Yes, they don't "fly" with you because you are downright psychotic in your hatred towards Pacquiao, to the point of it being disturbing. Holding losses of guys in their first year of boxing ever when they are malnourished kid not even 19 years old (something YOU fail to mention) in any way whatsoever is just pathetic hater talk, plain and simple. It's not a bad loss. It's not a "good" loss. It's just an (understandable) loss Holding KO losses against a heavy-handed Thai who was considered a good boxer at the time and came from a family of fighters is not a bad loss, you weirdo. Holding a loss to Erick Morales because "he was like, washed maaaaa~n" is dumb and disrespectful of a veteran who was a great boxer seeing a vulnerability in a come-forward fighter and being able to exploit it. The only loss you have where it was a "bad one" is Jeff Horn, and since I agree with that I don't know why you keep harping on it other than your disturbing "I HATE PACQUIAO" behavior, especially since I also agreed that Pac isn't the GOAT and never will be no matter what he does from here on out. PLEASE stop being a weirdo about this. It makes talking to you about Pacquiao so goddamn tedious. There are plenty of reasons to say Manny Pacquiao isn't and won't be the GOAT and not a single one of them involves tearing him down or painting him with some weird "if he was THAT good then he'd never lose to X no excuses only losers lose that's why it's called losing lol" brush. Guess we have to disqualify Ray Robinson from ATG/GOAT status for that Turpin loss; he was supposed to destroy that guy after all. Nope, don't care that there was a rematch, he was supposed to ko that dude by round 8! Clearly overrated. Those last couple of sentences are what you sound like. Note how crazy it sounds.
Paulie said before Pacquiao fought Cotto that if Manny wins he may be the GOAT, Max said before Pacquiao beat Margarito if Manny wins he is the GOAT. Clearly we have got to a point where people either dont remember or dont understand how insane it is that Pacquiao can even be competitive at WW, back when Pacquiao was destroying David Diaz at LW literally no one thought it was possible for Pacquiao to move up any more weight classes especially not win another world title in a any more weight classes, as we know he ended up winning in another 3 weight divisions! People definitely take Manny's achievements for granted, everyone knows Pacquiao is an 8 division world champions but most people cant actually comprehend how insane that achievement is. The fact even without the Spence fight Pacquiao has better wins at WW than Mayweather is insane, bearing in mind no one ever thought they would even see Pacquiao fight any higher than LW. As time goes on i think Pacquiao will definitely be appreciated a lot more, regardless if Manny wins, loses or draws against Spence, Pacquiao will always be in the GOAT conversation, history will look back fondly on him and rightly so.
My points are valid and backed by facts. It's not my fault you have trouble accepting them. You a damn right I'm going to hold that loss to torrecampo against him. He wasn't robbed and he got ktfo. That's what you do when you analyze a boxers resume you take the good with the bad. I dont hate pac I hate the fact that others, not you are being disrespectful and calling him the Goat when he's clearly not. He's a atg a top 25 or top 30 but his resume when you dive deeper into it simply doesn't measure up to greater fighters with better resumes that's all this is. Pac really isn't a great h2h boxer he can be outboxed by plenty of atgs his longevity and weight classes is what make him great.
How can he have better wins at WW when pbf beat pac himself at the weight? That right there trumps all of Pac's wins there.
Spence has only beaten two world class natural 147 pounders his own size and he struggled badly against both even though one was damaged goods and hardly close to being the best version of themselves for a whole host of different reasons. In fact, both those fighters were or should've been coming off a loss because Porter lost to the average Ugas in many people's eyes. Spence is a natural 154 pounder who is huge for 147 and all sinew and muscle at that weight. Sure he looks great beating up on career 140lb featherfists and blown up 135 pounders fighting in their 5th weight class, but the fact is he hasn't proven he can decisively beat a world class natural 147 pounder yet whereas other fighters in the P4P top 10 have not only proven they can completely dominate or embarrass world class fighters their own size but that they can do so against way bigger ones in weight classes above or two or three above their natural weight class. It's a completely different ballgame when you're facing world class and elite fighters your own size or much bigger than it is when you're huge for the weight fighting smaller ones who you're heavier, longer, physically stronger, more powerful and durable than. Not rocket science. Now here's the catch. Manny is one of those fighters and he is a natural 140 pounder who is fighting a way bigger, longer and heavier prime Spence who is a legit beast and worthy of the plaudits he's received when facing leprechauns like Manny and blown up 135 and 140 pounders and it would be an incredible win and feat for Manny to beat him at almost 43 years of age and coming off two years of inactivity and the fact that Manny has achieved all he has, especially in the higher weight classes, whilst being the complete antithesis of a weight bully is astonishing.
I'm not having any trouble accepting them at all; you are picking and choosing which facts to apply and which to ignore. Case in point: You also take into account other facts when analyzing a resume; what point in a career was this? Was he hurt, or had trouble making weight? How experienced was he, especially vs his opponent? Was he a protected prospect or someone thrown to the wolves to sink or swim? That's part of why GOAT talk or even p4p talk is, at the end of the day, silly; there are too many variables when looking at a boxer's resume, especially when comparing them to guys they'll most likely never fight. A close loss can be more impressive and indicative of talent than 10 easy victories. Not that losing to Torrecampo is indicative of talent (I'm not crazy) but I don't hold losses against a malnourished teen a year into his career against him, either. I wouldn't hold losses in the first three years against him, considering they'd be the first three years he ever wore boxing gloves, amateur or professional. If you don't hate Pac then don't rip him. This paragraph is about the most objective I've ever seen you post about him, and I've been here long enough/seen enough Pacquaio topics to get a good sampling size. He has an amazing resume with great opponents, but you are right that there are those who have simply better resumes. You are also right that head-to-head I don't think he matches well past lightweight, but there would also be no need to move up anyway, so who knows what would have been? But yes, to the extent that a GOAT even exists, you are right that Pac isn't and can't be.
you keep pretending like floyd and pac are the same size. like fighting at welter is the exact same sacrifice for both guys. it aint. fighting, and winning, at ww is different for floyd than it is for pac. floyd beating pac doesnt make him a better fighter than pac, it just makes him a better welter.
You act like pbf and Canelo are the same size. Pbf and pac are closer to the same size than pbf and canelo are. Yet you didn't make any excuses for pbf did you? Pac is a ww he has taken on and beaten bigger guys than pbf. Oscar margo Mosely cotto and thurman to name a few. It's an excuse sorry. He lost to a better man period.
no i dont. if you want to claim that if floyd and canelo were the same size that floyd would beat him, ok. but saying the real floyd at his best beats the real canelo at his best, is ridiculous.
Pac has beaten bigger fighters than pbf so he's a ww. He lost to pbf because pbf was better. That's all I'm saying.
that alone should tell you of his greatness, because hes smaller than floyd, no matter how you measure.
yes, and you judge those wins on their particular merits. floyd beating pac heads up still doesnt make floyd a better fighter, it just makes him better at ww. if mikey had lost to vargas, it doesnt make vargas a better fighter than mikey, it just means vargas is better at welter.
Yes it does they both considered the 2 best of the era pbf was p4p #1 and at times pac was p4p #1 this fight was the biggest legacy fight of the era whoever won would be fighter of the era and pbf won and won easily. Lastly your Vargas Mikey example is a horrible one because Vargas is no where near Mikeys level where as pbf is on or superior to pacs. Just like when pac lost to horn no one would say he was greater than pac because his accomplishments and resume don't back it up. But with pbf he does and was fighter of the decade for that reason and holds the two best wins of the last decade in pac and Canelo.
