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

Hagler cleaned out a tough division and fought legends. Whitaker fought Ramirez,Haugen (who was better than Hatton and beat Camacho)he fought Chavez and Delahoya and Azumah Nelson and won 4 titles. Chavez had 25 title defenses. I do not think it is there to say Pacman is better. Pacman is good, but why do you people overrate fighters so much. The time to rate Pacman as an ATG will be in about 20 years, and believe me he will not be rated as high as people think. No one ever is when time goes by.

 

now they rate him higher maybe because he is fighting now and the young people bombard the message boards, but in 2 years I doubt it. Believe me those ATG ranking change. If a guy after 20 years of his prime is still rated high in ATG ranking, he will always be rated. I think Pacman is good, but to say he is ATG over Hagler, then the breakdown of the career has to be down, and it does not match up.

 

I think Pac has surpassed Chavez and IMO still slightly below Hagler and Whitaker. Ring Magazine's ratings had Whitaker at #10, Hagler #17, and Chavez #18. Bert Sugar has said Pac should definitely be in the top 20. Anyone here who claims to be more credible than Bert Sugar, please, don't make an ass of yourself. If you do, here's my response in advance:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKpyWZwnLdA[/ame]

 

Bert Sugar is a sports man and he knows no more about boxing than many of the people on this board. That is ridiculous to say Bert knows about fighters now more than anyone else. especially guys like Chavez and Hagler and Whitaker who we all saw fight. Bert Sugar always went with the favorite in fights and with the popular opinion. He is just a guy who likes publicity. He doesn't even smoke that cigar.

 

Bert Sugar is a joke, his top100 list is a joke.


7) Muhammad Ali
25) Ray Leonard
48 ) Pernell Whitaker

 

Failed. Show us your resumes and maybe I'll stop laughing.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bert_Sugar"]

This content is protected

[/ame]

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Bert knows a hell of a lot about boxing....But often plays on that reputation, spinning **** to the general public and just straight up making **** up or portraying rumour as fact.

His lists are usually pretty crappy...He certainly has his bias, like a lot of the industry experts. They often have personal relationships with guys they are ranking.

 

uh huh ok if u say so

 

He seems to be more for publicity than a real boxing expert. I know he knows boxing history and all that, and probably more than most people if you talk about Tunney or Jack Johnson, but as for techniques and who is great he is a little overrated. For example, back in the 1980's he said nothing insightful about techniques when talking about Leonard and Duran. He is not an insider in boxing. He is a character, and if you buy into the character and think he is great that is fine, but to say his opinion matters more than anyone else is sort of ridiculous. He usually says the typical comments of sports writers around the country and says what people in the general public wanted to hear. He wrote that book with Jose Torres? Ok that is fine, but do most of his books have ghost writers or writing with someone else? I think he is an ok guy and I met Bert Sugar, but I always felt he was there for publicity rather than boxing itself. If MMA were to become huge there would be Bert Sugar making a book about it. There are many boxing experts in the country like Emanual Steward and former boxers who would give better insight into p4p lists. Although most people have favorite fighters and personalities, so those lists are not accurate anyway.

 

That's a good insight. But if the matter of ATG ranking just an opinion, who's to decide who is credible and who is not? You mention Emanual Steward as an expert which I do agree. And, he's been a known Pac disbeliever and discreditor for as long as I can remember, always putting down his unorthodox style. But as of late, he's been a Pac fan convert. After the Cotto fight he said he'd have to put Pacquiao as an ATG with the likes of Robinson and Ali's level. Are you going to discredit that statement after you mentioned him as a bonafide expert? Steward in those words just rated Pac higher than Bert Sugar rated him.

 

I respect Steward. I cannot say if some expert says this fighter is great that I believe it or endorse that opinion, because then my opinion does not exist. Yes I think Pacman is in the right direction for an ATG. I think people are overrating his wins against Hatton and Cotto, but he did win. If you asked people in 1985 after Hagler beat Hearns where would he be rated ATG, many would say top 10. Later objectivity is more evident. As for Hagler, Steward also rates Hagler high also. My point was more that there are people in boxing who have just as much clout as Bert Sugar. But I see your point. ATG lists are subjective. If you put everyones list and averaged it out you might get something, although some fighters who had charisma like Ali would be rated higher just on that charisma. It happens. We are human and we like to see other people with great personalities. Not saying Ali was not great, but his personality did help him. He had a great personality which made his fights remembered more and he was remembered more. He captured the country as well as boxing.

 

Correct. There were 8 original weight divisions. Henry Armstrong won 3 of the original 8 weight divisions and had a draw in a middleweight title fight which would have given him a 4th. Manny Pacquiao has won his 4th of the 8 original weight divisions by winning the welterweight title. Armstrong is rated higher than the 3 mentioned, while Pacquiao is rated below the 3 by many here on this forum. Logic please.

 

I disagree but state your case.

 

I agree. :good

 

Hagler definitely threw the leonard fight. FACT