One (major) thing that Pacquiao undoubtedly has over Mayweather in an ATG discussion

Cotto of 09 was younger and fresher? We all know who fought the better version of Cotto.... And Coralles was undefeated at the time and a dangerous fight for him.. He was not previously KO'd so that win was bigger than Manny facing Cotto that's a big win to leave out..

 

*******s grasping at straws.

 

Just because you don't consider him to be elite doesn't mean that he wasn't. Best lightweight of the past decade IMO.

 

typical *****-Logic right here :rofl

the un-shot Cotto :hi:

 

why the need to put a question mark? isn't it obvious already?

 

Man you are crazy. First off, the only reason you give Pac credit for beating Moralas, is because Moralas whipped his ass before. The same goes for Marquez and he whipped Pac ass three times!


1. Morales - I dont give him credit for the Morales fight because for one, he was already damaged goods. Morales and Barrerra had been beating the **** out each other for years. Also, after the first fight when Morales kick Pac ass, Morales fought Zahir Raheem and got his ass kicked. Then freash off a lost he fought PAc.

2. Marquez - I wont even get into this one. The fact that Pac is talking about a fourth fight with a fighter who never OFFICIALLY got the win should tell you something! And didn't Mayweather completely outclass MArquez.

3. Cotto - Man did I hear you compare Cotto to Diego CORRALES when Floyd fought him. Are you crazy? Cotto just came off one of the salvage beatings I ever seen a man take in Boxing. Then after that fight, Cotto fought Clottey and I think he lost. So then, Pac beats the **** out of a weight drained and mentally/physically beat fighter. Think about it, when Flloyd fought Corrales, it was two undefeated fighters matching up in their prime. Corrales was at the time 33-0 with 31KO's. If you remember that time, he was one of the most feared boxer in the lower weight classes. So for you to say Cotto when he fought Pac was better than Corrales when he fought Floyd means you are crazy.

4. I feel that it is always easier to say a fighter with loses has a better chance of making the case that they fought the harder opposition. Reason beings is that when they lose, it automatically raises both fighters credentials. EXAMPLE Take Ali, as great as he was, he always manage to lose a fight against fighters like Joe Frazier, Ken Norton, Leon Spinks, and Larry Homes. Just image if he never lose to any of these fighters, would you say he fought the toughest opponents? No you would not aknowledge these fighters as great fighters because we would of threw them in the bucket of fighters who couldn't beat Ali.

Same thing with Mayweather, he beats everybody, so after the fight, they always say he aint fought nobody. I mean, lets be honest, Floyd is way better than EVERYBODY Manny has faced. Floyd would of beat the **** out of Morales, Bareerra, and who else?

 

H2H Floyd picks Pac to pieces, but Pac has the far superior resume. Floyd has no-one but himself to blame for his resume.

 

..

 

43-0

 

Pacquiao fought better names. But he fought them under dodgier circustances compared to Floyd. Barrera 2003 win was a great one though.

 

Great thread pal.

My two cents.

They both have good resumes with the Pacman having the bigger wins due to his encounters at the lower weights.

I like the Marquez and Castillo recognition(both over Morales for me) despite the competetive outcome they are both very good at the weight.

Barrera is obviously the star here.

I however am in two minds over Mayweather vs Mosley.
On the one hand:
Cons.
Long layoff. Berto cancellation. 38 yrs old. Seen better days. Post fight with Mayweather proved to be shot.
Pros.
If the Pacman fight wasn't on then he HAD to fight Shane.
Smashed Margarito to be number 1 welter.
Very good performance while showing his willingness to be fight in the trenches.

For me the Tsyzu fight instead of Gatti would have significantly enhanced his legacy. Forget Margarito who cheated, Tsyzu would have made him undisputed at 140.


Its the retirement that will always show the gap for me. Tsyzu was the fight

 

Great thread pal.

My two cents.

They both have good resumes with the Pacman having the bigger wins due to his encounters at the lower weights.

I like the Marquez and Castillo recognition(both over Morales for me) despite the competetive outcome they are both very good at the weight.

Barrera is obviously the star here.

I however am in two minds over Mayweather vs Mosley.
On the one hand:
Cons.
Long layoff. Berto cancellation. 38 yrs old. Seen better days. Post fight with Mayweather proved to be shot.
Pros.
If the Pacman fight wasn't on then he HAD to fight Shane.
Smashed Margarito to be number 1 welter.
Very good performance while showing his willingness to fight in the trenches.
For ms the Tsyzu fight instead of Gatti would have significantly enhanced his legacy. Forget Margarito who cheated, Tsyzu would have made him undisputed at 140.


Its the retirement that will always show the gap for me. Tsyzu was the fight

 

Prime for prime: Whittaker ****s both floyd and pac man up
Prime for prime: Tszyu would KO pac, but the floyd fight could be exciting, because Tszyu never had problems with people who non-pressure fighters (He would've destroyed ODLH)

 

Castillo
Corrales
Hatton
Mosley
Oscar
Cotto
Judah
Hernandez
Manfredy
Chavez
Ortiz
Gatti was a top 3 fighter in the 140 division, and Hatton and Cotto refused to mention Mayweather's name in public after that fight.
Hell nearly every guy he beat during his title reign at Super Featherweight.

 

:deal

Floyd really shouldn't have 'retired' after Hatton. Could have made up for all the missed fights at 135 and 140 :-(