Who ranks the highest of these 5 guys?

pacquiaos last 5 fights

fought margacheato for 154 title and wouldnt let margarito weigh more then 150 and pacquaio came in at 144 after margacheato came off a knockout loss to mosley

fought bum clottey after he came off a loss to cotto

fought cotto coming off of a loss once again at a catchweight of 144 for the 147 title

and 8 Divison champion i dont think so hattons belt at 140 wasnt a major title
and he also wasnt champion at featherweight

fought ricky hatton after he came off of a knockout loss to mayweather and everybody knew he was shot

fought a shot weight drained de la hoya at 147 at a weight he hasnt made in 7 years

hes not even in the same league as bernard hopkins

 

Trinidad, Pavlik and Tarver are all equal or superior to the three fights you referenced. Morales was on the way out when Pac dominated the last fight. Did Pac really beat Marquez? Who is adding the depth you speak off guys like Margo and Clottey? Hopkins never came close to having a competitive fight with guys at that level.

 

Manny - accomplishments and talent
RJJ - sheer talent and h2h unbeatability
Bernard - accomplishment
Pernell and Floyd to me are nearly interchangeable. Maybe I have a PBF a little ahead because he was more dangerous in his day.

 

You must be ****ing kidding trying to put Pavlik and Tarver in the same sentence with JMM, MAB and EM. Get the **** outta here.

 

Like RobertV777, I can't believe people are honestly suggesting Oscar was Hopkins' best win. At the very least Trinidad and Tarver clearly rank above it, and a case could be made that Pavlik, Joppy, Lipsey, and Wright are all better wins as well. Similarly, Corrales clearly is a more impressive win for Floyd than Oscar in my book.

As for ranking Hopkins above Pacquiao, I think the case can be made depending on what you choose to emphasize from a given fighter's career. First and most obviously comes the subjective evaluation of fighters' wins and losses. Some people legitimately believe that Hopkins has not lost a fight since 1993, and has simply never received the benefit of the doubt in a close match. Similarly, some believe that Pacquiao lost one or both of his fights to Marquez. While the official record says otherwise, judges' scorecards are not necessarily more objective than those of you and me. In evaluating a fighter's greatness, it is certainly defensible to use one's own eyes and judgment for close fights and not simply accept the what the three ringside judges say (see for instance the Greb-Tunney series, which is even more difficult to evaluate for the purposes of any ranking because no footage exists). My main point here is that both Hopkins and Pacquiao's resumes can look substantially different if one is comfortable extending or rescinding the benefit of the doubt in certain close fights.

Similar subjective judgments also come into play about the quality of opposition. Were Morales or Barrera past it in any of their fights with Pacquiao? Was Oscar completely out of his league at 158? Did Trinidad have no business fighting at middleweight? All of these guys are great names to have on one's resume, but people can weigh the impressiveness of each victory in extremely different ways.

Winning titles across different weightclasses is quite impressive, but I also think there's a lot of value in sustained dominance of a single division. Hopkins was never much of a draw, and this made it more difficult for him to avoid problematic style match-ups in his division. I don't really want to turn this into a "Pacquiao is a cherrypicker" kind of discussion, but I do think popular fighters moving up in weight receive charitable treatment when they're selective about which particular beltholders they face. I hope it's not too controversial to suggest that David Diaz was not the top lightweight, Miguel Cotto was not the top welterweight, and Antonio Margarito was not the top junior middleweight at the time Pacquiao fought each of them. All of these fights made sense for financial or promotional reasons, but I do think that people are sometimes willing to gloss over the quality of opposition when evaluating a fighter who moved up (see Jones-Ruiz for another example of this). Hopkins was an undisputed champion, and I have never really heard anyone argue that he avoided someone during his time at the top of the division (though one will justifiably hear a lot of complaining if he regains the light heavy crown and retires without ever fighting Dawson).

Finally, the longevity of Hopkins' career is almost unprecedented. While this may not earn him any fighter of the year awards, I think a case could be made it that it's just as impressive to continuously be in the pound-for-pound conversation for as long as he has.

Sorry for the essay. Cliffs:
-It's possible to see Hopkins as not having lost a fight since Jones and Pacquiao as having lost at least one fight to Marquez. One or both of these adjustments can drastically change the comparison between the two.
-Quality of opposition is clearly a subjective matter as well and can cause differing rankings, including some with Hopkins on top.
-There's value in cleaning out a division and having a sustained reign at the top, particularly in the greater likelihood of running into a problematic style match-up.
-The longevity of Hopkins' career and stay at the top of the sport might not be reflected in any year end awards, but it can be seen as just impressive as any single year of dominance.

 

Was Pavlik at his best weight? Nope, 10lbs north.
Trinidad done nothing of note around 160, fantastic WW though.
Tarver doesn't even belong in the conversation.

Pac fought Morales at his prime weight, past prime sure but the only man to stop Morales x2.
Yes Pac beat JMM imo. In every poll I've seen the majority vote Pac, but that's another debate.

Barerra, Morales II and JMM are better wins than anything Hopkins has.

Also, Margo and Clottey competitive?:huh

 

I was a little more subtle than this.

 

:rofl

For real. Jmm, morales and barrera are atgs . Tarver and pavlik wont even get the chance to sniff the hof.

 

1. Whitaker
2. Pacquiao
3. Jones
4. Hopkins
5. Mayweather

 

1/2. Pernell Whitaker/Manny Pacquaio
3. Roy Jones

4/5. Bernard Hopkins/Floyd Mayweather

 

Juan Manuel Marquez isn't even close to an ATG. atsch

 

Arguable perhaps

Not even close? atsch

 

you forgot to mention that he can satisfy three men at once. :deal

This content is protected

 

what do you mean arguable? He is definitely not an ATG. He's on the level of like Virgil Hill. 2 more good big wins then you can consider him an ATG.