Asero, you must realize from my posts that I too am a huge Pacquiao fan. Well, as a kindred spirit, please heed my advice and stop making these rash and unjustifiable claims, you are one of the key reasons for all the '*******' crap on these forums. If you rank Pacquiao higher than Napoles p4p then fair enough, but please explain your case, and allow for disagreement. Just to plainly declare "Pacquiao was better than Napoles skill-wise" as if it is a definitive judgement is very rash. I disagree myself.
I'm sorry, I just can't agree with these statements. Yes, Floyd has looked exquisite at times, but you must always, always keep in the forefront of your mind (not just for PBF but for every fighter) the standard of the man he is in with. The two best opponents Floyd has ever faced in my opinion was undoubtedly Castillo and a clearly past-prime version of Oscar. In the three fights he had against his two best opponents, did he look remotely special in any of the three? Absolutely not. Did he look amazing against N'Dou and Gatti etc? Yes, no question about that. But to me that just doesn't justify the opinion that he is one of the most talented fighters ever - not even close. And I'm not going down the same old road here about who he didn't fight - he didn't perform against the best opponents that he did fight, and they weren't even great by any means anyway!! Do you see my point at all? For a start, this is a very strange point of view for you to hold. Mayweather's weight-jumping is inferior to Pacquiao's, yet Floyd must have remarkable SKILLS to have jumped weights so effectively, whereas you have often been critical to the point of dismissive about Pacquiao's skills. Perhaps that's something you should think about, a little sub-conscious Pacquiao prejudice maybe? Anyway, my main point here is that it is not Floyd's remarkable SKILLS that have allowed him to be successful at welterweight as much it is his highly unremarkable COMP. Do you seriously think fellow superfeatherweights Alexis Arguello and Julio Cesar Chavez could not have beaten guys like Sharmba Mitchell, Carlos Baldomir, Zab Judah, Ricky Hatton and an overweight Juan Manuel Marquez? Arguello failed at 140 because he had the courage to face one of the most ferocious light-welterweights in history, Pryor. Chavez failed over 140 because he went in against one of the most skilled boxers in the history of the sport, Whitaker. These two guys would have hung, drawn and quartered Floyd's feeble welterweight comp far far more impressively and conclusively than the Pretty Boy himself managed. His welterweight career is NOT anything special, and could easily been replicated by other top superfeathers, had they shared his lack of ambition and over-cautious mindset. Even this I would disagree with to be honest. Time won't tell, because too much time has already passed. The last time Floyd had a fight where he was not virtually assured of victory was the Castillo rematch, which was years ago. The last 5-7 years have been filled with mediocre comp and dull fights, so even if he does go on to utilize his size advantages and outpoint Pacquiao then retire, it still will be a long, long way short of proving he is a comparable talent or has had a comparable career to someone like Leonard. If Mayweather KO's Pacquiao, UD's Mosley, then outboxes Williams at lightmiddle, he would have done enough in my book to deserve the billing that he feels he deserves. The opportunities ARE there, it can't be blamed on his era. But is he brave enough? And is he good enough? I strongly feel the answer is a resounding no on both counts.
And how does this prove he is inferior to Pac? A detailed analysis of their careers would be very appreciated :good
I just went on this site called...Boxrec, or something, and it says Manny Pacquiao once got whooped on by a guy called..err..Torrecampo? ...The Backus fight was stopped on a cut, a rematch ensued in which Napoles practically won every round on route to a TKO.
napoles seeing through blood is nothing new. And napoles is a slow(not flat) footed fighter. There is no chance he can beat a 140 sweet pea
Depending on who you view as a journeyman and who you don't, this statement may or may not be true. But even if you believe it is true, is this really important enough to be the deciding factor between two entire careers? I don't think it is, not by a long shot.