You dont wonder why you are in the minority of this argument? look at the poll, floyds accomplishments in boxing are good and he is the most skilled boxer of that decade, but pacs achievements are better, he defeated better oposition, climbed trough more divisions. Had floyd no retired and continued his good run from 130/135 on to 147 with excellent opposition then he would be the man, but since that didnt happen history will see pac as the more accomplished boxer of that decade.
Ripcity is biased and a Floyd lover. Remember when Ripcity favors Mosley over Pacquiao. After the fight you will never see a post of him giving props.
No I don't wonder. That dose not mean they/you are right. People vote for Pacquiao not out of logic and facts, but because they like him better. As far as time goes Mayweather will be more apreacitaed as a boxer. Presurefighters/brawlers are always more popular than pure boxers. If this was the 70's you'd be telling me that Duran was more acomplished than Leonard, the late 80's early 90's that Chavez is more acomplished than Whitaker. History has been kinder to Leonard and Whitaker. " but pacs achievements are better, he defeated better oposition, climbed trough more divisions." The only way to describe this statment is Total bull****. I've explaned many times here (esb) why Mayweather has defeated better oposition. Just check out their boxrec profiles. Don't just look at the big names who Mayweather has fought better than Pacquiao, let alone beat. As far as climbing through the ranks. Am I suposed to be impresed that he was an oversized flyweight or that he ussed his poistion to get two bougus championships in catchweight fight for 147 & 154 championships?
I voted on the basis of who I believe to be the P4P best on that list. That would be Floyd Mayweather.