I'm tired of arguing with people who are obviously biased and don't have a clue, so I am counting on the classic forum gurus for insight and their opinions. Am I wrong to believe Pac isn't in the top 20 or close at the moment?
Bert Sugar has already proclaimed him as such, but I don't value the opinion of a historian who lives in the moment. The real question is, was he top 20 before Hatton? Because Ricky was/is not that good. Mayweather toyed with him before finally finishing him, and his most notable win was over a past it Kostya in what was essentially a mugging. Pac's wins over JMM are questionable, and in my mind owes Marquez another crack. A resounding NO from me.
Yes you're right, the current boxing forum is biased to active fighters, and the classic boxing forum is totally balanced and objective. :tired I used to be a very frequent classic forum poster (under my old username), but got tired of the bias towards classic fighters. Not a huge bias, but it was evident. Like I said in the other thread: a case can definitely be made, he has the credentials to do so. However he hasn't cemented a spot there yet, nor has he for the top 25. But a win over Mayweather will cement it IMO.
Yes he's gone from 112-140, spanning 8 weight classes, becoming a 6weight champion (3-4 linear) beating great fighters along the way like Morales (twice), Marquez, Barrera (twice), Hatton amongst other top ranked fighters. Not only that in his 8th division he ko'd the linear champion in 2rounds. Legacy wise and in terms of multiple weight success thats right up there with Armstrong and Duran. He has his floors as many greats do but looking back at his legacy it compares favourably.
