Home News Current Champs WAIL! Encyclopedia
The Cyber Boxing Zone Message Board
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 58 of 58

Thread: MORALES-PAQ CARD RESULTS & DISCUSSION THREAD 9/10/05

  1. #31
    kikibalt
    Guest
    Imo Barrera should not fight
    anymore he is going to get hurt

    Frank B.

  2. #32
    Rafael
    Guest
    I had it 118-111 Raheem. I think Morales lost primarily because he was in a horrible styles matchup, not because he was not the bigger guy. In my opinion, he would have a nightmare of a time with a guy like Raheem (who uses angles, and is a fast and accurate puncher) at any weight. Maybe a younger Morales would make it closer, but this was just an awful stytles mismatch. Neither Morales, nor his cornermen hadn't a clue about how to fight a guy with Raheem's skills. This was almost as bad as Winky vs. Tito.

  3. #33
    timayres
    Guest

    Raheem pulls it off

    Big credit to Raheem for going into the belly of the beast to upset the ppv showdown, both outboxing and outpunching Morales. Terrific effort, nice to see courage and execution rewarded. Tim

  4. #34
    diggity1
    Guest

    Re: Zahir

    raheem lapped him plain & simple

  5. #35
    Dhalgren
    Guest

    Re: Zahir

    My prediction that this would be a very tricky fight for Erik doesn't look so ridiculous now, eh?

    Can't remember who else said the same thing, but credit to whoever it was for noticing that this would be a bad styles match-up for Morales.

  6. #36
    GorDoom
    Guest

    Re: Tonight's Card

    I want to give Greg Beyer a Tip O' The Fedora for his EXCELLENT reportage tonight. I didn't see the fights but after reading Greg's report I know EXACTLY what happened ...

    Real good job, pal.

    GorDoom

  7. #37
    Roberto Aqui
    Guest

    Re: Zahir

    It wasn't a bad style matchup for Morales as it was a slowly fading legend moving up in weight against a quick young improving fighter. Raheem is the one who altered his style it seems at just the right time. He sure wasn't ready for a belt the night he lost to Juarez.

  8. #38
    Dhalgren
    Guest

    Re:Last night in LA

    With Pacquiao it could be the case that the trainers only want to make small refinements to his style because they don't want to negate his greatest strengths, i.e. his speed and power. Of course there is no reason why those things really need to be affected by basic changes in footwork and defensive style, but there is always a danger when you try to turn an exciting, powerful fighter into more of a technical fighter. It was a problem for Naseem Hamed, and more recently (although to a lesser degree) Acelino Freitas.

    I can't see how the result of Morales-Pac will be any different next time though, unless Erik fades badly or Roach somehow gets Manny fighting more intelligently.

  9. #39
    Kurant
    Guest

    Re: Re:Last night in LA

    JLP what on earth are you talking about?

    This was a setup for a huge PPV Showdown for Pacman/Morales. not an eliminator for Pac to fight Raheem. Raheem is a 135 pound fighter, not 130. Pacman is already out of his element at 130, IMO. Dumbest thing he could ever do is take a fight against a guy 2 classes higher then what Pacman SHOULD be in.

  10. #40
    TKO Tom
    Guest

    Last night in LA

    I saw the fights last night and I was disappointed with Erik Morales. My opinion of Manny Pacquiao hasn't changed.

    I think Erik Morales' lifestyle has caught up to him. There have been lots of rumors of him living hard when it comes to drugs and alcohol in between fights and it's no secret that he lets his weight balloon well above his best fighting weight.

    In the post-fight interview Morales claimed that he trained well, but I don't believe that. Morales looked pudgy to me at 134 1/2 and it is clearly not a good weight for him. Last night he weighed 148 unofficially. Morales should go no higher than a well-trained 128-130.

    I also believe that Morales underestimated how tricky Zahir Raheem was going to be and how slick and elusive he was going to be. It was doubly bad for Morales, because he wasn't in the physical or mental condition he needed to be to deal with the style that Raheem possesses. Morales also hasn't fought a strong, well-trained - and dare I say black fighter - with that type of style in years - if ever.

    Fighters are very calculating type personalities and many of them take chances in life and everything that they do. Last night was just a colossal miscalculation on Erik Morales' part. I think Morales will look better next time, and I see absolutely no reason why the rematch with Pacquiao should not go forward and happen next.

    In terms of Manny Pacquiao? I see him making the same mistakes he has always made. The HBO crew did a nice job last night of pointing out those technical mistakes that Pacquiao makes both offensively and defensively. Manny is an exciting guy, no question, but I'm perplexed as to why either he or his trainer, Freddie Roach, cannot correct his glaring stylistic flaws.

    :hat

  11. #41
    Chuck1052
    Guest

    Re: Re:Last night in LA

    Looking at Zahir Raheem's record, it looks like he
    has been fighting as a lightweight for awhile.
    That brings up a question.....why did he take
    the bout with Rocky Juarez? After all, he
    weighed 126 pounds for the latter bout,
    which is alot lighter that he usually weighed.
    Of course, Raheem was also fighting in
    Juarez's home territory and Robert
    Gonzalez, the third man, did much to
    ruin Raheem's chances to win the bout.

    Could it be that Raheem would not have
    got the chance to fight Erik Morales if
    he didn't lose the bout with Juarez? Man!
    Raheem has quite a bit of ability and it
    looks like his emphatic win over Morales
    has given him a big boost. Meanwhile,
    Juarez got his ears pinned back in his
    last bout. Boxing is a funny game.

    - Chuck Johnston

  12. #42
    diggity1
    Guest

    Morales logic

    I love how when Morales chose not to slug it out with Pac, it's called boxing but when Raheem chooses not to slug it out with Morales, it's running.

  13. #43
    Kurant
    Guest

    Re: Morales logic

    ^^^

    Isn't that the troof!

    Raheem put up a hell of a fight, I'm intrested to see where he goes from here.

  14. #44
    ShawnTheBleeder
    Guest

    boxing... what a hoot

    Raheem wouldn't have gotten the call if he'd beaten Juarez. Just like Holyfield wouldn't have gotten Tyson had Bowe not KO'd Evander.

    Morales is an all-time whiner. His dad bitching about the ref was hilarious, too. That started in round 7 or so? "You're not getting a fair shake!" They knew their guy was done early in this one.

    Congrats to Raheem. The Winky Wright of his division. Look forward to seeing him in three or four years when he gets another notable fight.
    Shawn

  15. #45
    jyoungfan2
    Guest

    Re: boxing... what a hoot

    Morales corner kept telling him that the ref was doing a lousy job and not to trust the ref. No one knew what they were talking about. Raheem slipped at least 1/2 dozen times on the logo just off the center of the ring. At first they thought it was water, but probably the vinyl or plastic used in the logo. I know they get some nice advertising bucks for the logo, but I think they should be done away with for the safety of the fighters.
    congrats to Zaheer.
    morales showed little class in his post fight interview.

  16. #46
    Todd Hodgson
    Guest

    Morales

    The ringside- and press-scoring madness continues...this from Doug Fischer's column today:

    I respect Julie Lederman and her father, Harold, who is without a doubt one of my favorite people in boxing, but I did not see the same fight they did. In fact, watching from ringside (where I did not have to hear Jim Lampley shout out every single punch he THINKS Raheem landed), I thought Morales did enough to win the bout or at least pull out a draw (which, believe it or not, was a common scorecard among the ringside press). Watching the replay on HBO2 yesterday, I scored the fight for Raheem ó by ONE point. The television angles and close ups (not to mention the endless replays of Raheemís best shots and typical Lamps cheerleading) made me appreciate more of what the classy Philly fighter was doing in there. Watching the tube, I scored six of the first nine rounds for Raheem. I scored the 10th round even. I scored the 11th and 12th rounds for El Terrible, which gave me a 115-114 tally.

    I wonít argue with anyone who had Raheem up by two or three points. Anything more than a three-point margin and I have to respectfully disagree. No big deal. Sometimes people see different fights in the same bout.

    [...]

    I thought Morales won between five (watching on TV) and eight rounds (watching from ringside). I donít give a ratís ass what you, Harold, or anyone else thinks of my scorecard, either.
    I thought Morales won two or three rounds.

  17. #47
    kikibalt
    Guest

    Re: boxing... what a hoot

    who ever say Raheem was running is wrong he just out
    box the hell out of Morales, an his corner people did't have the
    know how to tell him how to adjust.
    Morales lost because Raheem was the better fighter

    Frank B.

  18. #48
    JLP 6
    Guest

    Re: boxing... what a hoot

    Morales' dad never gave any instructions on how to deal with the problem in front of his fighter. Nothing.

    Morales in turn had no idea how to adjust and went out and improvised. He lost because of it. It was really sad but enlighting to see Morales reduced to shaking his right hand around, talking, and firing it wildly.

    That stunned me almost as much as the right hand that sent Morales flying across the ring.

  19. #49
    gregbeyer
    Guest

    Re: boxing... what a hoot

    when asked what happened and if the weight was a contrbutor to the loss morales said it was more because he fought a difficult fighter....how is that such a lack of class?
    greg

  20. #50
    gregbeyer
    Guest

    scoring

    todd,
    when i told gordoom that i was set up to do the round by round here he told me that i did not have to because you were doing it. when i said i wanted to do it anyway he said to go ahead because it would be interesting to show different perspectives. now i really wish you had. i have always respected your reporting but man did we get a different picture.

    i thought that morales lost this fight going away...it looked to me like the only thing he had going for him was zahir's poor footing. raheem is not a great puncher but he landed cleanly enough that it appeared eric was never let to mount an attack if many of the ringside guys had it as you see it then i guess the disparity in what is seen on the tube and what is seen from ringside is such that i doubt we should do commentary from a seat at home....

    as far as lampleys cheerleading goes...i never pay any attention to the guy....to me he is not a boxing man...he may be there and in a position to rant but i have no respect for his eye. too many times i have seen him call a right a left and too many times give credit for a punch landed to the guy that actually just recieved one....i have more respect for you and the guys that know how to cover this sport. thats why i am so amazed by our difference of opinion...still its the candy store of life and no big deal...just puzzling.
    greg

  21. #51
    Todd Hodgson
    Guest

    Scoring

    Gregg, that was Doug Fischer's opion from his Monday column that I quoted, not my opinion. As I said at the end of my last post, I thought Morales won three rounds maximum. No idea what Fischer and the ringside people saw that we didn't.

  22. #52
    StingerKarl
    Guest

    Re: Scoring

    Guys, I watched the fight with the sound off like I always do and I gave Erik 2 rounds.
    I have yet to listen to that non-stop nonsense from those commentators, and probably won't.
    Doug and his friend are the only ones I know of who gave the fight to Erik Morales.
    Talk about being on another planet.
    Karl

  23. #53
    gregbeyer
    Guest

    Re: Scoring

    sorry todd.....remember gilda??

    neveeeeeeeeeeermind!
    greg

  24. #54
    diggity1
    Guest

    Re: Scoring

    Greg, I thought you did a great job. You have to be the nicest guy & truest gentleman I know if that was your true reaction to what you thought was Todd's post. I would have told Todd to blow it out of his ass & wipe it with the Morales poster hanging over his bed.

    I thought this fight was even far less competitive & controversial than Morales/Pac. People may have strongly been in a certain corner for the fight which makes close rounds difficult to score at times but I thinked getting clearly outboxed is just as hard to ignore. Pac, although the "ineffective" aggressor in much of their fight, was clearly outboxed by Morales & not too visibly bothered by someone rumored to have a big punch. Morales, not even the aggressor in this fight, was even more clearly outboxed by Raheem & even visibly bothered by someone not rumored to have much of a punch.
    It's was all pretty clear to me.

    Did anyone catch Steward say Rahir Zaheem & Ledermans destruction of the Nevada state commission boxing rules?
    They should take the alcohol from these clowns, party later ya jack offs.

  25. #55
    rocky111
    Guest

    Re: Scoring

    The easy way Raheem won this with textbook boxing makes you wonder just how todays sluggers would have done with the slick boxers of the past. I mean there was a time when each divison had dozens of guys who could box like Zahir and better. Take a guy like Ace Armstrong. Watch a film of him outbox a monster like Henry Hank. What would the supposed greats of today at 160 have done with a guy like Ace? Kudos to Zahir for his performance.
    Also one must love the action Manny provides. Hes a slugger, but one with a rare zest for battle and hes in his prime. Hes a fav or mine and hes just built for the sport. I hope he gets the big fights while hes ready for them at this age.

  26. #56
    JLP 6
    Guest

    Re: Scoring

    I can't enjoy Pacquiao anymore. He is just wild. Back when he fought Barerra he slipping and countered his way inside. Once inside he put together fast hard bodyshots in textbook combination. He reminded me of a young Duran all over Buchanon.

    On the outside he put together fast 1,2's and lead left hands. Now he just throws left hands untill he hits or gets hit. No thought of defense at all.

  27. #57
    Roberto Aqui
    Guest

    Right hands

    [[[Now he just throws left hands untill he hits or gets hit.]]]
    ===========================

    Pac has developed a decent right hand. Watch the fight again. He used it against Morales as well. Pac is become a free flowing two fisted fighter. I don't like how he leads with his face sometimes into the other guys head. He will be losing on cuts soon enough, sooner if he doesn't correct this flaw.

  28. #58
    JLP 6
    Guest

    Re: Right hands

    Maybe this is not fare of me but, everytime I watch Pacquiao I compare him to the one that demolished Marco, who at the time was my p4p number 1.

    Manny pressed forward behind a jab, slipping and countering with controlled straight lefts. Once he got inside he stayed inside firing rights and lefts with awesome speed.

    Against Marquez he was wild, and Morales he tightened up, but he could have done more to the body. Morales gave him a bit of a boxing lesson in some of those rounds. Morales is a solid fighter, but I never thought much of his boxing skills, from the technical standpoint.

    Now I watch him, and I feel like I'm watching a prospect who is still developing the basics like footwork, right hooks, and defense.

    At this point, and I could be wrong, but I think Marquez shuts him out. I even Barerra has a chance.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
News Current Champs WAIL! Encyclopedia Links Home