I will never rank Pac ahead of Whitaker or SRL

I wouldnt say "boxed silly", though, pards.

The Pac-Sasakul fight's one of my favorite fights ever, and I've seen it dozens and dozens of times.

I would say Pac was being outboxed and outworked by the veteran Sasakul early, but not hurt, and I admit he lost those early rounds, 10-9.

But Little MannyPac hit so much harder, and every punch that he connected on Sasakul had a noticeable effect on the Thai champ. I could see that the Thai was getting hurt, and he was backpedalling all the time to counter and get away. Manny may lose the round, but he was also breaking the champ down, hard.

By the middle to late rounds, the power punching had paid off, and Sasakul was in trouble.

It wasnt just one lucky shot that won Manny the fight there. :good

 

I already have Pac and Leonard very close. If Pac beats Mayweather, he passes Leonard. Skills have NOTHING to do with it the way I look at it, but I can understand if you take skills into account somewhat.

 

And that's another view of it, and a perfectly legitimate view of it, but it explains in part why different people's lists look very different. But saying that NO MATTER WHAT X can't be ahead of Y because they think Y's skills are better is just ignorant - it's not taking the ability into perspective. The problem is that "ability" is, for the most part, extraordinarily subjective. Boxing betting wouldn't exist if you could just look at two fighters' skill sets and know who's going to win before they walk in the ring. But you know what - if Pac (hypothetically - it probably won't happen) wins lineal championships at WW, JMW and MW as well, then people were just underrating his ability.

 

Agreed.

 

Your probably a Klit fan as well.atsch

 

You LOST so this means you have to SHUT THE **** UP until 8/2/2009, or are you a ******? :smoke

 

Well how does that work?

Im sure you think Mayweather has a better skillset than Pac. Well if Pac beats him what does that say about Pacquiao as a fighter.

Its no how you get the job done(Hopkins) it that you get it done.

 

Won't blame anyone that rates him above SRL or Whitaker if he beats both Mayweather and Marquez, he already has Marquez on his record so he doesn't really need to beat him again, a win over Mayweather should be enough.

 

Old school guys all have magical powers. Don't ever argue against them. Also, if they are "slick" and especially "defensive wizards", it's over.

Whittaker is as feather-fisted as they come. Pacquiao can keep up relentless pressure for 12 rounds, hits very hard, has a good chin and against Whittakers feathers it wouldn't even matter, nothing Whittaker can throw would slow Pac down. Can whittaker beat him by wide UD? Yeah it could happen. But I can see Pac beating him too.

All this h2h crap is pretty meaningless. Fighters are too different. Even if they share the same approach, defensive, offensive, whatever, they are too different from each other to just assume one would beat the other only cause of style. I've seen so many predictions gone wrong.

 

Well I honor all my bets and nobody gotta boyfriend here newbie with no credibility..BTW post count may not equal credibility but 160 posts dont equal ****!

 

hey man good post but you know that it will fall on deaf ears cause the haters don't wanna hear this kind of ****.

 

Morales was very fast at his best weight of 122, he lost some speed (& power) as he moved up the weights... the main reason the man was still successfull when he moved up was BECAUSE of his skills, his punching technique was great, he thru every punch in the book extremely well & had 2 of the best feet in the business.

Dont think that because he had a lot of hard fought brawls that he didnt have boxing skills, the guy could fight his ass off in his prime vs any fighter around his weight class.

Ps. I agree with you regarding the determination & heart factors.

:good

 

Pacman wouldnt beat Whitaker, no way.

 

Talking about NO credibility...
This thread FAILED!:tired

 

Whitaker and Chavez fought only once.