Can a case be made for his inclusion into a Top 10 ranking among the all-time great flyweights? Guy has numbers and longevity. Is that enough?
Hey bro. There was another identical thread to this one a few days ago. Not a lot of posts (as i'm sure you can imagine) but the general concensus was a "no" from my memory. Mante picked out a number for him, I think around 25, although he acknowledged that the guy had very good numbers.
Top ten just doesn't seem right.He completely lacks the quality of names defeated to be that high imo, it would be somewhat like sticking chris Eubank or Calzaghe in a light heavy top ten, in large part because of their long title runs, and both those fighters took on much better fighters overall than Pong. He's been a fine fighter though, best if this decade, and had more talent than the hugely overrated Arce or Darchinyan imo. I'd say he's one of those fighters who could be justified in quite a wide area of placement.Someone really high on him might be able to argue well for putting him in as high as 15-20.On the other hand, the fact this has been a poor decade could see a harsher outlook dropping him out of a top 30 or 40 altogether. Not too sure what my final take on him would be.I'd prefer to go through his career again in a few sittings before coming to any conclusion.Been a long time since i watched a lot of his fights.
