How can u rank Floyd higher all-time p4p when Pac has better resume & achievements?

It's not that i underestimate that Hopkins, it's the fact he wasnt ATG calibre. He wasnt even elite then. And being a revisionist doesnt change that. The No.4 and No.8 in the MW rankings fought for a vacant IBF belt. That was it. The fact they went on to achieve what they did was fantastic but im not crazy in thinking a fight in 01 would have topped it 100 fold. Am I?


It's a great achievement, but still cant say Roy has a better resume than Hop. Sorry. Dont want to go on about it, the thread is a bout Pac and Floyd.

 

Yes it would have been a better achievment if roy had beat him in 2001 and no doubt hopkins improved in the fact he became more clever, but he was a very good fighter when jones beat him and he wouldn't be beat again for more than 10 years, to toally dismiss the win is over the top, roy beat an ATG fighter in hopkins who would certainly improve, but was still very good when he beat him.

I have no issues with anyone rating hopkins above jones, but to say his resume shits all over it is crap, they are close, TBH at this point in time i don't particular see Pavlik as being much better than Virgil Hill and he is arguably hopkins 2nd best win

 

it's like the whole RJJ V Calzaghe argument, i can see why people would put Calzaghe higher in the ATG list, but i think RJJ is a better boxer. Pac's resume is better than Floyd's, but Floyd is a better boxer.

 

When Pac caught Barrera and Morales, they both had started boxing when they were 15, and had miles on their fightometer before they fought Pac. They were names when PAc beat them, and you can tell by how they fought Pac back. With the exception of the first Morales fight, Pac dominated both guys. Pac has not clearly beaten Marquez either. Dlh was weight weakened, and the Hatton win was impressive, but even posters say Hatton was damaged goods.

Floyd's resume is filled with guys ranked pfp, and tough men like Jesus Chavez...guys in their absolute prime. Floyd beat a better version of Dlh and Hatton. The difference between Pac and Floyd is that Floyd beat guys when they were prime, and at their best. Pac, as gifted as he is, and I love Pac to death has not done this with his best comp. Only if Pac beats floyd will I be convinced that Pac is truly an atg. Right now Pac is great in my eyes.

 

:goodIf we are going to compare the two, the forgotten judgement is that we don't talk about their losses. Floyd has none. Floyd may lose someday, but he hasn't lost yet.

 

I'm not much of a resume guy, but in Pacquiao's case it's overwhelming, to go along with everything else.

He's definately ahead of Mayweather at this point in my eyes. No question.

 

Well save it for when im being hostile, not when im asking about incosistencies in your criteria. Go back to when you were explaining your reasons for having Roy ahead of Hop, or Floyd ahead of ODLH, or Finito and Calzaghe when you say Hop,Calzaghe and Oscar might have stronger resumes but....... You should add an asterix to avoid confusion.


How could anyone get the impression that you you only look past Resume when it suits your own argument, but when the fighter you are building up is superior in that regard you find it ok to not only stop there but to tell other people that any other criteria is irrelevant.

Pac's resume is better than Floyds, so there is no reason to dig deeper. Thats the most important thing.

Then, next argument..

Oscar's resume is better than Floyd's but i rank Floyd higher because......?

Hop's resume is better than Roy's but I rank Roy higher because....?

Calzaghe's resume is better than Finito's but I rank Lopez higher because.....?



Can you see how your characteristically watertight posts lead to confusion.?

(The clue is you moved on to give skillset and performances at the weight as most important when the fighters you wanted to come out on top were behind. An argument Pac would lose against Floyd, but is the trumps when it comes to resume. Funny that.)

Knock that out of the park.

 

Resume, wins and losses, the times that both fought their top comp, and what stage they were at during their careers...this all factors in. Floyd blows Pac away going by this analization. Mexicans and Phillipino's beg to differ, and that is ok. Everyone is judging Pac-Floyd by their styles, not their comp anyway nowadays.

 

Lmfao, he has maybe 4 good fighters out of his whole resume. Prime de la hoya? that was gone a long time ago.

 

Stay off the drugs lol. I wish you would stay on this topic lol. I'll roast your sorry ass off these boards lol. !~@#$~ are you talking about...maybe 4 good fighters lol.

 

Actually beating someone head to head counts a lot in terms of rankings, although you also need to factor in where they were in their careers, natural weights, etc. It's the hypothetical matchups that shouldn't be counted much, because they didn't actually happen, and all you're doing then is speculating.

At this point, there's a very good argument for Hopkins being ahead of Jones, despite Jones having kicked his ass. Pac's ahead of all three of them.

 

After the Hatton victory, I have no problem with anyone having Pac over Floyd, its a close one, he might even be ahead but if I have to pick then I still lean towards Mayweather personally.

2009 should enlighten us further if the fighters take the fights that the fans want.

:thumbsup

 

The funny thing is when Floyd beat Hatton, Floyd was supposed to, when Pac did it, it is so phenomenal because it was a one punch ko. Floyd was bigger than PAc supposedly, and Manny was smaller. Manny stopped an older version of Dlh, and maybe an already damaged Hatton(which is still a good win), and the double talk starts. I don't mind people picking Pac over Floyd in a fight or when talking who is better all time, but contradicting yourselves in front of me is...:nut