QUOTE (Eighty88Eight @ Aug 10 2011, 09:07 PM)
I don't think Manny was entirely prepared to fight a guy who didn't want to engage. Unless Pac bum rushed Mosley (giving Mosley his only shot to win), there isn't much a fighter can do against an experienced veteran who still has power and speed but doesn't want to throw a punch unless given an open target. However, Roach and Pac are already prepared for movement if it comes down to it. You don't beat guys like Pac and Floyd if they already know how you're gonna fight (i.e. Hatton).
Having watched Mayweather's recent fights very closely, notably the last two, I think the added muscle to his shoulders and legs have robbed him of fluidity and energy. He was incapable of putting a combination together down the stretch against Marquez, and if you pay close attention and turn off the announcers, he gets hit with a number of clean body punches, including one which buckled his knees against Mosley. I think Floyd feels tired down the stretch of fights lately and I think the years of candy, soda, no vitamins, and no conditioning coach are taking a slight toll on him. He's still perhaps the top fighter in the world, but he's not what he once was. His father has expressed the same thoughts.
It certainly takes courage to fight back and counter against Pacquiao. He's very rarely in range when he lunges off balance, and Morales and Marquez would never have given him the trouble that they did had they not struck Pac with some trepidation with their power and aggressive retaliations. Mayweather can sit back and counter if he wants, but he's not going to win that way. It's not only "circling" that Pac has to do, but also lead, then counter and get into that sort of rhythm. Mayweather has never faced movement, speed, intelligence, and power in one opponent before.
I agree with some of your points. However, using the view of Mayweather Snr. to argument a point only helps to weaken such a point in most cases. The man is simply incoherent, and mostly argues out of turn. He's been held on positions as diverse as "Jr. is never going to fight a southpaw again...," to "my son will not accept that Pacquiao trains in the Philippines for a fight that would stage in the US..." The first type would usually be debunked by Junior shortly afterwards and many times over, and we have reasons to believe his son would not necessarily subscribe to the second type. The man doesn't even train his son, one of the reasons being that they fundamentally disagree in and outside the ring, so how would he be a credible authority?
On the two fighting rivals themselves, It's ok to state that Mayweather has never faced the level of qualities you see in Pacquiao. It is also ok though to say Pacquiao has never faced the level of qualities that are generally associated with Mayweather. So it goes both ways. The reason I'm making this point is that when the qualities of only one of the two "gladiators" is exclusively showcased in an argument, it essentially just leads to a phantom conclusion.