SB Nation User Blog: Fj-3

Floyd Mayweather, Jr.-Brian Kenny II Interview on ESPN embed

Fj-3 — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 09:51:42 -0000

Floyd Mayweather, Jr.-Brian Kenny II Interview on ESPN embed

On Mayweather, Marquez, and De la Hoya ganging up on Pacquiao

Fj-3 — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:32:05 -0000

Mark Vester over at Boxing Scene just reported about a press conference for the September 19 Mayweather-Marquez bout wherein the two fighters involved, with the co-promoter Oscar De la Hoya (Mayweather is the other promoter) took digs on current pound-for-pound kingpin Manny Pacquiao.

Floyd Mayweather, Jr. commenced the verbal lashings, starting sofly by praising Pacquiao sparsely, but then proceeding to take him down the pedestal quickly: "Pacquiao is a good fighter, I don't think nothing away from him," Mayweather said. "He hasn't done anything I haven't done. Where was he when I was dominating the '90s? He hasn't called me out. I'm not worried about him. With or without him, I'm comfortable. I'm happy. He don't make me. I don't chase opponents. Opponents chase me. The biggest fight in boxing is Mayweather versus anybody."

After side commenting on Pacquiao and his promoter Bob Arum of Top Rank, he continued by raising his opponent Juan Manuel Marquez over Pacquiao, by virtue of his views about their two respective fights, "I would have to rate (Marquez) over Manny. For a guy to knock him down three times in the first round and come back to get a draw, we know who lost."

So, Floyd, you "don't take anything away" from Pacquiao, eh?

From your sea of unceasingly entertaining comments, I'll give you one thing you're taking away from him: his win against Marquez.

Mayweather has always been a joy to listen to, not necessarily pleasant to hear all the time, in press conferences, but he also has a habit of contradicting himself or blurring his comments at times, his interview with ESPN's Brian Kenny comes to mind. I have another recent interview to share to back this up.

As head-scratching as the above words regarding Pacquiao may be, De la Hoya and Marquez were quick to attest to Pretty Boy's beliefs, aggrandizing it in no time: "I'd have to go with Floyd. I felt more skill coming out of Mayweather than I did with Pacquiao. The winner between Mayweather and Marquez is the best pound-for-pound fighter on the planet. The fans are the ones who speak and we all know Marquez beat Pacquiao."

Marquez kicks in, "Mayweather is the best. He retired undefeated. When I fought Manny I thought I beat him both times."

Okay.

Well I wouldn't write this if I don't have my reservations about it and yes, I beg to disagree.

De la Hoya opined that Marquez defeated Pacquiao, and saying that "the fans are the ones to speak" not only looks to condone his previous statement that "the winner between Mayweather and Marquez is the best pound-for-pound fighter", it also points to his view that "we all know Marquez beat Pacquiao" as if as a confirmation. Well, Oscar, I'm one of those "fans" and I'm ready to declare that there indeed is a crowd that believes otherwise as much as there is who believe likewise, and I respect your opinions or theirs. But for the record, I think Pacquiao beat Marquez both times. When I first watch Marquez-Pacquiao on TV about five years ago, I originally thought that Pacquiao was lucky to escape with a draw, considering how he was thoroughly outboxed by Marquez the rest of the way. But when I watch it years later, I scored it and I saw it differently. It wasn't as "thorough" as I first thought-- I scored it for Pacquiao with the gap as much as HBO ringside judge Harold Lederman's card, 115-112. The second one, I've watched it countless times and it's one of my most favorite fights ever, and I scored it at least thrice and always came up with the same denominations: 114-113 for Pacquiao. That's my opinion. You can lambast me all you want but all the argumentation that matters is only with the official judges.

I can't help but see the comments of these three as something that seems to reek of jealousy. Let's see: Mayweather is jealous that he is no longer unanimously considered the pound-for-pound champion that Pacquiao is now. De la Hoya is jealous because he's no longer boxing's top superstar and cash cow, titles which Pacquiao basically took away from him in their infamous "Dream Match". Marquez? Well, he could've been at Pacquiao's position right now had the judges swayed the decision in his favor by at least just a point, picking up the mantle as boxing's best when the abovementioned Mayweather retired. Maybe. I don't know. It seems.

By ganging up on Pacquiao and making him look bad with the things they said, Mayweather, De la Hoya, and Marquez are the ones who are looking bad.

Welterweight division: golden era or just golden era of money?

Fj-3 — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 16:57:55 -0000

Are we truly entering a new "golden era" of welterweights?

If we're meaning "gold" as a financial reference, then I say we do.

But if we're talking of an era where great fighters exist at one time, in one division, where they can face each other, and it could create epic moments... well, you get the idea.

Not so fast, eh?

It has become gradually noticeable how virtually all media platforms (prominently HBO) of current seem to deliberately lead us to believe that welterweight is boxing's best and deepest division of the moment. Recently, boxing's most respected institution tried to fill us in on the scuttlebutt (it was presented as "Welterweight Heaven" in their web page, but I can't read and link the article as of the moment because it is unexplainably missing... what the heck?).

Anyway, that's the column that brought to me the idea of a new welterweight "golden era". The weight class's historical disposition contribute to the primping it gets from the media-- in a sport erroneously perceived by many as a dying one, this division has to be relevant again in these terms.

A short time ago, this was a point broached by ESPN. Eric Raskin wrote that a golden age of welterweight is in ocurrence, with Floyd Mayweather as the gold standard. Bad Left Hook recently exposed the fact that welterweight is just about 5-deep. Floyd Mayweather is returning, but the fact is he left the sport and hasn't even fought yet. And even if he fights (Juan Manuel Marquez), he's fighting a non-legitimate welterweight.

It is uncertain whether those media people truly believe in their hearts that welterweight is indeed the sport's deepest division or they are forced to do so by the powers that be. But it gets to us. What seem to be blinding them is the fact that welterweight seems this way because it is boxing's "money" division today. The biggest fights that can be made in all of boxing right now are all looming within this very division, financially-wise. Down economy and all.

Let's examine SC's top five list: Shane Mosley, Miguel Cotto, Joshua Clottey, Andre Berto, and Luis Collazo. All legitimate welterweights who fights and actually plans to stay fighting in this weight class. But commentators, reporters, and journalists routinely include Manny Pacquiao, Floyd Mayweather, Juan Manuel Marquez, and Paul Williams in the conversations. Antonio Margarito is obscure at least for the moment, but his name still lingers in talks of this weight class. In actuality, legitimate welterweight topnotch competition are found in those five guys mentioned above and beyond them the class is just average. Manny Pacquiao is not a welterweight and won't even fight at the 147 limit in his next bout. Mayweather has long been inactive from the sport and his return would be against a lightweight in Juan Manuel Marquez, but shamefully, though, Mayweather managed to get them to fight at the welterweight limit, so if it's really that bad then just let it. Paul Williams seems to be moving on to higher weights and it might not be good for him to drop to 147 again.

But the reason that he will do that? Simple. It's the money. It's also the reason why fighters from the periphery of this weight class wants to face fighters in this division, which makes their name eligible to be thrown in "welterweight is the best division" argument.

The crop of fighters at welterweight does not constitute a weak division at all, but to call it the best needs reconsideration. But as for the money division? Definitely.

To call it a golden age or a golden era of the division needs serious investigation. But the irritating wonder here is that, why is it being touted as such if many other divisions surpass it in terms talent and competition? Jr. Featherweight, Featherweight, Lightweight, and Jr. Welterweight are arguably better. Jr. Flyweight (and the few higher classes just above it), middleweight, and super middleweight are not bad ones. The higher classes are pretty bland, with boxing's supposed chief division laughed at as the epitome of it (at the very least, though, it's picking up some excitement for the near future, but that's just what it is for now).

Let's say, then, that welterweight is in a golden era right now. How about the other divisions I just mentioned? Are they entering a glittering phase, too? Isn't it necessary that before declaring a golden age of welterweights by comparing it to the past, we should look at the present and compare it against the other divisions? I don't know, but saying it's having such an epoch while it isn't even the sport's best division somehow doesn't appeal very much.

Now, among these other questions, why does the welterweight division continue to get much love? While the class entering, for the umpteen time, a golden era is still questionable, the "golden era" it is having in terms of money is most certainly not.

Artest to the Lakers! or Artest to the Lakers?

Fj-3 — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:46:59 -0000

Ron Artest is now a Laker.

The story of the NBA now, according to ESPN (go argue with them), is that Shaq’s the past, Kobe’s the present top dog, and LeBron’s the next big thing. Clearly, Artest chose the NOW. Or maybe, he just chose Los Angeles over Cleveland. After all those, It’s the Lakers, and it’s all about championships.

I’m happy, of course.

But it complicates some things, namely, Lamar Odom and Trevor Ariza. Ariza is reportedly gone and leaving for Houston, which makes it look like a trade between him and Artest– but it’s not. It’s not also entirely an accident, though.

With the lineup that the Lakers have before Artest, they are still good enough to win championship. Artest’s arrival pushes a guarantee, especially now that the Cleveland Cavaliers have added Shaquille O’neal and the Orlando Magic added Vince Carter. And his signing with the Lakers leaves Cleveland (his other option) longing for another piece. So, sorry, Cleveland, Orlando, even Boston (courting Sheed, eh?), and the NBA: the best just got better.

I feel good about this, but rethinking, I’m not sure Artest over Ariza is a better choice. Acquiring Artest virtually means allowing a similar defensive player and offensive contributor in Ariza to go, which he did and almost deliberately to the same team that Artest left. I know the Lakers are the NOW, but as a fan, I’m looking for them to build a dynasty. Ariza is young, he has a potential to be a star, and he only looks to get better. Won’t a dynasty be better served by a young energy guy like him staying?

Probably, but I hope things go well for the Lakers anyway. The Lakers will be monsters next season (73 win season, anyone?), Artest is in his prime (29) and is of course a better player than Ariza. But Ariza can and will improve. Man… I hope Artest is still good for a number of years to fortify this dynasty I’m anticipating. I just hope that Artest won’t be carcinogenic to the Laker locker room. He said he’s happy to be a Laker. I hope so. No problems between him and Kobe, especially, so that it manifests into an even better team. Winning solves a lot of problems, and winning is no problem to L.A. I don’t know if Odom would stay, but the salary of Artest stays at a mid-level exception (I do think it’s fair to give him a better contract, but I hope it doesn’t shoo away Odom). I know, I’m consoling myself, but after all, I’m not sure if Ariza would even surpass Artest as a player.

I guess you have to go to the now and the certainty.

Like Artest did.

Crossroads fight: Malignaggi's chances to walk out the victor against Diaz

Fj-3 — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 18:33:45 -0000

FanPost promoted by SC

At the very least, the upcoming fight between Paulie Malignaggi vs. Juan Diaz invites interest among boxing fans. Both are recently coming off significant losses against simply better fighters (of which they shouldn't be ashamed of, especially Diaz), both have two losses, and are looking for redemption. The style matchup here is irresistible: a boxer and a brawler. Both considered light punchers, this doesn't promise to deliver a knockout, but I find it intriguing nonetheless.

These two fighters are still considered young and can still make it to the top. They still hang around as contenders in their respective divisions (lightweight for Diaz and jr. welterweight for Malignaggi). Had they not lost big, they wouldn't be here at this point. But on August 22 in Diaz's hometown of Houston, TX, they will have to translate their meeting at the crossroads into a fight in a ring, where the victor may go further as he leaves the other potentially stuck at a fork in the road.

I say Malignaggi needs this win more than Diaz. Diaz is younger (25), and if he loses against Malignaggi (28) he can still come back down to 135 and stay there, as the top dog, especially now that Juan Manuel Marquez is fighting way above the weight class that he rules. But both Malignaggi and Diaz can use a fight like this to bounce back.

The August 22 tussle will figure to be an entertaining fight between two entertaining fighters. The "Magic Man" is flashy and slick, while the "Baby Bull" just keeps on punching and moving in. As a fan, I am torn between the two, as I like them both as fighters, but as for observation, I am not one of those who believe that Diaz is an overwhelming favorite in this one. Yes, Malignaggi's KO ratio more than speaks for his lack of power, but I think he still has more power than the people who diss him in comment boxes, believing that they themselves can take his punch. For these fans who hate Malignaggi, give him a break. He talks trash, but as Diaz's own trainer/manager Willie Savannah said, "he's respectful." Diaz is no power puncher either, with a not-so-stunning 50% KO rate.

Ricky Hatton may have shown that the way to overturn the Magic Man's tricks, as the Ed. (SC) puts it, is to walk right through him and pressure him, but let's not forget that the "Hitman," with the power that he has, let alone compared to Diaz, wasn't able to knock Malignaggi out. Malignaggi has a pretty solid chin. Plus, Diaz is moving up in weight, demanding a catchweight of 138 1/2 instead of fighting at 140. But still, moving up, don't you think that it may affect his already regular power? Couple that with the above said solid chin of Malignaggi and we take the KO out of the equation. Furthermore, Malignaggi is used to fighting (and punching) bigger guys and Diaz has settled in 135 comfortably for the longest time. How will Diaz respond to the punches of a bigger guy? Albeit a feather-fisted one in Malignaggi? And will Malignaggi look a stronger puncher against a guy moving up in weight? They quibbled about the weight, which shows that maybe both of them has disadvantageous problems on it. Is 138 1/2 a fair compromise? Or will it affect any of them negatively? Then there's the height factor, as Malignaggi has two and a half inches over the 5-foot-6 Diaz.

With that said, Diaz remains the favorite. He is younger, more powerful, and his pressure may remind Malignaggi some Hatton nightmares. This is a majority among fans. If some of them even chose Malignaggi, their picks are either only UD or SD, which could still be a difficult thing to secure as he is fighting in the baby bull's den.

I definitely respect other people's opinions but I hope that I've made some people to rethink their assessment of this one. Now, what does the SB Nation think?

De la Hoya’s Golden Exit

Fj-3 — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:32:48 -0000

The venerable Ring Magazine, through its Yahoo-overhauled new comprehensive website, has just featured Oscar De la Hoya with a list for his next ideal opponent. It’s been almost a month since his annihilation at the hands (or say, fists) of Manny Pacquiao and we haven’t heard from his camp yet about a plan for his possible golden exit this year.

We all know that De la Hoya didn’t look so golden in his last fight against new superstar and still pound-for-pound king Manny Pacquiao in their “Dream Match” that many people now think he’s done and he should be done for good. More than a few even believe that the sight of him surrendering on his stool will forever tarnish his legacy.

“The Golden Boy” stopped short of declaring his retirement, but did concede that he has to “be smart”. Does being smart mean he has to retire? Or does being smart mean he has to be even more careful in picking his next opponent?

Yes, De la Hoya looked pretty shot against “PacMan”, and not to take anything away from the brilliant performance and win of the Filipino fighter, I happen to think that the weight drain contributed a lot on the Mexican-American’s poor showing. As one ages, it’s also much more difficult to lose weight than to gain weight, so his 35-year old body didn’t help himself cope up with the weight loss either.

To top it all off, the unprecedented explosion of Pacquiao against De la Hoya exclaimed that De la Hoya’s camp erred in the selection of opponent. So the lesson to be learned would either be that De la Hoya should retire, as experts and many fans in consensus believe, or be even more careful in selecting his next opponent, as I imagine. If the latter may be the case, the accusation of fans that De la Hoya’s opponents throughout his career was handpicked for him to beat finally backfired on him on the surprising outcome of the Dream Match. I most certainly don’t buy that, as I see De la Hoya as a tough fighter who have fought the best competition available to him, and has always put on a gallant performance, in a win or a loss. The current no. 1 pound-for-pound boxer in the world, Pacquiao, is an example of a top opponent, but we all know by now that he is an exemption to my claim.

But again, that’s in part due to De la Hoya’s apparent discomfort in the 147 lb. Weight class, as well as with Pac’s blinding speed above all else.

It was a matchmaking logical error, in addition to the tactical mistake by his team about his weight coming into the fight. Excuses or not, maybe there’s still reason for Oscar De la Hoya to continue. And if they somehow sense that, here’s my idea of what could be sensible: Vernon “the Viper” Forrest.

Selecting his opponents will still be easy for ODLH, and already there’s a pool laid out there for Oscar to pick his opponent even at this point in his career. Boxing fans may not trust him anymore like they did before his match with Pacquiao, but boxers within weight reach still want to get a shot at him, because the money is likely to still be there, and De la Hoya is at his most vulnerable state as a fighter in his career. Right now, he wouldn't be pitted against most young fighters like Pacquiao, but fans would have no problem if he were matched with another veteran. Oscar is good, still good, and he looked to be a fighter who will avoid the bumpy road to the exit until he looked helpless at the ropes in round 7 looking at Pacquiao pummeling him in their bout last month. He has fought the wrong guys, it seems, and now it's time to settle for guys near his age, rather than go southward towards an Ivan Calderon.

Fight the old, because he can't fight the small? One can put it that way.

Why would it make sense to fight Vernon Forrest? Vernon Forrest is one of those few "oldies" who still has "it". Well, the Viper has only defeated his twice-tormentor Shane Mosley also twice, coupled with the fact that Mosley is fighting at welterweight, De la Hoya does not have to fight Mosley anymore. Forrest is also a champion, and rated no. 1 by the Ring Magazine in a weight class De la Hoya is more comfortable with. At his rating, people don’t think of Forrest as a washed-up fighter, unlike Felix Trinidad (De la Hoya would love to have revenge and we do too, so this may count), another boxer lined up in the De la Hoya sweepstakes, or raffle, right now. Julio Cesar Chavez, Jr. is another young gun offering intrigue with a match-up with De la Hoya, but the son of the legendary Chavez Sr. is still an unproven commodity with still unfurnished talent and skills. That bout would have stirred a lot of plotlines, but plotlines alone which may not satisfy audiences when it comes to De la Hoya’s fights. Don’t get me wrong but if this were to happen, I think Oscar wins. Decisively. Plus, people criticized De la Hoya for not taking on Antonio Margarito instead when he fought Pacquiao, saying he's a coward or something to that effect by avoiding men his own size. Let's not forget that Oscar showed interest - and consideration - in facing Miguel Cotto, a natural welterweight, but he lost to Margarito. As I remember clearly, De la Hoya refused to fight Mexicans for his last fight, so "The Tijuana Tornado" was cut off. My point? Chavez Jr., with all the rivalries and stories they have between them, is a Mexican.

If De la Hoya could defeat Forrest, he would get both a championship and glory, enough to warrant him a “golden exit” and escape the usual route of aging fighters who leave the sport at the mercy of a younger fighter in destroyed fashion. Forget the money. Anyway, it might still be there (just a smile from Oscar, if nothing else).

It is clear that Oscar De la Hoya does not have a career left for him like his heart wants, but one fight can and will prove that he’s a true champion like those others who still have “one big fight” in him.

The gut here is that he will still fight again, and with smarter decisions in and out of the ring this time, he can still win.