Pacquiao 16th fight was against Gala who had only ever won one fight. infact going into the Pacquiao fight he had lost 9 in a row. Fight number 17 for Pacquiao was against Sung-Yul Lee who had fought twice and lost twice. Pacquiao continued to fight average opposition before getting a WBC title shot which he won he then lost the title trying to defend it for the second time, he then goes on a run of winning the WBC international super bantemweight title six times in a row, I believe this is a stepping stone title for boxers outside the top 10. In total I believe Pacman has fought 15 times for stepping stone titles ? Pacquiao has 3 losses and 2 draws on his record. Pacmans last 5 bouts have been against boxers who were all over 30 years of age, some of them 'shot' eg DLH. I would be the first to admit that holes can be picked in most boxers resume's, as good as Pacquiao is, is he really a top 50 ATG or even a top 20 ATG as some people are suggesting, considering he is a modern boxer, 3 losses and 2 draws is not great, Pacman resume is also good but not great. I dont think he is top 50 ATG material at the moment {that can change if he keeps on winning}
Titles in 6 different divisions,lineal in 4 of them. Fought from 106 to 147. 2 of the 3 losses came when he was a boy. DLH wasn't shot,he was dead at the weight.
I think people put far too much emphasis on loses and draws. You have to look at when these loses happened and how young/under developed he was when he first started boxing. I'm not sure what you mean by as a 'modern boxer" but he sure as **** wasn't a "modern boxer" when he fist started fighting.
People always put he fought at 106 as an advantage to his greatness... so why not put the losses that came around then? can't have it both ways.
Yes you can. The fact that he won a world lineal championship at age 19 and very inexperienced is a testament to his greatness...doesn't take away the fact though that he was nowhere near his prime. No one is saying he was the best at that weight anyways, just that he was good enough to win a championship far far from his prime.
Liston was past it. Patterson was too small and past it. Frazier was past 30. Foreman was green. Ali sucks and isnt deserving of top 50 ATG. Idiots. You can do this with any resume...doesnt take a genius.
Makes for a very welcome change from the continuous ball licking Pac's great, no doubt. But it's true - most of his big wins have came against shot fighters
agree! winning 3 titles form 3 division in his pre-prime stage is a testament to his greatness... in fact, there is no flyweight/bantamweight champ that had success past 126(just goes to show how hard if not impossible)...pacquiao doesn't have only good run past 126 but a legendary career at that; and to some, what he did from 108-147 is iconic