As of now, do you rank Pacquiao higher than any of these five greats?

Pacquiao, Jones, Hearns, and Chavez are interchangable. It depends on what you weight in more heavily. How fighters look on film, head 2 head dominance, etc. or purely resmue alone.

I think Arguello is the greatest fighter on this list.

Pac has eclipsed Sanchez.

 

Still behind all five

 

I'd probably have him behind all of them overall, taking peak performance level and accomplishments into account about equally, but i can easily see why someone could rate him over Sanchez or make an argument for some of the others.

I thnk once his career is over Pac's going to be an interesting and tough fighter to rate.

 

i normally wait until people are retired to rank them but he has the potential to be a top 30 for me as long as he dosent blow it and if he beats FMJ top 10

 

I actually think it's a difficult question to answer right now. Especially after his recent destruction of Hoya and Hatton. Were these guys both shot or did Pac make them look shot? Hatton seemed fine against Malignaggi. I just think it's good to let a little time pass to help gain perspective. Of the five guys listed I don't think it's an outlandish question and Pac at least belongs in the conversation. I personally think Sanchez would've picked Pac apart and stopped him at 126, but I also feel like Pac has improved a lot since moving up. Between the improved technique and his abillity to execute against bigger guys he may have found his best weight. Is it possible that Pac could make popular a trend of fighting at a more natural weight rather than suck down to an unhealthy weight? If so, I think he may be in the process of changing the sport which would vault him up any list in my opinion.

 

"When Dejesus beat Duran,in the nontitle fight he was a young fighter still developing his craft barely out of his teens"
Actually Duran had had 31 fights unbeaten to Dejesus's 34 and Duran was two months older than Dejesus, so this wont wash .

 

Sure it will.I considered a lot more than simply the number of fights they had when coming to that opinion for one.Duran improved considerably over the next 2-4 years.At the point he fought Dejesus he really hadn't yet mastered the boxer-puncher approach he would later perfect.Dejesus looked as good as i've ever seen him on the other hand, by the end of his title run and rubbermatch with Roberto he had started to lose his legs.

ANd to be clear i'm not trying to diminish Dejesus accomplishment.That Duran was already a great fighter.

 

No ,you implied that Dejesus was a finished article whereas Duran was a work in progress .phrases like barely out of his teens when in fact Duran was older.
Dejesus ,when he fought Duran had met a washed up Percy Hayles and Angel Robinson Garcia. That was the extent of his top level competiton.
Duran in contrast had also beaten Garcia but in additition.
Ernesto Marcel , Kobayashi,and Buchanan for the title, he had faced better competition,and was the reigning Champ ,and unbeaten.Duran was far and away the more experienced fighter at top level.

 

Yes, but Dejesus had fully realised his style.As i said he looks as good in that fight as in any other i've seen him in.He was a lot closer to his best than Duran was, and fighters peak and improve at different rates..you should know the number of fights or even amount of quality opposition doesn't necessarily have a direct relation to that.

 

Well the quality of your opposition should have a direct correlation to how you progress and improve ,imo.But I dont wish to be pedantic ,I can see where you are coming from.:good