How Much Further for Pacman?

Both Hatton and Cotto were live opponents as far as I'm concerned. They were healthy on fight night, Oscar De La Hoya simply wasn't. Bokaj's argument that everybody was saying Oscar was going to murder Pacquiao is null and void. Those predictions were made based on the assumption that Oscar was not going to be a zombie on fight night. Manny Pacquiao weighed more than Oscar on Fight Night, that is all you have to know.

Manny Pacquiao's resume can be dreadfully overstated at times. Sure, on paper he beat Barrera twice, Morales twice, and Marquez and Oscar De La Hoya. But it's fact that, as Sweet Scientist points out, Barrera was practically done in the second fight, Morales was past his prime even for the time he did beat Manny, and I had Marquez winning both fights as did a lot of other journalists and spectators. Great resume, but I refuse to ignore the circumstances of those fights.

It's ironic that if Freddie Roach was a member on ESB, he'd actually be agreeing with everything I've said regarding the Oscar De La Hoya circus, Bokaj.

 

Nice Day; good poitns on Floyds defence/offence dealing with Pacs offence.

I just feel Pac is too unpredictable, full of stamina and in his prime, and will cause Floyd more problems than say, De La Hoya or Hatton, the most 'live; opponents he's fought recently :good

 

Of what, cyberspace?

 

i'll knock you into space dont you never say another unkind word about the pacman

 

What's this new foible then?

You're going all 'Duran' with Pac are ya?:yep

 

He would, then he would say that he thought that Oscar wasn't that bad just that Pac made him look bad.

Freddie Roach as beyond inconsistent. I agree with you by the way. Roach talked about how Oscar was a part time fighter and couldn't pull the trigger anymore. The fact that Pac outweighed him tells us enough of the story, no doubt.

 

Whose resume can't you do that with? The fact of the matter is that they were all considered among the best of their division when Pac fought them, divisions that was way above the one he started out at.

A simple question, how many can claim to have established themselves as world class in such a range of levels? If it really isn't such a big deal, there should be loads of them, I reckon.

 

Rating Oscar as a better win than Leonard's over Hagler is truly absurd in my judgment. Common sense should prevail.

 

Well, imo, there are fighters you can't do that to, not to the extent you can with Pac at any rate, and that's why I would rate them higher than him.

Not many. He is a great weight jumper, one of the very best ever, but assessing a fighter is more complex than simply looking at how well they have done over a range of weight classes.

 

Can you name me three modern fighters who you would rank above Manny Pacquiao at this point, Scientist? by modern let's say the cut off point is 1980.

 

Roberto duran,sugar ray leonard and pernell whitaker.

 

Pac-DLH a better win that Leonard-Hagler .......

It's so bad, I wouldn't even hold Bokaj responsible for that statement.

Diminished responsibility on the grounds of temporary insanity. Next.

 

Duran did a lot of his best work in the 70's.

 

If Pac beats Mayweather and hopefully takes the drug test in the process, then I would rate Pac quite high. Of course not above Robinson, Greb, etc, but somewhere. Maybe even bottom top ten.

 

I've seen it done on just about every fighter. It's one of the most tedious exercises on this board and it's done to death.

Of course, but it is in many cases a very large part of how fighters are ranked.

Let's see where Manny's career takes us, but brutally dominating some of the current top brass of the WW division for someone who made his stripes as a flyweight is quite probably unique. That carries a lot of weight for me.