Manny Pacquiao Is A Warrior—Chasing P4P Fighters Way Past The Twilight of His Career...

If we're going based on resume then its quantity vs quality.

Pacquiao moved through more weight classes and has sheer numbers on his side in terms of "good" wins. However he lacks signature wins over elite fighters in their prime. Only barrera and cotto fit and cotto was at a catchweight.

Leanard mostly only operated in 2 weight classes and had a short career with less fights. However he beat many prime fighters and had more signature elite wins against duran, hearns, benitez, cuevas, lalond, hagler, etc. If we're comparing signature wins pacquiaos resume doesnt stand a chance, but pacquiao has more B level guys and paprr belt holders. Also, many of pacquiaos best wins were guys severely weight drained/catchweights or past their prime like oscar or mosley.

Leanard had an eye injury that left him inactive for nearly 5 years. Inactivity is horrible for a guy who relies on speed like leanard, whereas pacquiao has been extremely active and only had one major injury (marquez ko loss and he came back rather quickly).

Also, there were less weight classes and less belts in leanards era. Its a lot easier to grab paper belts when there are like 4-5 of them and move in weight when there are only 4 lbs separating weight classes at the lower weights. Theres a reason you dont see middleweights going all the way up to light heavy, cruiser, heavy the way they do at the lower weights and there is NO conparison. Im not saying leanard could have conquered 8 weight classes if he fought today, but he certainly could have done more than just the 2 he competed in (147 & 160) in todays era of multiple paper belts and extra divisions.

Pacquiao has more losses and more unavenged losses and you yourself admit he isnt as skilled as leanard. If you think pacquiao is still better in terms of resume despitr all that, fine, but you're comparing apples to oranges. Pacquiaos best wins just dont compare to leanards wins over hagler, duran, and hearns and I DARE you to make a poll asking people if they think pacquiao's signature wins over barrera and cotto are better.

 

He beat Marquez in his prime. It wasnt dominant, but it was a win nevertheless.

Stop acting like a post Hearns post Mugabi 32 year old Hagler was prime. Can you do that?

Also I already agreed with you that Leaonrd has the better single win.

If you want to include fat Duran win then don forget Pac knocked out a faded Morales twice.

 

Hagler WON those fights! What part of that are you not understanding? He wasnt knocked down or suffering from long term injuries like broken bones or cuts. IF A FIGHTER IS COMING OF THE BIGGEST WINS OF THEIR CAREER, THEYRE PRIME GENIUS!

Hagler won the fight of the year and his biggest signature win over P4P monster hearns and then a thrilling war over hard punching mugabi. CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW THAT DIMINISHES LEANARD'S WIN OVER HAGLER WHO CLEANED OUT HIS DIVISION? ESPECIALLY BECAUSE LEANARD WAS MOVNG UP IN WEIGHT AND INACTIVE FOR 5 YEARS?

 

It diminishes it because they took Haglers prime from him.

 

Bull.

You literally just dont want to give leanard credit. That makes zero sense. Hagler won the fight of the year and didnt have any long term injuries and he was 32.

The only person "diminished" was a 5 years inactive eye injury leanard who never fougt at 160!

I DARE you to make a thread asking people if pacquiao has a win better than Hagler! If you dont then i understand why.

 

Make a thread asking if Hagler was prime in 1987.

 

Um Leonard beat a PRIME UNBEATEN Bentitez and Hearns.
He beat Duran when Duran had lost only ONCE- and he made Duran quit.
He beat Hagler who was unbeaten for years.
Duran
Hearns
Benitez
Hagler.
Name me 3 boxers of that caliber that Pac beat- and TWO of those boxers were in their prime and UNBEATEN.

 

No, the burden of proof is on you. Make a thread asking if pacquiao has a better win than Hagler.

YOU opened your big mouth and claimed pacquiao had the best resume of the last 30 years. Either defend that claim or take it back.

 

Sounds like deflection to me.

 

How the hell am i the one deflecting when YOU made a bold claim and then didnt have the balls to defend it?

The irony.

 

Dude I'm not going to start a whole thread over it. Especially since it's common opinion that 87 Hagler had slowed down.

Also I dont consider Leonard to be a fighter of the last 30 years. Since all his notable fights occurred over 30 years ago.

 

So by your last statement are you taking it back that pacquiao's resume is "above ali and leanard and its not even close"...?

 

Considering the depth no im not taking it back. But its not fair to compare Ali to a lower weight class fighter. There is no weight limit in the HW division. p4p is irrelevant in the HW division. Also, you can't move up when you fight HW. One reason why Pacquiaos resume is far deeper than Alis is because he could fight all the top guys in each successive weight class. Which he nearly did. Ali couldn't go chase other fighters you cant move up when you are HW.

And yes Pacquiao has a better resume than SRL in my opinion.

 

Then we're back to square 1. You're trying to have it both ways.

Either prove pacquiao has a signature win better than Hagler and Hearns or you clearly dont believe the nonsense you're writing. Because unless you're arguing sheer quantity vs quality thats the only way you can prove pacquiaos resume is "better". Go on, make the thread or I'll do it for you.

 

Those where both robberies. Talk about a douchebag...