De La Hoya-Pacquiao size difference is no big deal
Posted Nov. 23, 2008 at 08:06pm
By William Dettloff
|
There’s been so much chatter about the size difference that many believe will play so mightily into the outcome of the upcoming Oscar De La Hoya-Manny Pacquiao fight that my head is rattling more than usual with all the various points and counterpoints.
Sometimes it helps to quiet the competing voices in my head if I transcribe the conversations. That transcription, dear readers, serves as the basis for this week’s column. My long-suffering therapist, for whom you are filling in this week, sends his gratitude.
First the argument, made by many, that Pacquiao is too small and will be run out of the ring:
Of course he is! They can weigh in at whatever they want. De La Hoya is a junior middleweight through and through and he’ll be one when he enters the ring that night; the day-before weigh-in assures it.
Take a look at the guys at 154: Verno Phillips, Paul Williams, Vernon Forrest, Cory Spinks. All solid junior middleweights, more or less. Same as De La Hoya.
Now check the guys at 135, which is where Pacquiao last fought: Juan Manuel Marquez, Nate Campbell, Juan Diaz, Joel Casamayor. Lightweights. None of them over 135. About what you weighed in junior high. Little guys.
Would anyone expect Marquez to fight Phillips? Or Campbell to face Williams. Or Diaz to tackle Forrest? Would you pay to see Casamayor against Spinks? (Okay, that’s a bad example; no one would pay to see that at any weight.)
The point is none of those fights would get made. They’d be seen as uncompetitive. And the smaller guys would be crazy to take them. Size is always a factor. Always.
De La Hoya was too small to beat Bernard Hopkins. He was too big to lose to Julio Cesar Chavez. He was too big for a lot of guys, but has never enjoyed a size advantage as pronounced as the one he’ll have against Pacquiao. This is a no contest.
There’s a saying that’s been around forever: a good big man will always beat a good little man. The legitimacy of that axiom will be confirmed, again, on Dec. 6.
Now the argument that Pacquiao is not too small and just might send De La Hoya into a permanent retirement that consists mostly of finding new and exciting ways to arrange large piles of money:
Ever heard of Roy Jones? You mean the guy who won a middleweight title and then, a bunch of years later, won a heavyweight belt? Yeah, that’s the guy. A lot of people said he was too small. Turns out he wasn’t.
Didn’t another guy do something similar? What was his name? Eagle? Sparrow? Oh, that’s right -- Byrd. Turned pro at around 160 and later was making a fool out of great big 260-pound giants that bench press Toyota Tundras. He was supposed to be too small, too. Turns out he wasn’t either.
James Toney wasn’t too small. Neither was Bob Fitzsimmons or Mickey Walker or Tommy Loughran. Henry Armstrong wasn’t too small. Neither was Roberto Duran, who won world titles at lightweight, welterweight and even middleweight. That’s a span of 25 pounds. Michael Spinks wasn’t too small.
There’s a saying that’s been around forever: it’s not the size of the dog in the fight, it’s the size of the fight in the dog. Exceptional smaller fighters beat good bigger ones. Here’s what’s more important than Pacquiao’s size: He can fight.
After much internal and exhaustive debate, here’s my take: It’s assumed that on fight night De La Hoya will have roughly four inches and about 15 pounds on Pacquiao. That’s not enough to make this a blowout. It may not even be enough to make De La Hoya the winner at the end.
If De La Hoya wins it will be because Pacquiao is easy to find in the ring and not shy about opening up, which will give De La Hoya counterpunching opportunities.
It will be because Pacquiao cuts very easily these days and can be predictable. In short, it will be because Pacquiao’s style suits De La Hoya like a glove. The size difference will have little, if anything, to do with it.
Some miscellaneous observations from last week:
Upset at Buddy McGirt for throwing in the towel during his loss to Ricky Hatton in Las Vegas Saturday night, Paulie Malignaggi whined to HBO’s Larry Merchant, “I’m better than getting stopped.” My, where to begin with that …
First, no he’s not. If Joe Louis and Willie Pep and Armstrong got stopped in their careers, how is Paulie Malignaggi too good to get stopped?
Second, Malignaggi should be grateful: If a stricter referee than Kenny Bayless had worked the fight, Malignaggi would have been disqualified by the fifth or sixth round for holding.
If Jenna Jameson made a trilogy of movies with John Ruiz there wouldn’t be as much groping as there was in that fight. It was awful, though there was some delicious irony in seeing Hatton, of all people, complain about being held.
There will be a lot of claptrap in the coming days about how Floyd Mayweather Sr., has improved Hatton’s technique. It’s nonsense. Hatton, pre-Mayweather and post, was too strong and earnest for a guy whose only real weapon is a jab, and not a very hard one at that. It’s easy to remember to do everything right against a guy you know can’t hurt you.
Nevertheless, we all should be happy about Hatton’s victory if it assures him a shot at the De La Hoya-Pacquiao winner, which apparently it does.
For Pacquiao-Hatton especially, there would be a significant gore factor, what with all the blood and plasma and whatnot guaranteed to splash all over everyone at ringside.
Golden Boy would do well to hand out raincoats or rubber umbrellas to everyone with a good seat. Or maybe there’s a poncho with the Ring logo already in the works? …
James Kirkland could have completed a triathlon with Ann Wolfe riding on his back in the time it took for Brian Vera to unload a right hand, but I defy anyone in any sport to find a tougher guy than Vera (I‘m looking at you, MMA diehards).
He took a hard beating from a real puncher for almost eight long rounds and still complained when the referee stopped it. …
How times have changed. Around the time he faced Raul Marquez and David Estrada, Shane Mosley turned down a fight with Antonio Margarito. He was right to do it.
Now it’s Margarito, not satisfied with a purse of a couple million to face a much older Mosley, who has walked away. Most avoided fighter in boxing, indeed. …
Give yourself a round of applause if you see the similarities in the current state of auto manufacturing and professional boxing in America.
Both industries have suffered immensely at the hands of greedy, arrogant and short-sighted leaders interested principally, if not solely, in the fast buck with no thought whatever to the long-term health of the business. The only difference is there will be no bailout for boxing.
On a related note, fightnews.com reports that Kelly Pavlik, Humberto Soto and Pacquiao each were on the verge of being stripped of their titles before paying the WBC overdue “sanctioning fees.” After the WBC got its money, all was forgiven.
“We wish the best of luck to our champions who will have very important activity in the near future and the WBC is very proud of all of them," the website quoted Jose Sulaiman, the gnomish cretin who heads the WBC. What a business this is. …
Kudos to Celestino Caballero, the WBA’s junior featherweight belt holder, on his blowout of Steve Molitor Friday night (it’s been a rough couple weeks for the Canadians, eh?). Caballero’s reward for adding the IBF belt to his collection? Twice the sanctioning fees! Is everybody happy?
William Dettloff can be reached at dettloff@ptd.net
