Leonard was a better fighter ... Pac's longevity and multi division titles along with Leonard's eye injury that limited his career early may give Manny an edge on accomplishments .. Floyd outclassed Manny and no one outclassed Ray ..
When people say Leonard is a better H2H fighter, are they including Pacquiao at Welterweight in that argument ? or Pacquiao at his best weight ? because i think a prime Pacquiao in his prime at his best weight, matches up pretty well with most of the greats of the past, just as good as Leonard does in my opinion. I mean how many times in Pacquiao's prime was he really challenged ? Marquez and Morales 1 ? that's about it. He also fought many more solid opponents than Leonard, we also never see Leonard fight against some of the more dangerous opponents of his era either. Like McCallum, Nunn, Kalambay, Curry, and a few others.
How I think also. The wins are just spectacular and some of the best ever and different styles and greatnesses to all of his opposition.. He found ways to win in different ways each time. Manny had a gear which was great, but I don't think he had the many gears Ray had , but he had a great great gear as stupid as that sounds.
I think I would go with Pac. Both probably in the 13-17 range…close but I still think Pac edges it for me
I went with Leonard but it’s a close call. Ray has a great top 3 or 4 best wins but pac’s resume is loaded with depth and longevity.
Norris did when Leonard was about the same age as Manny for the Mayweather fight. Leonard's fall off had everything to do with his lifestyle and little to do with his eye.
I crunched the numbers earlier this year and Pac's resume looked a little better than Duran's. What Pac is more unique and won't be replicated. Leonard's level at 147 probably was only slightly higher than Pac's level at 126-140 too.
A dried up Lalonde was more of a joke than Diaz and that's how Leonard got his "titles" at 168 and 175. Barrera was the man at 126 so the the alphabet belts weren't needed there. Agree that Pac doesn't count as a 154 champ.
Great question but extremely tough to answer. All replies arguing for either side have been excellent It’s almost like being asked to compare apples to oranges (though appropriate to do so in this exercise) in respect of somewhat different career attributes and the pros and cons of same. On one hand, Ray has the superior quality in comp. (though, the as and when status of said comp. when Ray prevailed over them has to be factored, not just the “name” - same goes for Pac, of course). On the other hand, Manny has the extremely successful longevity and, perhaps by association, the greater consistency. I wouldn’t say Pac was outclassed by Floyd - and certainly it wasn’t the best Pac that Floyd faced. The fight should’ve happened years earlier and Mayweather only engaged Pac after Manny had clearly slowed and had suffered a devastating KO loss, no less. In some ways we can say that Ray was outclassed at least once - vs Norris but it would be remiss not to qualify that it was an old, slow, erratically active and well deteriorated Ray. Of course SRL was worse off than Manny was v Floyd but PAC’s performance vs Floyd still warrants concession as per justified degrees. Absolute PAC was necessary to beat Floyd - which I believe he could’ve. Absolute being frenetic, tireless and firing shots from all angles, every second of every round. Anything even a bit less than that was so much more of a subtraction from the prime sum. Also, fair to say that post retirement Ray was a tad more selective and careful in choosing his opposition than Manny ever was? For mine, Manny had a near enough to - fight ‘em ALL ethic, old school, and the losses here and there are natural and more acceptable when a fighter doesn’t contrive his career so carefully as it appears Manny did not. All this adds up to - I dunno. I definitely need more “think” music on this one. Great thread concept btw.
Good thread this... SRL better fighter and has better single wins but Pacs longevity and the list of names he boxed is incredible. Argument here for both. I'll pick Leonard
Close. Very, close. But I believe sincerely while he didn't climb as far or fight as long Ray Leonard beat men who could've all been the standout fighter if not for him. Thus I have him higher both are great however.
Here's where I believe you're wrong .. Floyd was the older man vs Paq and both had been active. Ray was highly inactive and the much older man when he fought Norris who was in his own prime .. in addition your point about his lifestyle vs his eye is simply wrong .. he had to retire at the prime of his career over his eye .. years after the forced inactivity is when he fell into the drugs .. still nothing taken away from Paq who was an exceptional fighter .. his wins over Cotto and Margarito to me at that weight were amazing ..
Look, you want to invent your own facts , power to you .. if you're trying to say he didn't retire for a detached retina and fear of losing his vision, you're simply flat out wrong.