How does the Classic Forum Rate Pacquiao in an all-time P4P sense?

He won the left over scraps that were collected and clung onto by Sasakul.

 

also Pac defended his Flyweight title once

 

I disagree. The 130 version of Mayweather would beat the 130 version of Pacquiao without question. At 147, Mayweather is a languid, one-punch-at-a-time pot-shot machine. There is absolutely no way he possesses the power in his punches to stop Pacquiao IMO, and that makes me think that Pacquiao's speed, workrate, and angled attacks could see him outwork Floyd and win a decision. Of course Mayweather will land some lovely, crisp and clean counters along the way, but when he tastes Pacquiao's full-blooded punches, he will retreat into his over-cautious welterweight shell. He will do what he did against Oscar, flick out some nice punches and believe that his nicer aesthetic work will sway the judges, but unlike Oscar, Pacquiao will be attacking and working for every minute of every round. I wouldn't say I feel overly confident, but I can't understand why anyone could write this fight off as a foregone conclusion, with Mayweather's lethargic performances at 147 and Pacquiao's all-action performances at 140 and above in mind.

Floyd will fight whoever he thinks will give him less trouble between Pacquiao and Mosley. We know his mentality by now. He's been the same ever since JL Castillo beat him.

Wouldn't you say that Pacquiao has looked better at 140 and 145 than he did at 126 and 130? I think Pacquiao's optimum fighting weight would be 140, but there simply aren't enough good, big-name light-welters around right now. I believe Pacquiao would be a stern test for almost anyone who has ever fought in the light-welterweight division (with a couple of exceptions of course).

 

McGrain

I think Mosley would be considered top of the division with the win over Margarito. Margarito is serving a ban so he is out of the rankings. Does Floyd Mayweathers win over Marquez re establish himself as a top welterweight, i think not. Then there is Cotto who has wins over top contentders and Mosley before losing to Margarito then beat Clottey who was a top contender so i would say Cotto was 2nd going into this fight.

So really Pac is 2nd or 3rd depending where you rank Mayweather

i would have it something like this

1. Mosley
2. Pacquiao
3. Mayweather
4. Cotto

 

He fought and won at world title level in the flyweight division.

And since he has matured, he has jumped from super-bantamweight to welterweight.

Although none of this was filmed in grainy black-and-white, rather impressive no?

 

Pac is definitely an ATG and is definitely breaking the mold. He's a very interesting case. To me, it's interesting that's he's ascending these heights but I'm left wondering what's his best weight? I'd venture to say maybe 135. Pre 135 Pac was a very flawed technical fighter. I believe ATG's like Gomez at 122 and Sanchez at 126 would've been too much for him at that point in his career. Likewise, at 147 and currently, Pac is a much improved technical fighter. But guys like Leonard and Hearns would've been too much for him at the weight. But at 135, where technique and experience meets physical prime, I believe Pac is a very difficult opponent in a head to head matchup. Surely Duran beats him. Is he too fast for a 135 Arguello? I'd have to favor Arguello, but one could become a poor man underestimating Pac these days.
In my mind, he doesn't beat Gomez, Sanchez, Leonard, Hearns at their respective best weights, but the fact that such a range of weights is under consideration is remarkable. I prefer to let his career play out but I'd say he has a chance to surpass all these fighters (if he hasn't already) based on career achievements.

 

are you joking???? Manny pacquiao is the greatest asian fighter of all time! There isnt even an arguement about being the best fillipino!

 

It comes down to this for me pop: Pac has some nice combos he can rat-a-tat off of static or ineffective movers, but Floyd will render most of his combos void. Manny's first punch isn't that unpredictable and once Floyd dodges it he will be out of the way of Pacquiao's otherwise "throw punches in one spot and expect the opponent to still be there" punches.

I think Pac has the type of style that will make Floyd's defense look good basically. I'm not a fan of Floyd's offense at this weight as you know, but I still think he'll clearly outland Pac.

Sounds right to me.

I think he has been facing a lower calibre of opponent (slower, easier to hit) and that has made him look better than he was at the lower weights. Personally I still think Pac was at his best at 126, where he could physically monster excellent/great featherweights. I don't see him doing so against excellent/great fighters at jr. welter and welter, unless of course they are shot or past prime. Bigger guys are naturally slower than the little guys and that Pac has pretty much kept his speed, it is a good advantage to have against the bigger guys.

I know a lot of people are onto the Pac has improved technically aspect, but to me it has been minimal. Just look how he was getting hit tonight by Cotto. Has he really improved defensively since the lower weights? Is his punch variety really than much better now? I don't see it.

 

And now, predictably, I have people convincing me it was an impressive win (which I rightly acknowledged before the fight was even over), and throwing in the odd black n' white jibe because I'm obviously shafting modern fighters.

The forum's too slow for this. Yes, Pacquiao is greater than Henry Armstrong.

 

We need to wait until his career is finished. I wouldn't rank him in the top 10. He's probably somewhere around 20-25. If he could beat PBF or Mosley, he'd make a big jump. But, I don't think he can beat either of those fighters.

 

I would rank Armstrong anywhere between 1 and 4.

I would rank Pacquiao anywhere between 20 and 30.

I don't think anyone in their right mind would say that Pacquiao is greater than Henry Armstrong.

But Pacquiao had matured physically at superbantamweight, and last night he dominated one of the two or three best welterweights around.

Just over 18 months ago, he was a super-featherweight.

What is there to criticize? Great fighter, great achievements. Is there any reason why established Classic posters have to view anything happening right now with the familiar tired brand of cynicism? Thankfully there are people like McGrain who are equally excited by the timeless achievements of guys like Hank, and the great feats of men like Pacquiao.

 

As am I. What would lead you to believe different?

My original gripe, and the reason I posted on this topic, was that 'there is a case for Pacquiao to be rated above Armstrong' - not posted by you.

He's not in the same league as Armstrong. Only about seven fighters are.

That's what there is to criticise, exaggerated opinions. It's not even the fighter, it's the fan.

But it's typical of the bandwagon crew to get all defensive and imply I was saying Pacquiao was ****.