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

Pacquiao is a top 40 all time great. This fight did nothing but re-affirm what level I thought he was on. I definitely still believe Floyd would beat him, though. In which case, if Pacquiao were to beat Floyd, it would raise his standing dramatically in my eyes. In that case I wouldn't argue with the top 20 argument. A Mosley fight is difficult to call, more because of Mosley's age than anything, as I believe a prime Mosley is definitely too much for Pac. If he did beat Mosley it would just continue to re-affirm what I think of Pacquiao as a fighter and an all time great.

 

Agreed on all counts. He'd be just outside the top thirty on my list, although of course I'd like for him to have retired for a bit first.

 

I suppose it depends on how Floyd fights.

If he can shrug Pacquiao's attacks off, he will fight like he did against Marquez for the most part. Robust and forceful, often in the centre of the ring. If this comes to be, I can envisage the same outcome as you.

If he gets badly stung by Pacquiao, he will (as I said) retreat into his over-cautious welterweight shell like he did for large sections of the De La Hoya fight. A Floyd concerned with defending himself, snaking out the occasional counter, could easily drop a decision to a relentless buzzbomb coming in and out of range.

I expect Pacquiao to throw more punches, and if he backs Floyd up I expect him to land a lot of bodypunches. Floyd will land eye-catching single shots, but I haven't seen enough evidence of his ability to string combinations together at welterweight to suggest to me that he can clearly outland Pacquiao.

It remains a possibility that Pacquiao's punches could be so fast that they unhinge Mayweather's defensive system, as Judah managed intermittently.

Unfortunately so.

I suppose the crux here lies in that I do think he has improved technically. Therefore, with his speed intact and his improved abilities then the 140 version is significantly better than the 126. I do think the 140 Pac would have a better chance of lashing the best light-welters to defeat than the 126 version would stand at outmuscling the best boxers from that division.

IMO, the Pacquiao of 2003-2005 relied too much on one hand, he was raw and one-dimensional, and (as shown in the first two Morales fights) when he was attacked he retreated in a straight line and could look awkward and easy to hit.

Now I think his footwork and movement have improved a lot. He punches well with both hands, doesn't rely as obviously on the straight left, he moves out of trouble better. Maybe the Cotto fight gave a false impression slightly, because I think Pacquiao was deliberately taking punches in a sort of machismo show that he could hang with a bona fide welter.

As usual, good talking with you anyway.

 

It did, I just don't think it enhanced it as much as everyone is making out, mostly on the basis that Pacquiao was a teenage Flyweight a decade ago. That's not too relevant to what he's been doing recently as a fully matured fighter, IMO. Therefore I don't put a whole lot of merit into the "7 titles in 7 weight classes" deal as everyone else. I've always put more into the fighters rather than the titles. I wasn't slating Pacquiao in any way.

 

if the mosley or mayweather fights dont come off will pac try one last jump to light-middle

 

Because some of the greatest fighters of all time did not achieve much.

 

You posted a brief list of achievements, and implied Pacquiao's weren't on the same level. I think in the context/circumstances/times that Pacquiao has progressed in, his achievements are comparable with those you listed.

In 2003 when Pacquiao trounced Barrera at feather, it would have been completely inconceivable that he would one day dominate one of the best welterweights in the world to take a 147 strap.

But if your main objection today is that someone said that Pacquiao was on a similar level to Armstrong then of course I apologize for criticizing you personally, as I share your belief that they are two completely different levels of fighter. Armstrong winning titles in traditional weight classes, and regularly beating welterweights while he weighed in as a lightweight are timeless, unparalleled achievements that stand up to anything this sport has ever seen.

 

Yeah.

Yes.

They really are. If Pacquiao became the best lightweight in the world and defended his title eighteen times (as Armstrong did as a small welterweight), then we may be able to compare them. I fully acknowledge that Pacquiao is about as good a fighter you'll see in today's era because they don't fight as often as before, but still.

 

The seven weight divisions status means little to me, as many of the weight divisions are artificial not natural. Yes, I know weight are all artificial in the sense that they are human creactions and have changed historically. By saying the junior titles are not natural, I mean they are not original - a fact - and they add nothing to the sport - my opinion - and that it is unfair to boxers who won three titles in the natural weight divisions (Armstrong, Duran) to have their accomplishments eclipsed by modern day fighters who can put on a few pounds and win a title - and they have so many to choose from, another absurdity - in another weight division, a complaint that seems so obvious to me as to be uncontroversial. At best, Manny has claims to championships in two weight classes: flyweight and lightweight. That's something in itself.

What is more significant about Manny is that he has moved from being a world class flyweight (WBC is a venerable authority going back to the 1960s) to a world class lightweight (again, winning the WBC title), and is now competing among the best welterweights in the world. He has secured his pound-for-pound status by beating top fighters across a large weight span and by displaying rare ability. If we were to judge fighters like Manny on accomplishments, any record book that honored the tradition of boxing would not have Manny accomplishing much at this point (he only defended his WBC flyweight title once and didn't defend his lightweight title at all). But if we judge him the way we judge Ezzard Charles, Sam Langford, Charlie Burley, and other all-time greats who didn't accumulate titles, then Manny shines. He's a throwback, in my view and if he beats Floyd Mayweather, I think he's top twenty material.

 

Hard to rank him as there have been so many great fighters who fought in times where one could beat 30-60 contenders in a career. Today that is simply not possible, but Pac is achieving everything he can, and then some.

Funny thing is that just about everyone considered Dela Hoya vs Manny to be a mismatch by GB productions, Oscar picking on smaller guys, etc etc. It did turn out to be a mismatch, but the other way around. Then, the Hatton and Cotto fights both were pretty much 50/50. Again, both insanely one-sided victories.

There are many former greats whom i don't know too much about, but i think he could be top20 or 15 at best, and top40-35 at worst.

 

Sorry to get off topic, but a number of you have said that Pac may go top 10 if he beats PBF. Conversely, what would happen to PBF's P4P ranking if he beats Pac?

Is a Pac win over PBF greater than a PBF win over Pac? I personally would say so, given Pac's starting weight and the current size discrepancy.

 

I read a post quoting Cotto as saying that he couldn't see where the punches were coming from. Pac may throw "basic combos" but the question is whether his opponent pick the combo in time and react accordingly - Pac is very fast and moves very well. Secondly, his left is thrown in an unusual way and can be thrown from different angles. I think this somewhat disspells the "basic combo" argument.

Although I think PBF wins a UD against Pac.

 

Saying he ruled the weight class is kinda like saying Leon Spinks ruled the Heavyweight division when he beat Ali. He scored a stunning upset in a bout he was being worked over in, and then faltered in embarassing fashion almost immediately after, only to move up not one, not two, but 3 classes because of how weight drained he was there.

I think Duran's performance against Barkley had to do with a mixture of not just him beating a larger man, but doing it significantly past his prime. Pacquiao is the best he's ever been, on the other hand. Either way, I do agree with what you said. This win just affirmed what I thought, and made it beyond a shadow of a doubt what level of fighter Pacquiao is.

I already stated all of this.

God, I hope that fight doesn't come off.

I would've called them lunatics. I don't see what you're trying to prove, though. Pacquiao has raised drastically in my eyes since those days, you're making it seem as if I stated he's never improved and never will.