Why do some consider May/Pac to be one sided?

JustOnce

JustOnce

On Hiatus
@Gold
Joined
Jan 22, 2015
Messages
24,000
Reaction score
28,126
I watched a fight and I felt that May won. My impression was Mayweather hasn't done shit, but Pacquiao has done less. It looked like Mayweather's grabbing and holding was so effective and Pacquiao was punching air, but Mayweather didn't do much either, evidenced by post fight tactics which I 'think' showed both fighters landing at career low and also percentage wise out of total shots attempted.

I don't agree with Roach's tactic, I thought Manny should've gone out guns blazing like many people thought he should've done, and not really sure if bum shoulder ,if it was,mattered really.

I just don't get it why some people talk about it as if it was a complete masterclass put on by Mayweather, when he hasn't done shit either. Mayweather especially hasn't done much of anything at all in earlier rounds he won, which would've led to majority draw if those rounds went to Pacquiao who has done even less during those rounds.

Floyd Senior I believe said that he wasn't sure that his son won so was bit nervous when the cards were being read.

I don't watch a lot of boxing nor am I a boxing fan, but it just puzzled me and I ended up spending some time on forums after today's fights, and decided to make a thread about it and hopefully get some good inputs. Unlike some mayweather fights where I could see that other guy had no chance as in the mayweather could get his shots off and other guy just wasn't capable of returning the fire back in time, in this fight, it wasn't like that. Manny was always in it, but Floyd was just so good at evading shots.

To clarify, where one guy is superior better than the other guy, I feel like the other guy can control the distance so well that he's not really in a harm's way but can do some damage the other way almost at will, or not so much but to a degree, so it makes me feel like, watching the fight, as it looks like other guy just can't touch him but can't really stopping the other guy from punching him, it almost looks like a movie with a set script, but in this one, there was always a tension where Manny always looked like he always could threaten, and Mayweather always seemed to respect Manny's speed and power.

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
I think that it wouldn't have mattered if Pacquiao was more aggressive, Mayweather's style of defensive boxing was just a nut that Pacquiao wasn't going to crack.

Aggression has its price: stamina and vulnerability. Though I don't doubt Pacquiao had more in the gas tank to pursue a more aggressive offense against Mayweather, I think if Pacquiao got too aggressive, he might've left himself open to a clean shot from Mayweather which could've floored him, and Roach was definitely aware of the possibility. Taking a risk averse approach might've been the best strategy going in, though obviously, it didn't seem to impress the masses.

There was that pivotal point where Pacquiao had Mayweather covered up on the ropes, and was teeing off (where Mayweather looked back at Pacquiao and said "nope"), but realized it wasn't working, and didn't want to gas himself out, so took a step back and let Mayweather off. I think that's a perfect metaphor for the fight in general. Mayweather's style seems to be uncrackable, which is why it's so impressive to watch.
 
If Pac got floored, there would have been no chance of rematch and there would be a loss of revenue for future matches against anyone else. Pac never wanted to win. He just needed the money.
 
The reason some consider it to be one-sided is that it very much was one-sided. Boxing is not just a sport, it's also an artform, and Floyd is a brilliant artist. He had far too many dimensions to his game for Pacquiao to solve in just 12 rds. Floyd set the scene, gave Pac his script, made him do the dance of his choice. "Pac with a different strategy" theories don't make sense to me. I believe Pac came to throw, but Floyd is a MASTER of making his opponents fight to his tempo, throwing off their offense, taking away their confidence, and dodging what little offense they do believe they can connect. Pac never looked so lost.
 
Although Floyd clearly won, it was no one sided ass whooping. That's more of a fan trash talking other fans type of thing. There was no ass whooping here. Neither guy had a mark on them when the fight was over. Floyd's thing is to slow the tempo to a shot-for-shot type of fight where he just can't be beat. But with Pac, he fought probably THE most carefully I've ever seen a fighter fight and was using dirty, Hopkinsesque methods to smother Pac's aggression. He actually never had a big moment in the fight.

I've watched this fight very closely and some of those rounds were decided by literally a punch or two. Both guys were tentative. I know most found it boring but I didn't. It was awesome watching them trying to figure each other out. Pac came to fight and actually managed to hurt Floyd twice but couldn't capitalize on it. Hurting his shoulder in the fourth was a big blow, as his power in his right hand was would be a big key to victory. But after that he just didn't have anything behind it, despite still trying to throw it. I was impressed by Pac's defense here. A lot of Floyd's shots that were making the crowd ooh and ahh were blocked. But with Pac injured and unable to get anything going for the rest of the fight, Floyd was able to hold and stifle and manage to land some meaningful punches to just win the round. It's a shame he didn't make the fight more exciting for the fans but Floyd's never really been known for that.
 
It was pretty one sided. Pac won couple of rounds but it wasn't an especially competitive affair. Pac got outworked and outboxed in at least 10 rounds.
 
borntoloseNOT said:
The reason some consider it to be one-sided is that it very much was one-sided. Boxing is not just a sport, it's also an artform, and Floyd is a brilliant artist. He had far too many dimensions to his game for Pacquiao to solve in just 12 rds. Floyd set the scene, gave Pac his script, made him do the dance of his choice. "Pac with a different strategy" theories don't make sense to me. I believe Pac came to throw, but Floyd is a MASTER of making his opponents fight to his tempo, throwing off their offense, taking away their confidence, and dodging what little offense they do believe they can connect. Pac never looked so lost.
Click to expand...
This. Pac has NEVER looked so clueless in the ring as he did in that fight.
 
I think people were more disappointed that the fight went down exactly as most fans predicted it would.
 
From a points perspective, it was one sided. I think the reality is that the difference within each round was relatively minor. The accumulation of those minor victories added up to a fairly dominant performance...
 
10-2 (for me, on my card) is a pretty wide margin. It wasn't like Pac was beaten half to death, but that margin is wide enough to say he was outclassed in there that night. Even dominated isn't too strong of a word for a 10-2 bout, IMO. But it wasn't a violent beatdown by any stretch. It is what it is. It is what I expected it would be, and it is about what I expect it would be in a rematch.
 
Had it even through the first 6 rounds, then Floyd shutting him out after that. Neither guy was impressive really imo, fight hurt boxing in the short term.
 
Just an awful fight. I would like to holding called more and would like to see how this might have affected Floyd late career. Oh well.
 
PHATV said:
10-2 (for me, on my card) is a pretty wide margin. It wasn't like Pac was beaten half to death, but that margin is wide enough to say he was outclassed in there that night. Even dominated isn't too strong of a word for a 10-2 bout, IMO. But it wasn't a violent beatdown by any stretch. It is what it is. It is what I expected it would be, and it is about what I expect it would be in a rematch.
Click to expand...
Good point. To me, a guy losing wide like that means his opponent was pretty dominant. I suppose to some fans, if a guy doesn't take a beating and doesn't lose his legs at some point, then it wasn't so bad.
 
Seano said:
Good point. To me, a guy losing wide like that means his opponent was pretty dominant. I suppose to some fans, if a guy doesn't take a beating and doesn't lose his legs at some point, then it wasn't so bad.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, you can barely win 10 rounds or you can clearly and dominantly win 10 rounds. 10-9 must point system leaves a lot up for interpretation.
 
ZroC said:
I think people were more disappointed that the fight went down exactly as most fans predicted it would.
Click to expand...

Correct. You knew Pac would look good at times but Floyd would control the fight, the rounds and thus the fight. It was never going to be a slugfest.
 
pac had 2 rounds and several moments thats it
 
It was a boring fight, and I was really disappointed about Pacquiao. Mayweather just did what he always did: fight smart, control the distance, throwing single counter punches. I expected Pacman to go all-out guns blazing, and he just punched air, never cut the ring and really didn't seem to make an effort whatsoever. For such a hyped fight, I stayed up tot 5 in the morning to watch it on a crappy livestream, and it was boring as f**k.
 
Seano said:
This. Pac has NEVER looked so clueless in the ring as he did in that fight.
Click to expand...
Pac looked pretty clueless against Saskul, difference is his punching power bailed him out there
 
Seano said:
It was pretty one sided. Pac won couple of rounds but it wasn't an especially competitive affair. Pac got outworked and outboxed in at least 10 rounds.
Click to expand...

how could it be 'one sided' that Floyd barely won, albeit clearly, more rounds to win? Floyd didn't land shit either. he just landed more in more rounds and won
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,254,406
Messages
56,645,295
Members
175,331
Latest member
psykro

Share this page

Back
Top