Barrera was bigger than Pacquiao on the night. Roach actually said in a pre-fight interview that they were gonna move back down to 122 after. Pac could still have made super bantamweight easily, but just took the bigger fights instead. As for height and reach, Paul Williams has height and reach advantages over Mike Tyson but that doesn't make him the bigger man. I was also gonna throw in Pac vs Hatton but I'm sure that at this point people think Hatton was not "good" although a few weeks before they fought I made a poll asking if he was elite and 80% voted yes.
No, I'm sure Pac outweighed Barrera on the night. I could be wrong though, I'll check it and get back to you.
Hopkins - Tarver. I know both men werent prime but at the time, both were top 10 p4p and Hopkins had jumped 2 weight divisions. Duran - Hagler. Sure Duran didnt win but Hagler was suppose to walk through him, just as many thinks Cotto will walk through Pac. This fight is more of an indication that it wont necesarily just take 1 punch from the bigger guy to stop the fight, as many here is suggesting.
Well you completely glossed over the other points, and as I said in a later post, Floyd probably gave away a good deal amount in weight to Chico (obv he's not a WW though). But this is not a Floyd Vs Pac debate (and I prefer Pac anyway). I just think that you're probably a massive Pac fan who is trying to make this win out to be one of the greatest of all time. It'll be a huge win, as Cotto is a fantastic fighter, but it's not of the historic proportions that you're trying to say it is....or will be!!
I know thatatsch.But instead of writing that about their then present status,you wrote that "Leonard was taller."I wasn't trying to insult you or take the **** out of you,just adding on to what you wrote.
Good choice, Virgil was defo beasting around this time no question... But Hearns was on his last leg's. (Great win tho, In my top fav's all-time) TH was not anywhere near prime tho.
And here we have the reason why many people don't even bother posting on the General Forum. Pathetic little fanboys who judge everyone by their own standards, and fabricate motives so they can get an argument. Because I have an avatar that has Pacquiao in it (it's not even a Pacquiao avatar, but hey) then obviously everything I ever write is always cunningly calculated to try and make Manny Pacquiao look great. That's the woefully childish mentality you're dealing with on here. It is, quite frankly, depressing. I make a thread asking if there is a HISTORICAL PRECEDENCE for good little men beating good big men because it is relevant to ask at this time, in the lead-up to a great fight, have fighters been successful in the past fighting naturally bigger men while having a sizeable weight disadvantage on the night. I got some good answers (Bowe-Holyfield II, Duran-Leonard, Hopkins-Tarver I accepted was good too) from good posters, showing that it can and has been done. Then I get this other chump who doesn't understand the question, puts forth some rubbish suggestions, whines about the thread, and eventually exposes himself as a fanboy child by coming up with some horribly lame, unjustified and infantile theory. Seriously: **** Off. PS: For the 17th time, this thread was regarding naturally smaller men who fought naturally bigger men and were jumping divisions. Chico and Floyd were both natural sfw's. I'm shocked at just how difficult it has been over these two pages for you to grasp a very, very simple question.
