Mayweather vs. Pacquiao: Two Egos Too Big, One Fight Not Too Big To Fail
by David P. Greisman
There are no good excuses. There are no good explanations. There are no winners.
It is no wonder.
It is no wonder that the biggest fight featuring the biggest talents, the biggest stars, became the biggest disappointment, the biggest embarrassment, all as a result of the biggest egos.
Floyd Mayweather Jr. and Manny Pacquiao had a mandate – fight each other. Put the two best boxers, pound-for-pound, in the same ring. See who is better.
They could do it for pride. How often do two of the best fighters in a weight class face each other, much less two of the best fighters in the sport?
They could do it for money. Mayweather, in his past three pay-per-view appearances, had buy rates of 2.44 million (Oscar De La Hoya), 920,000 (Ricky Hatton) and 1 million (Juan Manuel Marquez). Pacquiao, in his past three pay-per-view appearances, had buy rates of 1.25 million (De La Hoya), 850,000 (Hatton), and 1.25 million (Miguel Cotto).
At best, Mayweather-Pacquiao could break records and make millions upon millions. At worst, everyone involved would still make millions upon millions.
It was too big to fail.
They found a way.
For once, it wasn’t about money. They had agreed on who would get paid more – it would be a 50-50 split.
It was about pride.
Mayweather wanted Pacquiao to be tested for performance enhancing drugs. He wanted the tests to be more stringent than any done in boxing, beyond the normal urine tests. He wanted blood drawn, and he wanted the testing to be done randomly, unscheduled.
It is possible that Mayweather, unbeaten after 13 years and 40 bouts, wanted to be sure his toughest fight to date would be a fair fight. It is also possible that Mayweather, after 13 years and 40 bouts in which he never asked any of his other opponents to undergo random blood testing, wanted not just to get under Pacquiao’s skin literally, but figuratively, too.
There is no solid reason to believe Pacquiao is on performance enhancing drugs. None. There is only suspicion fueled by Pacquiao’s success, suspicion voiced by former 140-pound beltholder Paulie Malignaggi and Mayweather’s father, Floyd Mayweather Sr.
“I believe he’s on some type of supplements,” Mayweather Sr. said in September in an interview with the Grand Rapids (Mich.) Press. “Everybody should be checked a little bit more thoroughly. Sometimes people know what’s going on, but they ain’t saying nothing.”
“I think there is something up with Manny Pacquiao,” Malignaggi said in an interview in November with Ryan Burton of BoxingScene.com, shortly after Pacquiao had beaten Miguel Cotto by technical knockout. “Full blown welterweights don’t take those type of punches from Miguel Cotto the way he took them with total disregard for his power, nor do they hurt him with every punch they hit him with. These are full blown welterweights I am talking about. This guy is coming up in weight and doing all these things.”
It didn’t matter that Pacquiao weighed about the same on fight night when fighting as a welterweight as he did on fight night when fighting as a lightweight.
It didn’t matter that Pacquiao had never failed a drug test, though admittedly the state commission urine testing is not as stringent as the necessarily paranoid blood testing that goes on in the Olympics and in the Tour de France.
It didn’t matter what Pacquiao was beating fighters by using his speed and his style, which made him harder to hit, made his punches harder to see and made his punches harder to take.
It didn’t matter that Pacquiao is similar to Mayweather.
Pacquiao, at 16 years old, was a 106-pound professional boxer. At 31, he is an undersized welterweight who doesn’t need to boil down to make weight, who uses movement, speed and smarts to win and has enough power to keep his opponents honest.
Mayweather, at 15 years old, was a 106-pound amateur boxer. At 32, he is an undersized welterweight who doesn’t need to boil down to make weight, who uses movement, speed and smarts to win and has enough power to keep his opponents honest.
It is about pride.
Pacquiao didn’t want blood testing to be done, potentially, at any time, possibly disrupting his training. He balked at the proposed terms of the fight. It didn’t matter that Mayweather would have to undergo the same testing. Pacquiao was offended.
It is possible that Pacquiao felt that Mayweather was attempting a power play, attempting to force Pacquiao to accept terms he had never had to fight under before, to defend himself against unfounded accusations, to prove a negative when there had never been any proof positive.
It is also possible that Pacquiao has used performance enhancing drugs. But that is only because there is never any certainty anymore. Not when so many professional athletes have been caught by tests. Not when so many other professional athletes have been implicated in investigations, even when they found ways not to be caught by tests.
There is no solid reason to believe Pacquiao is on performance enhancing drugs. Pacquiao could have provided even more proof he is not.
Pride comes in several forms. Pacquiao could stick to his pride and refuse to give in to demands that arose out of allegations, especially allegations that arose without evidence. Or Pacquiao could show his pride and show his doubters just how wrong they are.
This isn’t the first time Pacquiao’s pride has gotten in the way.
Pacquiao’s fight with De La Hoya nearly fell apart because Pacquiao wanted more money. Pacquiao’s fight with Hatton nearly fell apart because Pacquiao wanted more money.
Winning the fight is no longer the only thing the boxer worries about. Now it is just as important to land the first blow during negotiations.
Negotiations between Mayweather and Pacquiao’s promoters failed. Mediation failed to produce a compromise both sides could accept. Mayweather’s team said blood testing could end no sooner than 14 days before the fight. Pacquiao’s team wanted 24 days, which is the same point that Pacquiao had given blood prior to another bout.
Now the fight is off. There are no good excuses. There are no good explanations. There are no winners. There are just two too big egos.
The fight could still happen. The money is still on the table, even if the timetable has changed. The fight would still be huge. But it has diminished from what it could have been.
Mayweather has often found ways to tear down fighters others wanted him to face. They have losses on their record. They haven’t beaten anyone. They turned him down in the past.
Meanwhile, Mayweather’s detractors have found ways to tear down the fighters he has faced instead. They are past their prime. They have no chance of winning. There are better opponents out there.
Through his demands of Pacquiao, Mayweather has given his detractors reason to tear down a fighter they wanted him to face. If Mayweather were to face Pacquiao and defeat him, it would be a victory over a Pacquiao who was no longer the unstoppable force supposedly boosted by performance enhancing drugs.
In 2009, Pacquiao reached the pinnacle of a long, brilliant career. He was in “Time” magazine, on television, in the news, in conversations. Now his name has been tarnished without him even losing in the ring.
The accusations had no proof. But with Pacquiao failing to provide proof otherwise, those accusations linger and fester, maligning his reputation, no matter how unfair the situation.
How often do two of the best fighters in a weight class face each other, much less two of the best fighters in the sport? This should have been a year remembered for such a momentous match. Instead, when it comes time to recall what Mayweather and Pacquiao have done, we will be reminded of what Mayweather and Pacquiao did not.
The 10 Count
1. Media coverage of the Mayweather-Pacquiao imbroglio proved to be a double-edged sword. It gave what seemed like play-by-play coverage of the negotiations and eventual collapse, but it also included the compromising of journalistic principles.
It is one thing for media to quote the boxers and promoters as they tear into each other – at least they are doing so on the record. But it is another thing for media to use unfounded rumors or hearsay, never following the basic tenet of “Trust, but verify.”
One longtime boxing writer, Tim Smith of the New York Daily News, cited “a source familiar with the talks” as saying representatives of Pacquiao’s camp asked how Manny Pacquiao would be penalized if he tested positive for performance enhancing drugs – and asking if a positive test could be kept secret “so that the integrity of the fight wouldn’t be ruined in the public eye.”
(The quoted sections were Smith’s words.)
Was this “source familiar with the talks” with Team Mayweather or Team Pacquiao? Political reporters are often chided when they let a member of one party speak anonymously solely for the purpose of attacking the other party. Boxing writers should be held to the same standard.
This very well could have been a calculated leak put forth to shame Pacquiao, and done so anonymously so the source could keep from being held responsible. But we won’t know. We have no clue as to the veracity of and the motivation behind this information.
2. Teddy Atlas seconded Smith’s report in a segment on last week’s season premiere of ESPN2’s “Friday Night Fights.”
“From sources that told me, they said that people in the Pacquiao camp sent a couple of e-mails to the Mayweather camp a few weeks ago, about two, three weeks ago,” Atlas said. “And the first e-mail was ‘What would the penalty be if our guy tested positive?’ The second e-mail was ‘If he did test positive, could we keep this a secret for the benefit of boxing?’
“Again, I don’t know other than my source, who I trust, told me that he saw those e-mails,” Atlas said. “I also know that Tim Smith, the columnist from the Daily News, reported on the same thing I just said.”
Did Atlas see these e-mails? Or is he just reporting what someone told him without verifying what he was told? Wouldn’t journalists for ESPN.com be held to a higher standard than this?
3. And then there was Michael Marley, repeating on Examiner.com an unfounded rumor that appeared to have gotten its start on a couple of boxing message boards. The rumor claimed that Michael Moorer, the former champion who had worked as an assistant at Freddie Roach’s Wild Card Boxing Club, tipped off Floyd Mayweather’s camp about Pacquiao and performance enhancing drugs.
“I don’t put any credence into this rumor,” Marley wrote. “I simply report to you to underline that the dirty pool games will continue between the opposing sides.”
Marley said the rumor came from “some Mayweather caddy,” but the only place I saw it was through message boards, where it spread like how swine flu was supposed to do.
What was the news value to the story? How many message board rumors get similar treatment?
To Marley’s credit, he did follow up in an article that ran Sunday after he got in touch with Moorer.
“Moorer made it plain that he’s no snitch in the first place and, in the second place, he has nothing illegal to report on concerning Pacman,” Marley wrote.
4. The problem doesn’t stop with Smith, Atlas and Marley. The issue is that each has been around the sport for some time, and as such the words of each carries weight. Their words are parroted on boxing news sites, blogs and message boards, and rumor gets repeated and repeated and repeated until it doesn’t matter whether it is even true.
One quick note: I wasn’t sure whether to name Smith and Marley. I was once blindsided by one boxing writer chiding me for something I wrote, and even though he didn’t name me, I was taken by surprise.
But it would have been silly for me to refer to Atlas’ words without naming him, especially when so many boxing fans saw and heard what he said. And it would have been unfair for me to name Atlas without naming Smith and Marley. This was not meant to disrespect any of the three, but rather to ask questions I felt should have been asked.
5. Boxers Behaving Badly update, part one: A judge last week tossed out a weapons charge that had been filed against Daniel Judah, the light heavyweight brother of Zab Judah, according to the New York Daily News.
Judah, 32, was arrested in July 2008 after police were called to a construction site in Brooklyn for a report of a robbery. He was charged with trespassing and criminal possession of a weapon.
But the judge ruled that the gun police found came as a result of an illegal search, that there was “nothing more suspicious than a person holding their pocket” when officers saw Judah.
A spokesman for the prosecutor’s office said they are considering their options as to whether to continue forward with what remains of the case.
Daniel Judah last fought in February 2009, losing a 10-round decision to Glen Johnson. His record is 23-4-3 with 10 knockouts.
6. Boxers Behaving Badly update, part two: Oh, to have been a reporter in the courtroom last week during the trial of light heavyweight titlist Jurgen Brahmer.
Brahmer, 31, is accused of assaulting a woman last year in a bar in the German city of Schwerin.
According to BoxingScene.com correspondent Per Ake Persson, Brahmer’s defense team decided to play a song: Bob Dylan’s “Hurricane,” which tells the story of how former middleweight contender Rubin Carter was wrongly convicted of murder.
The verdict in Brahmer’s case is expected to come this Tuesday (Jan. 12).
7. The prosecution should’ve responded with Inner Circle’s “Bad Boys.”
And if Brahmer is found guilty? The Clash: “I Fought The Law.”
8. Boxers Behaving Badly, part one: British lightweight Henry Castle has been arrested and charged with sexual assaulting a 17-year-old girl early on New Year’s Day, according to the Southern Daily Echo.
Castle, 30, appeared in court last week and was remanded into police custody until Jan. 15. He is also facing a charge of wounding with intent.
Castle’s record is 20-5 with 11 knockouts. His last fight came in July, a points loss to Gary Buckland in an elimination bout for the British Boxing Board of Control lightweight title.
9. Back, for a moment, to Floyd Mayweather Jr. and Manny Pacquiao – because isn’t that the only story in boxing these days?
Top Rank, which promotes Pacquiao, wasted little time in finding another opponent for its biggest star. Pacquiao will face Joshua Clottey on March 13 at Cowboys Stadium. The fight will be aired on pay-per-view. And though Clottey is coming off a split decision loss to Miguel Cotto (whom Pacquiao went on to stop), this seems like far from an easy fight for Pacquiao.
As for Mayweather, his next opponent has not yet been chosen, according to Richard Schaefer, CEO of Golden Boy Promotions, which represents Mayweather.
Schaefer told Kevin Iole of Yahoo! Sports that they’ve contacted several potential opponents, though he did not name them, and that a deal could be reached soon.
Many names have been floated in the rumor mill, but, well, we know how I feel about rumors. One name, Matthew Hatton, the welterweight younger brother of Ricky Hatton, claims Mayweather’s camp has contacted his team three times.
10. Matthew Hatton? Really?
It could be worse…
It could be Bobby Pacquiao…
