You can call me unpatriotic, superstitious or a crackpot, but I strongly felt the certainty of Manny Pacquiao’s loss to Timothy Bradley after I read chronicler Marv Dumon’s revelation of Pacquiao’s “16th jinx,” as mentioned in Recah Trinidad’s PDI 04-12-12 article and in which I, in turn, quoted in my previous post entitled “The Bull-Bear Connection - An Unsolicited Advice to the Black Swan Manny Pacquiao“.
This jinx story says that Pacquiao lost every 16th fight since he turned pro.
He first lost to Rustico Torrecampo in 1996 and this was his 16th fight since turning pro. Then he lost again to Medgoen Singsurat (3 K Battery) in 1999 and this was his 16th bout since losing to Torrecampo.
Pacquiao lost for the third time in 2005, this time with Erik Morales in their first encounter. This was his 16th bout since losing to Singsurat.
Pacquiao’s bout with Timothy Bradley was his 16th fight again, since his loss to Erik Morales.
Well, during the day of the bout, I was in fact the odd man out in my very own household. My wife and teenage kids all strongly rooted for Pacquiao and would not want to hear anything about my “jinx” story.
That is water under the bridge now.
Pacquiao lost to Bradley in another controversial decision where most boxing pundits and Pacquiao supporters including Bob Arum believed Pacquiao won.
Now the shoe is on the other foot and it’s now Pacquiao’s side on the complaining end.
The irony is that it was only months ago that the poor Juan Manuel Marquez complained of having been robbed of victory three times already. Speaking of how fate, at times, plays tricks on humans.
Now it can be told: Pacquiao indeed lost every 16th fight in his professional career. In plain folklore terms, Pacquiao appears to have a 16th bout jinx.
Dictionaries define the word “jinx” simply as a person or thing that brings bad luck. This is something, of course, that borders on what is generally considered superstition by our supposed scientific world.
Well, you are free to draw your own conclusions. I will stop discussions about jinx at this point, lest I get accused of peddling mumbo jumbo in a supposed investment blog like this.
We can argue until we turn blue that Pacquiao really won that fight with Bradley.
But what is hardly arguable is that Pacquiao is far from his best in that fight and he looked visibly tired in the later rounds which made Bradley recover from being dazed and display his wares (something that Pacquiao could probably have easily disposed of via knockout in his prime).
And hardly is it arguable that Pacquiao is far from his best in the previous fight with perennial opponent Juan Manuel Marquez which the latter noisily claimed to have been robbed of victory.
Neither is it arguable that Pacquiao has been piling up distractions one over another: that he is Mr. Honorable Congressman; that he has a regular noontime TV game show; that he used to gamble, indulged in vices and keeps company with men not known for virtuous living.
Well, he is now extensively reported as having abandoned his vices and reformed in favor of Bible readings and preaching. Whether this resulted in less distraction or just trading one distraction for another, can be something arguable.
And to top them all is his recent spat with the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) which is inquiring on the precipitous drop in his reported income tax payments. Displaying much bravado, Pacquiao says that he intends to fight this to the finish.
Pacquiao’s loss to Bradley and his lackluster performance with his Marquez bout are two trees in the forest. The forest is that of a man engaged in impossible juggling exhibition trying desperately to maintain focus amidst horrendous distractions.
What I want to point out in this article is how a boxing career resembles market behavior and how this relates to the Pacquiao’s case and his loss to Bradley.
Again, as per Philip Carret in his 1930 investment classic “The Art of Speculation”, the onset of bears can be attributed to “the inability of mankind to maintain a regimen of hard work in the face of easy living conditions.”
According to Carret:
”Just as in the realm of pugilism a few years of soft living will make a Dempsey (referring to Jack Dempsey) an easy prey to a Tunney (James Tunney who challenged and defeated Dempsey twice for World Heavyweight Title) so a period of prosperity contains the seeds of its own destruction.”
Pray, tell me, how will Manny Pacquiao be able to maintain focus and a regimen of hard work in the midst of all the horrendous distractions he currently faces?
Now, I believe Pacquiao can easily beat and knock out Bradley in a rematch and can even have a year or two to remain the ring’s top dog if (and only if) he regains focus and throws all distractions away.
Or he can now leave boxing for good and focus on being a politician if politics now stirs his soul more than boxing.
Well, as far as I am concerned, Pacquiao’s biggest battleground now is not the ring and his worst enemy not Bradley nor the judges.
His biggest battleground now is his own self.