I'll give you another FACT, ODLH dropped from 162 to 145 at 35 years of age in just a matter of days. Shot, too old and dehydrated that they had to rehydrate Oscar after the fight with medical means. Just because some people thought pacman shouldn't have taken the fight does not make his "victory" over and old Oscar such a huge victory.
Diaz - and overrated fighter who isn't as good as some people like you think
Hatton - "KING"?
another overrated fighter who was giving his last licks
Barrera - shot way too many wars including TWO grueling wars with Morales
Morales - shot including he had fought his trilogy with Barrera by the time he fought Pacman(and still managed to school Pac the first time)
Marquez - beat Pacquiao two times, Marquez was robbed BOTH times, a judge scored one round 10-7 instead of 10-6 for Pacman, so what? Marquez was robbed because the judges didn't score more rounds for Marquez like they should have. Pacquiao won only one round after the first at best. The fact that you cling to what the third judge scored makes you so uneducated about this fight.
Study Pacquiao's career over the last few years, he has cherry picked A LOT.
No matter what things you try to bring up most of these fighters were either overrated
(good but not that good) or [COLOR="rgb(255, 140, 0)"]shot by the time[/color] Pacquiao got to fight them. And just because you overuse the word "fact" after every sentence does not make them facts. Go look up fact before you over use the word wrongfully.