(Please join us all week long for daily De La Hoya/Pacquiao coverage, leading up to a live blog Saturday night. Today: How the two men stack up in some of the areas that will decide the fight’s outcome.)
Strategery. Boxing is about more than just the physical elements. There’s also the sweet science to consider in each fight. Having already evaluated the plain old genetics of things in Saturday night’s HBO pay-per-view bout pitting Oscar De La Hoya against Manny Pacquiao, it’s time to turn to the subtler, more mental aspects of the bout.
Offense. Let there be no confusion: This is the battle of the left hands, offensively. De La Hoya’s best punches are his left jab and left hook, thrown from his orthodox stance despite his being a natural left-hander. Pacquiao’s best punch is the straight left, which was so potent that he was able to persist at an elite level for years without much than a 1-2 punctuated by said straight left.
The tactical brilliance of Juan Manuel Marquez forced Pacquiao to adjust after 2004, when Erik Morales took up Marquez’ fight plan and pushed Pacquiao from the draw Marquez forced to an actual win. Speed and power, after all, only got Pacquiao to a certain point. They got him exceptionally far, but it wasn’t enough against a clever Marquez and a savvy Morales. That 1-2 combo is still, and shall always remain, his best weapon. But after the first Morales bout, Pacquiao was forced to develop a right hook he and trainer Freddie Roach called, hilariously, Manilla Ice. Silly name or no, it was mighty effective from pretty much out of nowhere. That right hand, plus an increased focus on body punching, led Pacquiao to knock out Morales for the first time in Morales’ career. Pacquiao has shown increasing diversity in his arsenal since; against David Diaz, he unveiled an uppercut that came pretty much without precedent. And he has demonstrated a surprising knack for counter-punching.
Still, for all his improvement in his offensive repertoire, Pacquiao often throws his hooks pretty wide, and De La Hoya’s team has noticed, correctly, that Pacquiao frequently has to take a step forward before launching his blows. Pacquiao, against Diaz, showed that he could punch from different angles, but that was against a very limited, one-dimensional opponent. He’d shown some of that crafty punch/step-aside technique in previous fights, but to a lesser degree than he did against Diaz. Significantly, De La Hoya hasn’t fought a southpaw in years upon years. He didn’t seem to like it.
De La Hoya, too, relies on his left hand, but for two punches: jab, hook. When De La Hoya has his jab working, he’s hard to handle. He uses it to set up distance and score points, then employs it to set up his fearsome left hook. That left hook is no mirage. When he lands it cleanly, it’s a knockout punch. Opponents have figured that out over the years, so De La Hoya mixes it in after the jab amid flurries. His right hand isn’t exactly a seal flipper, but it’s not a major weapon. It’s just part of his arsenal during a scoring flurry. He has no significant uppercut to speak of, but given that his game is predicated primarily on his speed, it’s not that big a problem; however, against a shorter opponent who’s going to try to get on the inside, an uppercut wouldn’t be a bad weapon to have. De La Hoya’s also not a bad counter-puncher, although he’s not a counter-puncher by inclination.
Overall, Pacquiao is the more potent offensive fighter. Pacquiao is so focused on landing power punches that it would be hard for the more cautious De La Hoya to keep up. But Pacquiao’s brazen emphasis on offense has hurt him in other ways.
Defense. Speaking of: De La Hoya may have been hit more by Steve Forbes than he had in past fights, but he’s fundamentally good on D. Pacquiao has historically made his overwhelming offense his defense, and even though he’s shown signs of improvement on D, it is assuredly one of the weaknesses in his game.
Where Pacquiao shows defensive acumen, it is primarily in his head movement on the way in to set up his offense. He steps to the side, he bobs and weaves and he occasionally blocks punches with his gloves. Mostly, he comes straight forward with his chin exposed. His defense looked fantastic against the slow, limited Diaz, but that probably was the anomaly. It’s hard to imagine Pacquiao dodging De La Hoya punches that defensive master Floyd Mayweather didn’t.
De La Hoya’s reflexes against Forbes were not up to his historical par. But De La Hoya routinely blocks a lot of punches with his gloves, and he excels at taking a step back to get out of punching range. Because of his defensive skills, he’s not taken all that much punishment over the years. I’m not saying he gets a golden glove, but he’s very good on defense.
If you were to make a triumvirate of reasons Pacquiao can’t win, it would be size, punch resistance and defense. Can Pacquiao match the defense of Mayweather, or even Forbes? No. De La Hoya’s defense may be on the decline, but even at his worst, he’s better here than Pacquiao. His chin better hold steady, or he better show major, major improvement on defense
Intelligence. By intelligence, I don’t mean, who’s the smarter man in an IQ test. I mean, ring intelligence – the ability to think inside the ring.
As on the defensive front, De La Hoya has a significant edge here. He has shown far greater versatility than has Pacquiao. He has demonstrated that he can slug, box and adjust within fights.
Pacquiao, according to trainer Freddie Roach, picks up things faster than does De La Hoya. That may be true. Pacquiao now is a way, way, way better fighter than he was prior to the first Marquez fight. But I can’t say I’ve ever seen Pacquiao figure out an opponent, so to speak, and make adjustments mid-fight. When he has mounted comebacks late in a fight, it has largely been because his unbelievable physical abilities have caught up to a slowing opponent, smarter or no.
Trainers. Roach, having once trained De La Hoya, knows him better than he might otherwise. Nacho Beristain, who trained Marquez to two almost-wins against Pacquiao, gives De La Hoya a little inside knowledge, too.
Roach is easily one of the best trainers of his generation, and if he can come up with a game plan that pushes the far smaller Pacquiao to a win over De La Hoya, then he should be Trainer of the Year, by far. He has taken Pacquiao’s raw physical gifts and molded him into a real boxer – not technician, exactly, but a smart enough, crafty enough, skilled enough boxer to maximize those same raw physical gifts. I have to imagine that Roach learned a little about De La Hoya’s strengths and weaknesses when he trained him for the one Mayweather fight. Joe Gossen, who trained Joel Casamayor to defeat Diego Corrales before switching to train Corrales to defeat Casayamor in the rematch, says he doesn’t think Roach will have learned enough from that one fight to make a difference. Maybe it won’t make much of a difference, but that’s some insider knowledge that can’t be bad to have.
Beristain is brilliant, too. His prized pupil, Marquez, twice took the strength of Pacquiao, his offense, and turned it into a weakness via the magic of counter-punching. It’s hard to imagine Beristain turning De La Hoya into as pure a counter-puncher as Marquez, but a little tweaking here can’t help, because eventually Pacquiao’s going to have to take some risks to get inside on the longer, taller De La Hoya. I don’t see much advantage to De La Hoya having sought the advice of Angelo Dundee for this fight, because as smart as Dundee no doubt is at his advanced age, De La Hoya’s frequent trainer reshuffling has, if anything, hurt him. There can only be so many cooks in the kitchen, or so many chiefs per Indian, or whatever metaphor suits you best here.
This category may be the only one where neither boxer has a clear advantage. Roach and Beristain, as much as they dislike each other, are two of the best trainers currently in the sport. They’ll bring a level of smarts to this fight that might not otherwise exist.
Mentality. Pacquiao has never shown a second of hesitation, doubt or surrender. De La Hoya clearly fears no man, but psychologically, his makeup isn’t ideal.
Pacquiao really only knows one way: Forward, and with 100 percent commitment. There’s nothing more to explain. He simply has never shown any tendency to back down or doubt himself. When he gets hit cleanly, he almost seems to admire his opponent for it,
and he reacts by trading back. There’s just nothing about his heart or mind set that raises any concerns. If anything, he is too fearless.
De La Hoya has underrated heart and bravery – just name any active boxer who has fought more truly great opponents, I double dog dare you – but in the ring, he sometimes seems beset by doubt. He undertakes mysterious misadventures like abandoning his jab against Mayweather. And I really think Roach, with all his criticism of that and other aspects of De La Hoya’s game, has gotten under De La Hoya’s skin. Unlike some critics, I don’t question De La Hoya’s heart. I think he’s a tough S.O.B. I just think he can be psyched out a little.
It may be that, unlike Pacquiao, the same intelligence that makes De La Hoya formidable is a handicap in other ways.
(Tomorrow: The undercard. Thursday: The official prediction.)
Normal
0
<!–
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}Offense. Don't get confused: This is the battle of the left hands, offensively. De La Hoya's best punches are his left jab and left hook, thrown from his orthodox stance despite his being a natural left-hander. Pacquiao's best punch is the straight left, which was so potent that he was able to persist at an elite level for years without much than a 1-2 punctuated by said straight left.
The tactical brilliance of Juan Manuel Marquez forced Pacquiao to adjust after 2004, when Erik Morales took up Marquez’ fight plan and pushed Pacquiao from the draw Marquez forced to an actual win. Speed and power, after all, only got Pacquiao to a certain point. They got him exceptionally far, but it wasn’t enough against a clever Marquez and a savvy Morales. That 1-2 combo is still, and shall always remain, his best weapon. But after the first Morales bout, Pacquiao was forced to develop a right hook he and trainer Freddie Roach called, hilariously, Manilla Ice. Silly name or no, it was mighty effective from pretty much out of nowhere. That right hand, plus an increased focus on body punching, led Pacquiao to knock out Morales for the first time in Morales’ career. Pacquiao has shown increasing diversity in his arsenal since; against David Diaz, he unveiled an uppercut that came pretty much without precedent. And he has demonstrated a surprising knack for counter-punching.
Still, for all his improvement in his offensive repertoire, Pacquiao often throws his hooks pretty wide, and De La Hoya’s team has noticed, correctly, that Pacquiao frequently has to take a step forward before launching his blows. Pacquiao, against Diaz, showed that he could punch from different angles, but that was against a very limited, one-dimensional opponent. He’d shown some of that crafty punch/step-aside technique in previous fights, but to a lesser degree than he did against Diaz. Significantly, De La Hoya hasn’t fought a southpaw in years upon years. He didn’t seem to like it.
De La Hoya, too, relies on his left hand, but for two punches: jab, hook. When De La Hoya has his jab working, he’s hard to handle. He uses it to set up distance and score points, then employs it to set up his fearsome left hook. That left hook is no mirage. When he lands it cleanly, it’s a knockout punch. Opponents have figured that out over the years, so De La Hoya mixes it in after the jab amid flurries. His right hand isn’t exactly a seal flipper, but it’s not a major weapon. It’s just part of his arsenal during a scoring flurry. He has no significant uppercut to speak of, but given that his game is predicated primarily on his speed, it’s not that big a problem; however, against a shorter opponent who’s going to try to get on the inside, an uppercut wouldn’t be a bad weapon to have. De La Hoya’s also not a bad counter-puncher, although he’s not a counter-puncher by inclination.
Overall, Pacquiao is the more potent offensive fighter. Pacquiao is so focused on landing power punches that it would be hard for the more cautious De La Hoya to keep up. But Pacquiao’s brazen emphasis on offense has hurt him in other ways.
Defense. Speaking of: De La Hoya may have been hit more by Steve Forbes than he had in past fights, but he’s fundamentally good on D. Pacquiao has historically made his overwhelming offense his defense, and even though he’s shown signs of improvement on D, it is assuredly one of the weaknesses in his game.
Where Pacquiao shows defensive acumen, it is primarily in his head movement on the way in to set up his offense. He steps to the side, he bobs and weaves and he occasionally blocks punches with his gloves. Mostly, he comes straight forward with his chin exposed. His defense looked fantastic against the slow, limited Diaz, but that probably was the anomaly. It’s hard to imagine Pacquiao dodging De La Hoya punches that defensive master Floyd Mayweather didn’t.
De La Hoya’s reflexes against Forbes were not up to his historical par. But De La Hoya routinely blocks a lot of punches with his gloves, and he excels at taking a step back to get out of punching range. Because of his defensive skills, he’s not taken all that much punishment over the years. I’m not saying he gets a golden glove, but he’s very good on defense.
If you were to make a triumvirate of reasons Pacquiao can’t win, it would be size, punch resistance and defense. Can Pacquiao match the defense of Mayweather, or even Forbes? No. De La Hoya’s defense may be on the decline, but even at his worst, he’s better here than Pacquiao. His chin better hold steady, or he better show major, major improvement on defense
Intelligence. By intelligence, I don’t mean, who’s the smarter man in an IQ test. I mean, ring intelligence – the ability to think inside the ring.
As on the defensive front, De La Hoya has a significant edge here. He has shown far greater versatility than has Pacquiao. He has demonstrated that he can slug, box and adjust within fights.
Pacquiao, according to trainer Freddie Roach, picks up things faster than does De La Hoya. That may be true. Pacquiao now is a way, way, way better fighter than he was prior to the first Marquez fight. But I can’t say I’ve ever seen Pacquiao figure out an opponent, so to speak, and make adjustments mid-fight. When he has mounted comebacks late in a fight, it has largely been because his unbelievable physical abilities have caught up to a slowing opponent, smarter or no.
Trainers. Roach, having once trained De La Hoya, knows him better than he might otherwise. Nacho Beristain, who trained Marquez to two almost-wins against Pacquiao, gives De La Hoya a little inside knowledge, too.
Roach is easily one of the best trainers of his generation, and if he can come up with a game plan that pushes the far smaller Pacquiao to a win over De La Hoya, then he should be Trainer of the Year, by far. He has taken Pacquiao’s raw physical gifts and molded him into a real boxer – not technician, exactly, but a smart enough, crafty enough, skilled enough boxer to maximize those same raw physical gifts. I have to imagine that Roach learned a little about De La Hoya’s strengths and weaknesses when he trained him for the one Mayweather fight. Joe Gossen, who trained Joel Casamayor to defeat Diego Corrales before switching to train Corrales to defeat Casayamor in the rematch, says he doesn’t think Roach will have learned enough from that one fight to make a difference. Maybe it won’t make much of a difference, but that’s some insider knowledge that can’t be bad to have.
Beristain is brilliant, too. His prized pupil, Marquez, twice took the strength of Pacquiao, his offense, and turned it into a weakness via the magic of counter-punching. It’s hard to imagine Beristain turning De La Hoya into as pure a counter-puncher as Marquez, but a little tweaking here can’t help, because eventually Pacquiao’s going to have to take some risks to get inside on the longer, taller De La Hoya. I don’t see much advantage to De La Hoya having sought the advice of Angelo Dundee for this fight, because as smart as Dundee no doubt is at his advanced age, De La Hoya’s frequent trainer reshuffling has, if anything, hurt him. There can only be so many cooks in the kitchen, or so many chiefs per Indian, or whatever metaphor suits you best here.
This category may be the only one where neither boxer has a clear advantage. Roach and Beristain, as much as they dislike each other, are two of the best trainers currently in the sport. They’ll bring a level of smarts to this fight that might not otherwise exist.
Mentality. Pacquiao has never shown a second of hesitation, doubt or surrender. De La Hoya clearly fears no man, but psychologically, his makeup isn’t ideal.
Pacquiao really only knows one way: Forward, and with 100 percent commitment. T
here’s nothing more to explain. He simply has never shown any tendency to back down or doubt himself. When he gets hit cleanly, he almost seems to admire his opponent for it, and he reacts by trading back. There’s just nothing about his heart or mind set that raises any concerns. If anything, he is too fearless.
De La Hoya has underrated heart and bravery – just name any active boxer who has fought more truly great opponents, I double dog dare you – but in the ring, he sometimes seems beset by doubt. He undertakes mysterious misadventures like abandoning his jab against Mayweather. And I really think Roach, with all his criticism of that and other aspects of De La Hoya’s game, has gotten under De La Hoya’s skin. Unlike some critics, I don’t question De La Hoya’s heart. I think he’s a tough S.O.B.
But it may be that, unlike Pacquiao, the same intelligence that makes De La Hoya formidable is a handicap in other wOffense. Don’t get confused: This is the battle of the left hands, offensively. De La Hoya’s best punches are his left jab and left hook, thrown from his orthodox stance despite his being a natural left-hander. Pacquiao’s best punch is the straight left, which was so potent that he was able to persist at an elite level for years without much than a 1-2 punctuated by said straight left.
The tactical brilliance of Juan Manuel Marquez forced Pacquiao to adjust after 2004, when Erik Morales took up Marquez’ fight plan and pushed Pacquiao from the draw Marquez forced to an actual win. Speed and power, after all, only got Pacquiao to a certain point. They got him exceptionally far, but it wasn’t enough against a clever Marquez and a savvy Morales. That 1-2 combo is still, and shall always remain, his best weapon. But after the first Morales bout, Pacquiao was forced to develop a right hook he and trainer Freddie Roach called, hilariously, Manilla Ice. Silly name or no, it was mighty effective from pretty much out of nowhere. That right hand, plus an increased focus on body punching, led Pacquiao to knock out Morales for the first time in Morales’ career. Pacquiao has shown increasing diversity in his arsenal since; against David Diaz, he unveiled an uppercut that came pretty much without precedent. And he has demonstrated a surprising knack for counter-punching.
Still, for all his improvement in his offensive repertoire, Pacquiao often throws his hooks pretty wide, and De La Hoya’s team has noticed, correctly, that Pacquiao frequently has to take a step forward before launching his blows. Pacquiao, against Diaz, showed that he could punch from different angles, but that was against a very limited, one-dimensional opponent. He’d shown some of that crafty punch/step-aside technique in previous fights, but to a lesser degree than he did against Diaz. Significantly, De La Hoya hasn’t fought a southpaw in years upon years. He didn’t seem to like it.
De La Hoya, too, relies on his left hand, but for two punches: jab, hook. When De La Hoya has his jab working, he’s hard to handle. He uses it to set up distance and score points, then employs it to set up his fearsome left hook. That left hook is no mirage. When he lands it cleanly, it’s a knockout punch. Opponents have figured that out over the years, so De La Hoya mixes it in after the jab amid flurries. His right hand isn’t exactly a seal flipper, but it’s not a major weapon. It’s just part of his arsenal during a scoring flurry. He has no significant uppercut to speak of, but given that his game is predicated primarily on his speed, it’s not that big a problem; however, against a shorter opponent who’s going to try to get on the inside, an uppercut wouldn’t be a bad weapon to have. De La Hoya’s also not a bad counter-puncher, although he’s not a counter-puncher by inclination.
Overall, Pacquiao is the more potent offensive fighter. Pacquiao is so focused on landing power punches that it would be hard for the more cautious De La Hoya to keep up. But Pacquiao’s brazen emphasis on offense has hurt him in other ways.
Defense. Speaking of: De La Hoya may have been hit more by Steve Forbes than he had in past fights, but he’s fundamentally good on D. Pacquiao has historically made his overwhelming offense his defense, and even though he’s shown signs of improvement on D, it is assuredly one of the weaknesses in his game.
Where Pacquiao shows defensive acumen, it is primarily in his head movement on the way in to set up his offense. He steps to the side, he bobs and weaves and he occasionally blocks punches with his gloves. Mostly, he comes straight forward with his chin exposed. His defense looked fantastic against the slow, limited Diaz, but that probably was the anomaly. It’s hard to imagine Pacquiao dodging De La Hoya punches that defensive master Floyd Mayweather didn’t.
De La Hoya’s reflexes against Forbes were not up to his historical par. But De La Hoya routinely blocks a lot of punches with his gloves, and he excels at taking a step back to get out of punching range. Because of his defensive skills, he’s not taken all that much punishment over the years. I’m not saying he gets a golden glove, but he’s very good on defense.
If you were to make a triumvirate of reasons Pacquiao can’t win, it would be size, punch resistance and defense. Can Pacquiao match the defense of Mayweather, or even Forbes? No. De La Hoya’s defense may be on the decline, but even at his worst, he’s better here than Pacquiao. His chin better hold steady, or he better show major, major improvement on defense
Intelligence. By intelligence, I don’t mean, who’s the smarter man in an IQ test. I mean, ring intelligence – the ability to think inside the ring.
As on the defensive front, De La Hoya has a significant edge here. He has shown far greater versatility than has Pacquiao. He has demonstrated that he can slug, box and adjust within fights.
Pacquiao, according to trainer Freddie Roach, picks up things faster than does De La Hoya. That may be true. Pacquiao now is a way, way, way better fighter than he was prior to the first Marquez fight. But I can’t say I’ve ever seen Pacquiao figure out an opponent, so to speak, and make adjustments mid-fight. When he has mounted comebacks late in a fight, it has largely been because his unbelievable physical abilities have caught up to a slowing opponent, smarter or no.
Trainers. Roach, having once trained De La Hoya, knows him better than he might otherwise. Nacho Beristain, who trained Marquez to two almost-wins against Pacquiao, gives De La Hoya a little inside knowledge, too.
Roach is easily one of the best trainers of his generation, and if he can come up with a game plan that pushes the far smaller Pacquiao to a win over De La Hoya, then he should be Trainer of the Year, by far. He has taken Pacquiao’s raw physical gifts and molded him into a real boxer – not technician, exactly, but a smart enough, crafty enough, skilled enough boxer to maximize those same raw physical gifts. I have to imagine that Roach learned a little about De La Hoya’s strengths and weaknesses when he trained him for the one Mayweather fight. Joe Gossen, who trained Joel Casamayor to defeat Diego Corrales before switching to train Corrales to defeat Casayamor in the rematch, says he doesn’t think Roach will have learned enough from that one fight to make a difference. Maybe it won’t make much of a difference, but that’s some insider knowledge that can’t be bad to have.
Beristain is brilliant, too. His prized pupil, Marquez, twice took the strength of Pacquiao, his offense, and turned it into a weakness via the magic of counter-punching. It’s hard to imagine Beristain turning De La Hoya into as pure a counter-puncher as Marquez, but a little tweaking here can’t help, because eventually Pacquiao’s going to have to take some risks to get inside o
n the longer, taller De La Hoya. I don’t see much advantage to De La Hoya having sought the advice of Angelo Dundee for this fight, because as smart as Dundee no doubt is at his advanced age, De La Hoya’s frequent trainer reshuffling has, if anything, hurt him. There can only be so many cooks in the kitchen, or so many chiefs per Indian, or whatever metaphor suits you best here.
This category may be the only one where neither boxer has a clear advantage. Roach and Beristain, as much as they dislike each other, are two of the best trainers currently in the sport. They’ll bring a level of smarts to this fight that might not otherwise exist.
Mentality. Pacquiao has never shown a second of hesitation, doubt or surrender. De La Hoya clearly fears no man, but psychologically, his makeup isn’t ideal.
Pacquiao really only knows one way: Forward, and with 100 percent commitment. There’s nothing more to explain. He simply has never shown any tendency to back down or doubt himself. When he gets hit cleanly, he almost seems to admire his opponent for it, and he reacts by trading back. There’s just nothing about his heart or mind set that raises any concerns. If anything, he is too fearless.
De La Hoya has underrated heart and bravery – just name any active boxer who has fought more truly great opponents, I double dog dare you – but in the ring, he sometimes seems beset by doubt. He undertakes mysterious misadventures like abandoning his jab against Mayweather. And I really think Roach, with all his criticism of that and other aspects of De La Hoya’s game, has gotten under De La Hoya’s skin. Unlike some critics, I don’t question De La Hoya’s heart. I think he’s a tough S.O.B.
But it may be that, unlike Pacquiao, the same intelligence that makes De La Hoya formidable is a handicap in other ways.
