Greater legacy Pacquiao or Mayweather

I have to point out the facts. Right now, Floyd can lose all of his respect with fans if he lost now. Maybe fans like me and you would say Floyd was past it, but no one is going to want to hear that. How do I know. Jones went up and down in weight, and lost, and they said he finally fought someone who was capable of beating him. The call Jones glass Jones...

 

True, but it's the manager's/promoter's job to pick WHO the fighter will meet in the ring. That's what I'm talking about.
As for Williams, I'm not penalizing him, although he fought a shitty fight vs Quintana the first time

 

It's easy to say Floyd just b/c his overall boxing ability and talent are overwhelming, but in terms of career depth....I'd have to go with PAC. He has the more challenging names on his ring ledger and he's been more consistant fighting the ELITE names than Floyd. It's close and I actually voted for May, but after thinking about it more I'm leaning towards PAC.

 

Pac can fight period. I love PAc, but where you saw guys like Barrera and Morales, and how they fought in the past...you can't tell me they were at their best when they faced Pac. This is not a knock against Pac because imo he proved to me he was legit when he beat J.m.m up in their first fight, and he took a bit of a beating himself. PAc beating Barrera and Morales at their stages is good to great, but not equal to Floyd beating Chico and Castillo because they were truly at their best. The name sounds better, but prime is prime. his is not a knock to PAc one bit. It's my judgement call. To point out who had the greater legacy ...all has to be taken into account. Record, rematches, style, comp, skills. Right now it is Floyd. If Pac beats AM, get back to me

 

Sometimes you just have to hold a guy back. should AM have been in with guys older than him? Yes and no. His early losses in his teens will not have no bearing on how I judge his career.

 

This content is protected

 

You're insane :yikes

 

It depends on your general view of boxing. Many people value their own perception of a fighter's ability that they have arrived at through watching the fighter fight. Many people prefer to value a study of the fighter's resume highest. Many others prefer to value a 'zero' highest. So when ranking the very best, it depends on which criteria you apply.

My own guidelines are I place little importance on a 'zero'. None of the old ATGs except Marciano has one, so how could I? My own view is resume is the most important thing. If a fighter purposefully chases the best and in doing so incurs a few losses, that still means more (particularly if he performs well and/or bravely in defeat, and has the mental fortitude to come back strongly in his career) than a fighter who maybe didn't chase or secure fights with the most dangerous fights around.

Would Ali be rated as a better fighter if he had never fought Frazier, and therefore had never suffered that loss, and never won the series 2-1?

Would Oscar De La Hoya be rated as a better fighter if he had had a completely different mindset, had won a light-welterweight title and had worked hard to stay at that weight for the majority of his career, defending one version of the title and beating challenger after challenger, building up a long unbeaten streak?

Would Alexis Arguello be rated as a better fighter if he had never moved up to a fourth weight division and took on the best fighter in that division (Pryor), and put in a stunning performance in an amazing fight, and lost?


In all three instances, the answer must be a resounding no.

 

I disagree when you say that PAC's victories over MAB, EM or JMM were not as meaningful as Floyds win over Chico. Here is why. Chico at the stage where Floyd completely dominated him was a very young and inexperienced Chico....Kind of the same way Andre Berto is now...yes Chico was a champion but he didn't fight, get the exprience or had the rounds to say he was PRIME. Floyd wasn't either but with the talent floyd is he would have been hard to beat by anyone even as early on as 18 to 20 fights in to his career.

 

In boxing the zero is rare so most boxing fans get it right in terms of judging a fighter. It's the fighters that they DON'T like that they fail to realize their greatness. When I say hate, it can be "personal or style wise". I'm about to get off of work, Peace. Good talking with you Pac84 and Carles. Good to speak to knowledgeable guys...

 

We can agree to disagree.:good

 

I'm clocking off shortly too mate. I'll remember your name and see you in another thread. Good chat. Cheers Nallege and Carles :good

 

:good:good

 

Fact is PBF is retired. The question then should be: will Pac surpass PBF's legacy? I can answer it with a resounding YES.
Compared to Floyd's skills, Pac's may be too far yet. But thanks to his talents he has managed to somehow get over his competition quite well. Being a one-dimensional fighter he was able to neutralise MAB and surprisingly beat him in the process. What he showed against Diaz was quite an improvement and I say he can still improve a lot. One department he can still vastly improve on is his defence.
Now, if Pac gets to fight PBF that would be a great accomplishment by itself. Never mind if he wins or not.