who dwarf him. He gets them to chase, he hammers them with a combination and he angles off before they can touch him.

What Pacquiao is not good at is cutting off the ring. When he is forced to chase, Pacquiao throws himself off balance with his left hand. He can get extremely wild, as he did when he got knocked out by Juan Manuel Marquez who was floundering at the time. If you chase a good counterpuncher, you're normally going to get hurt.
Click to expand...

3.
Next time you label something as "must read," it should maybe actually be must read. That was a fluff piece from a Pacquiao fan. More well written than some - though it's still nothing special - but a fluff piece all the same.

Fluff pieces are only must read when they're hilariously bad.
Click to expand...

Jack doesn't do puff pieces. Jack is one of the best technical fight analysts writing these days. His analysis videos are spot on. check out his youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCl3zMJRgefZm7ELHkIp-xDA

He is a fan and it does come out but he has never let that stop him from being critical where required that I have seen.
 
Seano said:
Wow, what scathing criticism! He says he's limited and then goes on to describe how he's not limited in the next sentence.
Click to expand...
I don't know if that's quite a fair assessment... a lack of vitriol invalidates otherwise reasonable and explained criticisms?
 
Seano said:
Wow, what scathing criticism! He says he's limited and then goes on to describe how he's not limited in the next sentence.
Click to expand...

You must have one hell of a short attention span if you missed where he points out exactly how he's limited in the VERY NEXT PARAGRAPH!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,281,148
Messages
58,344,160
Members
176,009
Latest member
wmmaf

Share this page

Back
Top