Prior to Saturday night, Victor Ortiz had received more exposure than any other prospect has in a very long time. He was on the front page of the ESPN boxing web-page, he had a promo segment on Sportscenter, his face was plastered on various boxing websites, and he was headlining a card on HBO. Ortiz was being groomed by his promoter and the boxing powers that be to be the next cash cow, the face of the next generation of pugilism.
Boxing certainly could use another superstar on the magnitude of an Oscar De La Hoya, Sugar Ray Leonard, or Mike Tyson. The sport has become a niche commodity, only coming out of the closet and into the mainstream sports news when one of the above mentioned superstars were involved in a major bout.
On Saturday night Victor Ortiz was TKO’d by an unknown named Marcos Maidana. At first glance you would assume that Golden Boy Promotions had picked the wrong young prizefighter to back as the next great champ. To get Ortiz as much prime face time must have taken a ton of effort and money. Well, surely Ortiz’s stock has taken a hit with the unexpected loss but don’t think that the investment was all for nothing.
Ortiz, despite losing on the grand stage, put up one hell of an effort and gave boxing fans exactly what they wanted: entertainment. A hardcore fan base is built by consistently thrilling the audience. Arturo Gatti was not a dominant champ by any means, but he sold out all of his fights because he was so exciting to watch.
The boxing public, and even some of the general public, now knows who Victor Ortiz is. And they want to see him again.
In this week’s mailbag I answer a ton of Manny Pacquiao related questions from the legions of loyal Pacfans out there. I also comment on the Mayweathers, David Haye, Wladimir Klitschko, among other topics. Enjoy!
(Managing Editor?s Note: At one time Pacland was a good home for Brian’s bag, but for one reason or another Dong Secoya stopped placing it on his site. We always support the Manny Pacquiao fans and want this bag open to all, so we hope that others from Pacland will still visit RSR and continue to have their questions answered by Brian Wilbur. We love hearing from you.)
Pacland Snubs RSR
Hey man, what’s up? I seldom participate in asking questions in your mailbag but I make sure I get to read RSR. I try to make my questions count though as always. Anyways, I have a couple of issues here. First, I was just wondering why RSR articles including your mailbag are no longer included on PACLAND? I try to read PACLAND everyday but I also have to go to another browser and pull-up RSR. It wasn’t the case before right? What gives? I mean it may help generate hits right?
Second, and as far as I know, Cotto?s belt will not be on the line should he and Manny fight if below 147 right? Are you hoping that they meet at 147 with the belt at stake just like what Hatton did?
And my third and final is about an article by John Chavez.
I don’t know man but I am a very, very, very, big Pacfan but I’m also very logical and reasonable when guys like you will predict against Pacman but you have certainly have valid justifications. But man, his article is offended me a bit.
Thanks, Chief! Keep on keeping on, after all, we can’t win them all!
-Rotciv54
Rotciv54,
I don’t have a problem with Pacland posting links to my articles. I wish they would because I talk about Manny Pacquiao a lot and I think Pacfans enjoy my bag from the response I get every week. You have to ask the people at Pacland why they stopped posting links to RSR. I don’t know why. If you find out why please let me know. Maybe we could start a petition to get RSR back on!
The welterweight belt could be on the line as long as the fight is held below 147 pounds. 147 is the upper weight limit but there is no lower weight limit. That is how Henry Armstrong was able to put the Lightweight and Welterweight Championships on the line simultaneously in the 1939 fight against Lew Feldman. Both men weighed under 135 pounds. If both camps agree on the catch weight of 143 and both men agree that the title will be on the line then it is fair game.
I read the article and I don’t agree with everything that John Chavez says about Pacquiao being overrated. He is discrediting the wins over De La Hoya and Hatton too much. However he is making an argument and we may find out as Pacquiao continues to fight very dangerous and accomplished foes that John is right. You never know, he could be right. Like I said, I don’t agree, but we’ll see. Time will tell the whole story.
Joshua Clottey is as good as any welterweight in the world. He might be able to beat Manny Pacquiao, absolutely. If you can entertain that idea that Mosley or Cotto have a solid chance to beat Pacquiao then you have to say that same about Clottey. Even though he is world class and on that level, Joshua is not a potential Pacquiao opponent because he lacks the market appeal. He is not a big enough name.
Hating the Mayweathers
These Mayweathers are making us dumb!
First, the Sr. for mocking, insulting, degrading or even crucifying Freddie Roach in every interview is not just hyping the fight. It?s totally unprofessional in every way! When the fight ends with him being embarrassed he points the blame on Hatton and the press gladly accepted the reason.
Second, the Jr. coming to the scene after retirement saying he doesn’t fight for bragging rights, but he always brags about everything and anything asked about him. He was discouraging of Shane Mosley for having 5 losses, Pacquiao’s loss to Morales, Marquez being very small, and Pacman for every man beating each other but not him. Floyd brags about being the cash cow and not De La Hoya or Pacman, for being undefeated, for not ducking anyone, insulting an anchor guy (Brian Kenny) for not having laced up any gloves his entire life and talk about boxing,
Anyways, the Mayweathers are making us look like fools for anticipating this fight and then issuing a statement it won?t happen? A what? A rib injury? Didn’t Mayweather say he’s always in top shape and that no one can beat him? So why now? I don’t understand. Are we that stupid to believe that is what happened?
So if that is how popular he is, then why on earth did nobody really know the real truth behind this matter? Could anyone do their assignment on this issue and confirm or research the rib injury? I’m sure people around the world would know if Pacman had coughs and colds right?
By the way, 2008 ends. Is Jr. a billionaire now? He sure did promise he’d be what he said before the year ended in 2008. I think, at the end of the day we’d realize, we are that stupid and the Mayweathers are smiling!
-James
James,
I see your points on the Mayweather family. Floyd is a hypocrite, plain and simple. Him dissing all of the other fighters and in the same sentence saying that he ducks nobody is laughable. I don’t know how he says it with a straight face. He picks and chooses fights based on who offers him the most money with the least amount of risk, not the best fighters.
The rib injury appears to be legit. The doctor says that it is muscle related. I’m curious how he suffered the set back. Did he get tagged by his sparring partner in the right place? Is he rusty and his body is breaking down due to inertia? Perhaps this is a sign that Mayweather is losing his edge. Or it could just be a fluke injury. By the way, the fight (Floyd Mayweather vs. Juan Manuel Marquez) has been rescheduled to September 19th and will go on as planned.
Why Is Shane Mosley Not A Superstar?
Good day Brian! I have a couple of questions regarding Sugar Shane Mosley and how the judges scores a bout. First and foremost I am a huge fan of Mosley as you might have noticed on my previous emails. I’m just wondering why he isn’t or hadn’t been a bigger draw in his career?
I think he has a good and entertaining style, he can be a good defensive boxer if he wants to but he is more a powerhouse offensive fighter who loves slugging it out and often looks for the finish in any round. He’s fast and strong and packs a helluva punch especially in his early career. Although as he aged he hold a lot more often but hey he’s 35 years old and he needs that.
He’s not afraid to fight anyone even against the most avoided fighters (Forrest, Wright and Margarito). Early in his career he was known as a knockout artist as evident in his brutal KO’s in the lightweight division. He is a multi-division title holder. He fights guys normally bigger than him. He’s not a trash talker (unlike PBF) but he knows how to get inside the skin of his opponent when he needs to. He has the moniker “Sugar” on him which says a lot. His 4 loses against Forrest and Wright are close enough to discredit him as far as I can remember. And most of all he beat the Cash Cow twice!
So that makes me wonder why he’s not a big attraction. Maybe John Chavez is right that Golden Boy is still bitter with him so they are feeding him dangerous unknown fighters or those very dangerous fighters Oscar didn’t want to face. He might have been mismanaged all through out his career.
Or probably Steve Kim is right that most black fighters today (I hope you wont call me a racist I’m stating the article of Steve Kim) are not really big draws except probably Floyd who arguably became an attraction because of Oscar and Hatton. I’d rather watch Mosley fight over Mayweather any time of year.
My second question is, if you are to score this scenario how are you going to score it:
Fighter A punishes Fighter B for 2:30 minutes to the point that you can easily score it a 10-8 for fighter A. And then on the last 10 seconds, BOOM. A big right hand floored fighter A. He beats the count and went back to his corner. Is it a 10-8 round for Fighter B or probably a 10-10 round (how about a 9-9 if there is such a thing since it’s a 10 must scoring system hehe)?
My last question is what are your criteria in scoring the fight? Here are my arguments:
1. In the Penalosa-De Leon fight, Ponce threw more leather but was not effective all through out. You could actually see his head flip a lot of times. Yet they scored it for De Leon Lopsided!
2. Based on the Cotto-Clottey fight, Clottey threw and landed more punches according to Compubox but Cotto won. I think Cotto was more effective so he deserves it.
It’s really very subjective being a judge I haven’t actually tried it in all the fights I watched I know I’m going to be very bad on scoring….
Thanks and more power.
-Jerome
Jerome,
Steve Kim might be right. If you look at the popular fighters in boxing over the last couple decades, all of the non-heavyweight superstars have had a built in audience. Julio Cesar Chavez had the Mexicans. Oscar De La Hoya was the media darling of the Olympics as well as having the Mexican fans. Manny Pacquiao has the Filipinos. Felix Trinidad had the Puerto Ricans.
There are two black non-heavyweight fighters who have had superstar popularity in that time to buck the trend. One was Roy Jones, who I think was good enough and considered the best for a long enough time to gain a strong following. The other is Floyd Mayweather who attracts the thug hip-hop culture that is huge in the United States in addition to being considered the best for an extended period of time. The win over Oscar De La Hoya really helped Mayweather’s crossover appeal.
Shane Mosley was too clean cut to have the street appeal for the young kids. The losses to Wright and Forrest slowed down his momentum tremendously and really killed any potential he had to become a true superstar. The controversial loss to De La Hoya in the second fight did not help his appeal to mainstream fans. For someone without a built in audience, he needed to obliterate people to gain the notoriety that certain ethnic boxers would gain by simply winning.
As for your scoring questions, you have to look at everything on a case by case basis. It really depends. I could potentially score that a 10-8 for the guy who got the knockdown, 10-9 for the guy who got the knockdown, 10-10 if they even each other out, or 10-9 for the guy who won most of the round. In the 10 point must system the winner of the round must get 10 unless there is a point deduction from the referee.
Penalosa vs. Ponce De Leon was just a bad decision. You are supposed to award effective aggression, not ineffective aggression. The person who lands the more frequent and more meaningful punches should win. Now if neither were landing any punches of significance then I can see you give the round to the person going forward. But Penalosa was landing leather.
My guess as to why Cotto got the decision over Clottey is that the rounds he won early on were very clear. That set the tone for the rest of the fight. The last few rounds Clottey needed but did not win by the same margin that Cotto won his rounds leaving room for the judges to consider the round for Cotto.
Judging in boxing is way too subjective. Coming up with a good scorecard under pressure is tougher than most people think.
Mosley vs. Pacquiao or Cotto vs. Pacquiao
Hi Brian, how are you? Now that Cotto is the front runner for the Manny Pacquiao sweepstake, can you give me your thoughts about what is going to happen if they going fight? Many said, that Manny is cherry-picking this opponent and that confuses me. He cherry picked a tough opponent?
I think Mosley is a very dangerous fighter, aside from being taller and bigger, he also has a long reach. But Cotto is also a tough fight for Manny. What?s your take if Manny fights Mosley? How does this fight play-out? Thanks and more power to your mailbag.
-jr2quiapo
Jr2quiapo,
Pacquiao is not cherry picking opponents. He is willing to fight anyone. Bob Arum is cherry picking in that he is making the fights that are the easiest to make. Mayweather and Mosley are just as good or better fights compared to the Miguel Cotto bout, but those fighters are not Top Rank boxers. Cotto vs. Pacquiao is an easy fight to make so that is why it is happening.
I expect a great match with Pacquiao vs. Cotto, for one. They are both offensive-minded sluggers who make for crowd-pleasing action fights. Both are capable of boxing but I think we will see Pacquiao trying to box more than Cotto because he is the smaller man and not as confident that he would win a slugfest. Both men will get their punches in. In the early rounds Cotto will do well. Pacquiao will come on strong in the late rounds once Cotto tires. I see an epic fight with a decision that could go either way assuming it goes the distance. However I could easily see Cotto winning by early KO if Pac can’t take the heavy punches, or Pacquiao by late TKO if he is able to bring the heat against the bigger man.
I am in the minority in my opinion of Mosley vs. Pacquiao. I like Pacquiao in that fight by decision and think it is an easier match up than the Cotto fight.
Who Brings More Money?
Hi Brian. How are you man? Hope you?re in good health. I’ve been busy lately but not too busy to read your mailbag, I?ve never missed one of them. Now Cotto will likely to meet Pacquiao in a November 14th fight and Mosley is being bitter because he didn’t land the Pacman sweepstakes. And now Shane is saying that would bring more money to the table? In your expert opinion who will really bring bigger money for Pacquiao? Cotto or Mosley?
-jr2quiapo
Jr2quiapo,
Thank you for being a dedicated reader of my column! It is hard to say who brings in more money between Shane Mosley and Miguel Cotto. They are very similar in their market value. My guess would be Miguel Cotto has more box office appeal. Mosley has had a few box office flops where tickets, interest, and TV ratings have been poor. Cotto, for the last couple years or so, has done very well. Plus, Cotto has a win over Mosley.
Mosley claims that Pacquiao would make 20 million for a fight with him while Manny would only get 12 million to fight Cotto. If that is true that means that HBO is overestimating Shane’s worth as a box office attraction. Mosley is promoted by Golden Boy and HBO seems to do whatever Golden Boy wants so it is possible that Pacquiao would make more money fighting Mosley even though the actual money making potential is better with Cotto.
Greatest Ever Weekend Event
Man, is this true? The greatest ever weekend? For sure, we boxing fans will have as much say as the legends themselves. I don?t know exactly what the mechanics are and all but do you think modern day (last 10-15yrs) legends like Mayweather, Pacquiao, JM Marquez, De La Hoya, Hopkins, Jones, Klitschko, Trinidad, JC Chavez, Whitaker, Iron Mike, Calzaghe?will crack at least the top 20?
I?m a little disappointed about the date though, as this will happen two weeks prior the scheduled fight of my man, Pac, cause I really think that if he beats or KOs a legitimate welterweight title holder in the likes of Cotto or Mosley, picking up his 7th world title in the process, his standing would go up by at least +5, he could crack the top 20 or 15 by then. I?d like to have your thoughts. -Pacboy
Pacboy,
Sugar Ray Robinson is the greatest fighter of all time. Why do they need to hold a silly three day event with a bunch of blow-hards to tell me what I already know? Seems like a money making scheme to hold an event full of celebrities and charge overpriced admission. I’m not into it, but that’s just me.
The modern fighters that you listed probably won’t be nominated. That is fine though, because you should never really judge the greatness of a boxer until a while after he retires.
David Haye and the Klitschkos
Hello Brian,
I?m wondering about the David Haye situation. I think his injury may be a blessing in disguise (for him) because lets face it, he only has one fight in heavyweight division. Taking on Wladimir is a massive task to overcome, just pure and simple size and reach. So a couple fights may help him get more used to the weight and get some miles. Maybe he doesn?t need them but overall he doesn?t have too many fights. Maybe he needs a little more experience.
If Haye fights with Vitali next then I don?t think it?s a blessing in disguise. I personally think Haye has better chance with Wladimir. Granted Wladimir is younger and a better boxer, but when he faces big puncher’s or very aggressive guys he gets very uncomfortable and awkward sometimes. Men like Corrie Sanders, Samuel Peter and Lamon Brewster (very weird knockout loss, seemed completely gassed out not lights out). I?m not sure if he has a glass chin but its not rock solid. But Vitali on the other hand is much more comfortable in his clumsy very effective style. What?s your opinion on that, who’s is harder for the style of Haye?
I would like to see Haye take a couple of fights before he gets in with the brothers, keep on insulting them and annoy them. Building the tension even more, getting the event even bigger. Whilst making his way through the bums of the heavyweight division (his words not mine). He fights in a rather fan friendly style so it would be fun to watch as well. And if he doesn?t have what it takes against Klitschko then at least we get more out of him we get something to ponder about in the heavyweight division for longer time then if he loses straight away.
One question, I couldn?t see the Klitschko vs. Chagaev fight, no channel in Iceland picked it up. Was it as dreadful as I?m reading all over the place?
On a side note I think it?s OK if people choose to hate on Klitschko. Because that makes them want the other guy to win and can gather interest that way. I think it?s just hard for people to understand how hard it is to face Wladimir Klitschko and his jab. It may look like its predictable but I imagine it’s far more grueling than some might think. He is quick on his feet for a big man and fights safety first, which is the task for a big man with a reach.
We don?t ask the Tyson or smaller boxers to fight on the outside, so why do we ask the big guys to mix it up? Well it?s far more entertaining, but if one puts himself in the shoes of the fighter it makes sense to fight the best way to win. I?m not saying I don?t understand and even agree that sometimes this goes to a level that is too much. If you got the guy, then for God?s sake finish him. Wladimir is the man to beat, and in my opinion he is one hell of a fighter, size, speed and power, even though he is not so entertaining. In my opinion all he needs is a good challenger who can test him. Like the Peter fight put him through shaky moments. Someone where out there lies the antidote, we just don?t know who it is.
-Olafur
Olafur,
The injury to David Haye was a blessing in disguise for him. Haye would not have lasted three rounds with the version of Wladimir Klitschko that showed up June 20th.
But even with that said, yeah, Wladimir Klitschko is the better styles match up for Haye. Wladimir is more susceptible to big punches than his iron-chinned big brother. Vitali’s terrific durability nullifies Haye’s best, and only, significant weapon: his knockout power. Haye would be a sitting duck against Vitali.
I like your idea of having Haye stand pat for a while before mixing it up with the Klitschko brothers. Although I think David Haye is one-dimensional and will someday be exposed big time, he is very explosive and exciting. He has personality and desire too so people want to see him fight. Haye should fight a few more times on TV to increase his exposure. He needs to marinate for a while to become a more bankable opponent. He has the exciting style that could potentially make a super fight against one of the Klitschko brothers in a couple years or so.
If Nikolay Valuev and Vitali Klitschko successfully negotiate and fight, I will assume that Vitali comes out victorious. The Klitschko brothers will have all the belts and will be desperate for interesting opponents. That is when Haye will be needed. Until then, knock out some scrubs Mike Tyson style to build a bigger fan base.
Klitschko vs. Chagaev was not great but not dreadful either in my opinion. I thought it was more interesting than Klitschko vs. Sultan Ibragimov. Wladimir did little other than use his footwork and jab to create the perfect distance and then tattoo Chagaev with big right hands. It was formulaic but very effective. Wladimir was landing huge right hands in almost every round until the fight was stopped. The bout was very one-sided but not boring in my opinion. I enjoy watching a supreme athlete at his best putting on a clinic.
It’s funny, I hear the same people who gush over Larry Holmes because he “dominated fights using nothing but the jab” criticize Klitschko for being “boring”. I don’t see a difference at all.
Okay readers, I’m eager to hear your reactions and questions. Come back next week for another new mailbag!
