Even if Floyd beat Pac, would he leapfrog Pac in ATG status?

check my post

 

some of you are making comparisons that just dont fit.
the case you have here with pac and mayweather is that both men are in their PRIMES and the two best fighters of their era. there is no doubt pac has a better resume and deeper resume and should be considered the better fighter as is stands. but is it overwhelmingly superior that he should still be considered better even if he loses to mayweather in a convincing manner?

its really how you judges each mans career.

 

It wouldn't necessarily mean that. Only that PBF is a better Welterweight. Did Duran's loss to Hagler mean he wasn't an ATG lightweight? Especially if it's close and it appears size was the main difference.

And despite what people seem to think, you really can't have a fight for PFP best unless the two guys in the running are naturally at the same weight, like when Hearns and Ray Leonard fought each other. Ray Robinson losing to Joey Maxim didn't mean Joey Maxim was all of a sudden the PFP best.

Probably both of them are ATG fighters in any event, based on their previous histories.

 

Truth, and that's the kicker. Personally, I think Mayweather is a win over Pac and another big obstacle from overtaking Pac. Just beating Pac doesn't erase Pac's own accomplishments, which outweight Joy boy's.

 

Why, its a fact.

Hatton,Cotto,Margarito right away...

 

Was talking about Floyd's comp, that you think must be only against top, prime fighters.

And no, it's not fact. Your opinion of fighters is just that, your opinion.

 

no a win over pac doesnt erase what pac has done in his career, but while you acknowledging pac accomplishments, you cant say mayweather hasnt done anything his whole career. his career has had some bull**** in it especially recently no doubt but his whole career hasnt been that awful.

 

Floyd is levels above Pacquiao come on Floyd is in the top 10 of all time manny is not.

 

I'm a huge Floyd fan, but if they were to fight, the winner would certainly rank higher than the loser regardless of whom the winner is. Although I believe Floyd is certainly better "ATG-wise" than Pacquiao, it is close enough to the point the winner would def leap frog the loser. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool.

 

I don't. I am aware of Floyd's career. I just feel he wasted too many good years of his prime. Badically his entire tenure at 140. And his time off when 147 was red hot. And now again. Pac was kicking ass and taking names while Floyd played it safe or took time off. And that is why I thin Pac is well ahead of Floyd in an ATG stance where a H2h win won't leap frog him over Pac.

 

I pretty much agree with Lance_Uppercut.

No, it wouldn't. He would need at least 2 or 3 impressive wins on top of that.

 

pac*

 

No i didnt mention Floyds competition in that respect.

For a start, the Hatton win also goes against Floyd, not as much as Pacs over Hatton as that was a much worse version of Hatton but because it was at 147 where Hatton looked like **** already against Collazo.

 

He didn't make Marquez do ****. Marquez is the one who wanted to fight him, so of course they fought in Mayweather's weightclass. And he schooled Marquez with speed and skill, not strength.

 

Hatton was undefeated when he fought Floyd. Floyd damaged him.