By Dami Ademidun: Understanding boxing and how styles make fights, one could come to the realization that despite the arguments for Floyd Mayweather Jr. and Manny Pacquiao having an equal chance of having their hand raised at the end of a fight between one another, that there may have always been a high chance that a fight between these two men may not be and may never have been a competitive fight if they ever got into the ring, even in 2010.

In regards to the fight of this century as the people of now would call it, this writer believes there has always been a high possibility that this fight would underwhelm once both fighters were under the lights. This in particular would be the case because one of the fighters would likely expose the other in grand fashion. The fight would not be back and forth in terms of who is winning on the cards and likely this is something both fighters know, but cannot predict. It is for this reason above the plethora of others that have accumulated through the years, that these fighters continually refuse to get into the ring with one another while continuing to throw up smokescreens as diversions to delay the fight.

When you look at the two fighters, they are more or less matched for speed, so that is out of the equation. In a true technical boxing sense, Mayweather’s footwork in regards to ebb and flow is better, with Pacquiao seeming to favour the footwork more akin to that of an explosive American football player. However, Mayweather’s footwork has not been used as much since fighting Ricky Hatton in 2007, for reasons he claims are intentional, but in reality may not be. So thats out of the equation. Amongst qualitative traits such as speed, footwork, and others in their fight game, the only real arguments about who’s are better end up coming from one’s own personal bias for one fighter over the other and can be argued for days between avid fans of both fighters.

Continuing with this writer’s viewpoint though, Mayweather is and always has been the more technically skilled fighter who is more appealing to a trained eye, while Pacquiao may be more appealing to watch to the untrained eye or the eye looking for excitement and activity over technicality. So depending on the eye of the one’s judging, the choice to favour one of these two men in a contest based on ways in which they appeal in a fight could be out of the equation also.

This all makes the fight seem very 50/50. However, at the end of the day, the outcome of a fight between these two men most likely comes down to, and may have always come down to, the answers to these questions: Can a masterful defense neutralize an unparalleled offense? Or can this overly aggressive offense overwhelm and crack the battle tested Philly shell? If the answer is yes two one of these two questions, the fight will be very one-sided and may not go anywhere close to the distance.

One thing this writer knows though, is it’s hard to bet against defense. If you have good defense, it can create opportunities to mount a good offense. On the other hand, there are not as many legitimate reasons to support the notion that a good offense can correlate to having a good defense, even if you believe the rearranged axiom of a certain fighter’s best defense being their offense. There is a reason for that phrase not originally be told in that order of words. The truth of the matter is, one can’t fall back on a defensive foundation that is not there if all offense does fail.

However, in the context of boxing and a superfight, one can make a case for offense. If Floyd Mayweather lands more punches at a much higher connect percent all night but throws 600 less punches, a judge who does not have the benefits of compubox, may not realize a lot Pacquaio’s punches aren’t landing as long as he persists with this offense gives the illusion that Mayweather is being forced onto the defensive, even if it is by Mayweather’s own design. However, this argument assumes that this fight could go to a decision and that Pacquiao can return to form in his upcoming fights, of which there don’t seem to be many left.

It really is up in the air whether this fight really ever was and really ever will come down to a 50/50 defense versus offense showdown. Although age continues to set in for both fighters, if they ever do fight, there has always been a strong possibility that one fighter will dominate the other without any back and forth shift in who’s controlling the fight. If the fight ever happens, we’ll see how close it could be or we’ll see who dominates and who crumbles. Will it be an even contest? Will it be a case of the exposer and the exposed coming to light? Would it really have made any difference if they had fought back in 2010 versus sometime in the now? Let it be known what you think!