Why Pacquiao will always be greater than Floyd

Pacquiao is better at being liked. Floyd is better at both the business and the art of boxing (leagues above Pacquiao head to head). Floyd is better at this sport, period. Pacquiao will go down as a better ambassador of the sport.

 

I think both are great and very close to each other in terms of accomplishment. I do rank Pac ahead in terms of greatness.

Point of thought, the ones that are certain that Floyd is ahead shouldn't have no problem to have Calzaghe ahead of both Hopkins and Jones Jr, as when they met, Calzaghe beat them fair and square.

 

good luck finding a consistent flowmo, theyre rarer than hens teeth.

 

118-110 just deal with it.

 

As far as Pacquiao is concerned top 15 is appropriate. If moving up from Flyweight Champion to becoming a world class Welterweight was easy then why has nobody else done it?

 

Sorry but disagree with the comparison altogether and feel it's not even remotely relevant.

You're trying to make an out of context point which is the equivalent as saying Terry Downes>SRR which in fact although Terry did beat a 44 year old SRR, he's does not deserve to be ranked over him for obvious reasons.

When you put what Manny did in context, and what Floyd has done in context, Floyd has the stronger case that holds up better and this is why most credible sources, even Freddy Roach rank Floyd higher.

 

When I made those comparison, I don't mean that Calzaghe should be ranked higher than both Hopkins and Jones Jr, just to clear that so there is no misunderstanding.
I agree with your first paragraph but not the second, which I thought manny did accomplished more overall than Floyd. I don't hold his struggle with morales and Marquez too much against him as they are both great fighters in their own right.

 

I don't understand this whole trashing people thing about losing or winning close fights or just struggling against another fighter. When you fight a man of his equal size and he's a great fighter in his prime you will most often lose or have struggles fighting him. This isn't a video game. It's real life. The other man is often times very good, very hungry, and very smart. It's not like he's just sitting on his ass and he's done nothing to prepare himself. In fact, all he's done is optimize his preparation for the sole purpose of beating you.

Having an undefeated record means two things. First it means you haven't lost. Second it means your level of competition has been lacking.

 

Floyd never lost and Pac got ktfo 3 times. Facts.

 

They're both great fighters.

What stands out to me with Mayweather was his longevity. I would've liked to seen him fight more frequently from 2007 to 2013 (when he signed that SHOwtime contract,) but he decided to turn his fights into annual mega events rather than fighting 2-3 x's annually.

Floyd was dominant for a longer period of time and really was only tested by 2 or 3 fighters in his entire career. He's also a much more skilled fighter than manny and holds a win over him head to head. These things have to be factored in when assessing guys on the ATG scale, which both men clearly are.

Floyd was a top 5 P4P fighter back in the 1990's and stayed in that category until 2015. He's in uncharted territory and NO fighter, and that includes great old fighters like Archie Moore and Bernard Hopkins, had more successful reigns than Jr.

We're talking about a guy who was the # 1 P4P fighter the moment Jones Jr got knocked out and remained at the top until he retired. I know he's not everyone's cup of tea, especially when he became a LOT more defensively oriented at WW and JMW, but his greatness can't be denied.

He's an elite ATG fighter that would've been successful in any era although I have my doubts he would've went up to 147 in certain periods of the sport (i.e. Ray RObinson/Burley period, Emile Griffith period, 4 kings period, etc.) He has the look of a great 15 round fighter and I can't think of more than maybe a handful of guys that were more complete than him as a boxer when you factor in offense, defense and ring generalship.

 

How many times was Floyd kod? And list Pac's true record. And you can list the first Bradley fight as a win but you can't take away any of Pac's losses, lmao. If they were decision losses(not including the Morales drubbing) ok, but not the ko losses because you can't change the outcome of a guy being flattened! Lol

 

I'm not sure that we can say that he was dominant at any time when he was at welterweight since he cherry picked the whole time and never fought his greatest threats. Dominance means something when you are Joe Louis or Marvin Hagler and you clean out the division and loop back for rematches. Dominance isn't only fighting the number 5 or 7 guy in the division for ten years. His list of unfought contenders was always stacked. 2007 he wasn't fighting Cotto, Williams, Mosley, or Margarito. 2008 he's retired ducking a De La Hoya rematch and he doesn't fight Cotto, Margarito, Mosley, Pacquiao. 2009 he's not fighting Pacquiao, Mosley, Cotto, Margarito, Clottey. 2010 he's not fighting Pacquiao or Cotto. 2011 Pacquiao is still ranked above him like he has been the previous 3 years. 2012 he's not fighting Pacquiao or Brook. In 2013 he's not fighting Bradley, Pacquiao, Brook, Porter, Thurman. 2014 he fights the number 9 ranked Maidana twice instead of Pacquiao, Brook, Khan, Bradley, Marquez, Porter, or Thurman. That is not what dominance looks like. That's what undefeated looks like. Don't confuse the two.

 

You're a racist supremacist coward who doesn't care for logic. You're still using the 'more credible sources' BS.
I've already exposed those sources as having no credibility because of just how casual and awful their rankings are. Freddie the P4P biggest moron in the sport included.

 

Pac fought all comers in fair fights plus he was fighting seasoned pro's as a 16-17 yr old kid
Fraud fought "SELECTED" opponents & even those were "handicapped" so they had little chance of success. Even after all this Fraud STILL HAD TO CHEAT!!!!!
FraudPac

 

the iv gate is only for the ignorant trolls online, there are reasons no one ever brings it up, if you had a clue to the specifics you wouldn't keep trying to spread the silly "illegal" iv bull**** never mind there was never anything ILLEGAL, there wasn't anything AGAINST THE RULES.

fyi: there were blood samples taken at the same exact time they were filling him with saline to get ther urine so it was kept per rules.

if he had them "bought off" like so many morons claim why the fook wouldn't they **** in the cup themselves. stop the madness