Preview: Floyd Mayweather Jr vs Manny Pacquiao
Mayweather-Pacquiao photos by Esther Lin for Showtime
On Saturday, May 2nd, Floyd Mayweather Jr. of Grand Rapids, Michigan will fight Manny Pacquiao of General Santos City, Philippines at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas for the welterweight championship of the world. It will be the highest-gross fight of all time, and for an hour the world’s attention will once again be firmly fixed on boxing.
This happens once or twice every decade, most recently when Mayweather fought Oscar de la Hoya on May 5th, 2007. That fight, a close victory for Mayweather, sparked the chain of events that resulted in this site and my mild obsession with the Sweet Science. Before that, Lennox Lewis fought an over-the-hill Mike Tyson in June 2002 at the Pyramid in Memphis, Tennessee. Tyson finally fought rival Evander Holyfield in November 1996, losing by a late stoppage, and then followed 7 months later with the infamous biting incident in the rematch. There is nothing like a big prize fight, nothing. It just takes a big prize fight for the mainstream public to remember that fact.
A fight of this magnitude forces media outlets that mostly neglect boxing to find some larger angle on the its historical significance. The most popular are whether said fight is a bigger deal than Frazier-Ali or whether it’s further evidence that boxing is dying. The first question is much easier to answer (No. Ali-Frazier was an iconic moment in American history; this fight is mostly a commercial endeavor). I would argue that latter is almost as straightforward.
The question of whether boxing is dying has been continually debated within and without the sport since Jack Johnson stopped Tommy Burns to become the first black heavyweight champion in December 1908. As ringside commentator Larry Merchant once remarked, ”Nothing will kill boxing, and nothing can save it.” Boxing’s fortunes continue to rise and fall, but the sport will likely never disappear.
Combat sports will stay in vogue as long as violence remains humanity’s primary method for resolving conflicts. At times that has meant wrestling, boxing, mixed martial arts, or armed combat. The spectacle of two men competing to destroy each other covered by the veneer of official rules will not disappear any time soon, not so long as there are willing participants driven by desire for fame, money, or mere relief from a life of chaos and violence.
Perhaps boxing no longer captures the greater public’s interest as it did many decades ago, but neither does anything else besides football. Most people have dozens, if not hundreds of TV channels to choose from. The Internet is an endless supply of entertainment, and our on-demand world no longer requires that we watch whatever is on at a given time. Would the whole country watch the moon landing in unison today, or would many of them avoid it by streaming HBO shows and the last season of The League on Netflix?
On Saturday Floyd Mayweather Jr. will attempt to cement himself as the greatest boxer of his generation by defeating his chief rival for the honor. Mayweather was raised amid violence and uncertainty in Grand Rapids, the son of a fighter who once reportedly used him as a human shield to avoid being shot. Mayweather’s propensity for gambling and splashing his millions about is well-documented, as is his insecurity and obsession with being the best. Between his chaotic upbringing and the endless scrutiny he faces now, it is not surprising to hear Mayweather finds himself most comfortable while fighting or preparing for his next bout.
Like many fighters, Mayweather is no angel. He has a long history of domestic violence, questionable conduct, and lashing out at others with malicious intent. Mayweather does not drink or smoke, yet somehow he manages to say more hurtful and idiotic things than most rock-bottom addicts. His nine-figure ATM receipts and gaudy taste ensure there will always be enablers at hand to tolerate his misbehavior, but Mayweather will never fully convince the public that he is a good guy at heart. He has still tried at times, through both the media and very public showings of generosity.
For many fight fans, the question of Mayweather’s character is largely irrelevant. Boxing has long been a sanctuary for those deemed unfit for polite society. Sugar Ray Leonard called boxing the poor man’s sport, but it is also a refuge for people seeking redemption. Former heavyweight great Sonny Liston had a lengthy criminal record and alleged ties to the Mob. Mike Tyson was accused of domestic violence and served time in prison for rape. Current light heavyweight champion Adonis Stevenson was a pimp. Even former champion and promoter Bernard Hopkins, legendary for his self-discipline, learned to box while in prison.
Should we boycott a fighter because he is a bad person? That is a personal decision, but history tells us that most won’t. We have a justice system, and while it is flawed, it does allow for the possibility of rehabilitation. How should we view those who have served their time and returned to public life? Should they be forever shunned? In many arenas they are. The gym is one of the few places where someone’s past mistakes are largely forgiven. One needn’t respect Mayweather personally in order to respect his ability, or enjoy his fights. In fact, those appalled by his past may consider watching him just on the possibility he loses, joining millions of others with similar hopes.
By most accounts, Manny Pacquiao is the antithesis of Mayweather, at least personally and professionally. While Mayweather is seen as cautious and defensive in the ring, Pacquiao at times can be reckless and dashing. Until recently he was one of the sport’s most dynamic fighters, and also one of its most humble. His rise from abject poverty in the Philippines to international stardom is an inspiration to millions, and also evidence of his extraordinary determination. Pacquiao is a revered figure in his homeland, a politician, entertainer, champion, patron and cultural icon. His generosity is expansive, but so is the circle of hangers-on that surrounds him. It would not be surprising to see him fight well into his 40s, driven by the need for more money to fund his many endeavors.
Despite the reputations of the two combatants, this fight is no match-up of good and evil, just like Ali and Frazier were hardly polar opposites as the media portray them to be. Pacquiao is not perfect, and Floyd is far from pure evil. This is a massive fight for very simple reasons: these are the two best fighters of recent years, and the public has been clamoring for them to fight for half a decade. During that period, the public’s appetite for the fight has only grown and now the two sides will cash in while interest is at its highest point.
Mayweather is famously opportunistic in his selection of opponents, frequently fighting legendary names like de la Hoya, Shane Mosley and Miguel Cotto once they began to show cracks. Pacquiao may be the latest on this list, because the Pacman hasn’t looked the same since he was stopped by Juan Manuel Marquez’s right hand in 2012. Pacquiao looks a tad slower and much less aggressive, while Mayweather seems only slightly less dynamic than his prime. Two years older but having taken far less punishment, Mayweather is the favorite on biology alone. His mastery of the finer points of defense and countering only augment that advantage, and put further pressure on the Filipino to pull off the unexpected and put Floyd on the canvas for the first time in his career.
Pacquiao has a better chance of pulling off the upset than any Mayweather opponent since de la Hoya. But he would be unwise to engage Mayweather in a boxing match, something he likely cannot win. What Pacquiao needs is a fight, at a furious pace that unnerves the supremely cool Mayweather. Pacquiao must jump on his opponent early and punch frequently throughout the fight, ultimately flooring Mayweather or even stopping him to put the result beyond doubt. If Pacquiao lets himself be lulled into the languid pace of fighting Mayweather prefers, it would be a sure recipe for defeat.
Still, I expect this fight to calm down after some early excitement from Pacquiao, and eventually Mayweather should take charge with his shoulder roll defense and pinpoint right hand. Pacquiao may trap him against the ropes or land a big left hand, but Mayweather has shown before that he can recover from early trouble and still win convincingly. The burden is on Pacquiao to prove he is the better man by either hurting Mayweather badly or out-working him in essentially every round. The pick is for Mayweather to win a close decision, or possibly earn a late stoppage via right hand.
A fight of this magnitude proves boxing remains alive, if greatly diminished, in the imagination of the American public. Even as it is labeled a niche, boxing continues to draw high interest among African-Americans and Hispanic Americans. Anyone that has dared to type a word about Manny Pacquiao can testify to the passion bordering on mania he generates in his countrymen and many Filipino Americans. Boxing’s audience remains strong worldwide, but perhaps it isn’t the audience most valued by the foiks who decide what is culturally relevant.
The fight is a perfect opportunity for those that enjoy extolling boxing’s many ailments, from the weakness of the heavyweight division, to the poisonous politics of promoters and sanctioning bodies who prevent the best fights from being made. But these flaws are par for the course in boxing, not some recent change. Boxing occupies a prized place in our minds in part because it is lawless, unregulated, unfair, and always breaking people’s hearts, then kicking them while they’re down. That’s far more realistic than giving the worst team in the league the first draft pick. Boxing is cruel and boxing is exploitative. But so is life for most people.
Good boxers are typically some of the most restrained and peaceful people I have met. Like anything, after a while fighting becomes a job. Perhaps one day we will evolve into a society where skill at dispensing violence is no longer a trait to be admired. But I am almost certain I will never see that day. Recent weeks have seen headlines clashing over how law enforcement officials have deployed violence, and members of the public responding in kind, some justifying their actions as civil disobedience. People on both sides have defended their actions as justified. Violence for them was the only possible means to their end.
This post was edited to correct the fighter’s ages–GN