A CASE FOR TECHNICAL BOXERS
Cambridge, MA- We are living in one of the most polarized eras in boxing history. A combination of nutrition and the impact of mass media have divided most fighters into two camps: those that primordially value skill and those that believe courage will always prevail. The contemporary spectrum from talent to heart in the game runs somewhere from Bernard Hopkins (48-4-1, 32 KOs) to Arturo Gatti (40-9, 31 KOs), with fighters like Floyd Mayweather (38-0, 24 KOs) somewhere in between. This past weekend?s clash between Kelly Pavlik (32-0, 29 KOs) and Jermain Taylor (27-1-1, 17 KOs) made a strong case for preferring the latter.
PACMAN LOOKS TO ?REMOVE? BARRERA
Frances “The Fight Chick” Martel
Before you have a chance to give up on those boxing lessons and go watch ?Rocky? for some inspiration, Manny Pacquiao (44-3-2, 35 KOs) will be back to balance the scale next week against a foe who isn?t, surprisingly, Erik Morales (48-6, 34 KOs). Pacfans will hardly notice. Pacquiao, beloved by millions for his nationality and by a few for his indefatigable spirit, is poised to defeat another over-the-hill Mexican star in Marco Antonio Barrera (63-5, 42 KOs). While Pacquiao might opt not to use his mental faculties too much in the ring, thus allowing his fights to degenerate from potential artwork to bloody Roman Coliseum entertainment within seconds, his handlers have narrowed the field of lucrative and easily trumped opponents for him with brilliant precision. Barrera, in style, fights like an improvement on Erik Morales; he is from the same school of fighters, with more experience but less wear and tear, and as defeatable as any fighter with 68 fights to his name. Barrera and Morales are the successors of Julio Cesar Chavez (107-6-2, 86 KOs), who now resemble the champion more circa his bout against Kostya Tszyu (31-2, 25 KOs) than against Hector Camacho (78-5-2, 37 KOs).
EXPECT PACFANS TO ERUPT HERE
In this manner, Pacquiao is very much a one-trick pony. He can only defeat one type of fighter- granted, a highly capable class of blood-and-guts warriors- but a class of boxers with very similar styles, and only those that adhere to the age requirement (too old). He is a sort of kryptonite that affects a very small group of Supermen. Perhaps it is fortunate that Pacquiao has opted to show us only one piece of his limited repertoire; he retires boxers that many others don?t have the heart to fight. He also feeds a very profitable fire of ethnic animosity, one of the few trustworthy fanbases the sport has left. This overwhelms him with the type of pressure that makes him panic into political misadventures and economic failures. The problem in this is the question of whether allowing the sport to survive solely on the base of racism is ethical.
MANNY, MORE THAN AN ETHNIC STAR?
Arguing that Pacquiao?s success is solely based on racism is, of course, radical and faulty. His success is based on a combination of primitive crowd pleasing, racism, and healthy nationalistic rivalry. The clear difference between the latter two is the difference between, say, France and the United States as opposed to Greece and Turkey. One pair of countries is aggressive to the other in popular culture but is allied in the political realm; the latter pair are cultural and political enemies. The latter is not the case with Mexico and the Philippines, but the former certainly is, and it is feeding our money-hungry sport. In this case, the issue of primitive crowd-pleasing, or what I called previously in this article the ?Roman Coliseum? mentality, is a much greater threat to boxing, especially considering the economic pressure the UFC?s success is applying to boxing as an art form. Promoters and other special interests are being tempted to sign fighters and put fights together that will entertain crowds that have no genuine interest in the art of boxing. It is preferable to become a niche sport in order to maintain our identity than to assimilate into a culture of violence that has rejected the recent rise of the technical fighter.
MARCO & PAC: TWO DIFFERING VIEWS
It is difficult perceive Barrera in such a culturally significant lens. Barrera never put on airs of being culturally significant. He has his domestic prides and affiliations, but prefers to be first and foremost a fighter in the eyes of the public, and not an ambassador. As for his chances against people?s champ Pacquiao, Barrera, to his credit, is a champion, and it never hurts to emphasize that champions never lose the element of surprise, nor are they ever completely underdogs. It is also equally true, however, that champions need to know when to retire. Looking at his record, Barrera?s time is not yet here, but studying the pattern among Pacquiao?s opponents, and measuring the pure ability of Pacquiao to retire fighters, the former?s record might not be so telling after all.
