ATG: Who Ranks Higher? Pacman or Hitman?

I am not sure why people overrate someone after a win. As though Hearns or Whitaker or anyone couldn't have beaten Delahoya or Hatton recently. Those are not great wins and Floyd did do the same thing Pacman did. And the two fighters were more prime than they were for Pac.

 

duran was past his prime when tommy crushed him like a pinata. not trying to defend duran, but actually even a past his prime version was able to accomplish great things like destroying moore, hung 15 rounds with hagler, possibly the best middleweight of all time and busting him up making hagler look like the loser, and then dropping and beating the man that recently destroyed tommy and beat tommy twice. no credit should be taken away from tommy, but duran already had a record over 80 fights! A fighter that has that many fights usually is retired by then! so i really don't see anything ridiculous thinking duran was old, because most likely he was.

 

I see your point but the facts are that Duran fough 35 more times after Hearns and had 3 more title fights. He fought Camacho and Pazienza two times each and was not knocked out by either of them 10 years after he fought Hearns. 10 years later! Duran fought until 2001 which was 17 years after Hearns, and if you take when he fought Hearns, Duran's career was 34 years long. He fought Hearns in the first half of his career actually. Amazing as it sounds. Duran fought well in those years of the early 1980's when Hearns fought him he just could not hang with the big top guys like Hearns and Benitez and Hagler.

 

Yes, I've said it even before the Floyd fight.

Hatton hasn't done **** after "beating" the old Tzsyu. He fought like 5 guys after that, and his best wins out of those fights were Malignagi and Urango.
He was always a limited fighter and a B- to B level at best.

Beating Hatton shouldn't elevate him to the top 30 like some morons say. He's a top 50 atg, and maybe, just maybe top 40. But I personally have him at the top 50.

 

Hatton was a cherrypicked fight for Pacman. He knew he would easily beat him. All Hatton ever had was the win over Tzyzu. It was good but one fight does not make a legend.

 

VIVA Hit Man Hearns!!!!

 

Pac really does not have the great wins of some of the greats in history who fought guys who were young and in their utmost ability. Diaz and Delahoya and Hatton all have flaws. Yet Pacs fans want to make more out of it all.

 

Not really. When MAB fought Morales for the 3rd time, they were still in their primes. You could argue that Morales was a little bit past it, but still very close to his prime. Nobody was saying that he was past it when they fought, only now did that excuse magically appear just to somehow discredit Pac. Morales was the favorite when he fought MAB the 3rd time. Then MAB goes on to prove the critics wrong and beats Morales and goes on to be UNDEFEATED up until 2007 when he fought JMM who he even gave a tough fight. And if we go back to that Pac fight, MAB was coming off the best win streak if his entire career before he met Pac. You couldn't give me a better win streak than that in MAB's professional career.

I don't care if you think Barrera was overrated. If you think he is then fine, but at least be consistent with your objectivity and actually acknowledge that MAB was prime when Pac fought him the first time, overrated or not.

 

I do not think he was prime. I think he was a little past his prime as was Morales.

 

That's all unfounded speculation. I haven't seen anybody saying that Pac's out of his prime now. In fact anybody who says that should be shot in the head and shouldn't be watching boxing at all.

 

and I do think a prime Morales probably beats Pac more often than not.

 

Look whatever. The records prove otherwise. You don't want to look at the other side of the argument, fine. I'm not wasting any time here.

 

Were not talking about Morales now are we?

 

Why argue it. I do not think either of us is going to see the other person's side. I agree with you on the wasting time.

 

This thread is about Manny Pac. and Thomas Hearns so Morales comes up. If a thread were solely about Pacman vs. Barrera and if a question was about Barrera being on the decline when Pacman fought him, then I would not mention Morales. I do think that Manny benefitted from both guys being on the downside of their prime. They were not shot fighters, but definetely downside, and those two guys there are the legends he fought who started his legacy. Also, I do not think Marquez is in the class of Barrera and Morales.