ATG: Whitaker,Hagler&Chavez may have better ability but Pac should be ranked higher!!

Why?

 

Would you like to explain the last 3 and their relevance? What does 'Historical Impact' have to do with being the better fighter? On that basis, Jack Johnson would probably be top 10. And would you especially like to explain what the **** 'Timeliness' is? And why does accomplishment matter that much? I bet Langford couldn't possibly be #1 because he never won a legit world title, right?

 

I already rank him higher than both Hagler & Chavez both in ability and resume. Whitaker above him in both categories.

 

atschatschatsch

WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY ?????

 

I think most people have him ranked higher than Hagler already.

 

I can't read any more.. Do everyone a favor, and take a long ass dirt nap. You must be like 12, this is your first computer, and you just started watching boxing, Your enthusiasm is respectable, but frankly you don't know **** about boxing.

 

I have him ranked ahead of Chavez in ability and more or less on the same level as Whitaker and Hagler. And I dont really destinguish resume frm ability. A fighter's resume is what we watch to determine his ability.

 

Somebody ban this fool.

Thread failed.

Again.

 

Please, he lost to an old Morales and was lucky the judges helped him out in the two fights against JMM.

The only good victory he has had in a looong time is Cotto.

 

Timeliness What "historical impact" has he had might I ask?

 

This is one of the reasons why *******s really get no respect when it comes to talking boxing. It's opinions like this one lol...

 

:good