Is Pacquiao a top 10 ATG?

No sir I saw Canelo fight when he was 21 already a world champion. When Floyd beat him he was 22/24 and Floyd was 36 so only 1 of them was past their athletic best yet Floyd took him to school. That victory showed how great Floyd was. The Pacquiao fight was delayed because Pacquiao refused to submit to Olympic style random blood and urine testing because he was afraid of needles apparently. Big Larry Holmes is an ATG and certainly in the argument for greatest heavyweight of all time.

 

Well, one thing I'm sure we can both agree on is that Floyd has never been afraid of needles.

 

Floyd has certainly never been afraid of compulsory and mandatory drug testing. In fact that is one of his key legacies to the sport. Try and remember this is not a Floyd or Pacquiao bashing session rather it’s an appreciation of top10 ATG. As I have said Pacquiao is a truly great great fighter however for me he is not in the top 10.

 

Here's Mayweather accusing McGregor of cheating through the use of IV fluids:

“I heard he got like seven IV bags, and with the Nevada commission, that’s illegal."

Let me help you out here. Floyd used IV fluids in the Pacquiao fight. Floyd accused McGregor of cheating through the use of IV fluids.

 

Pacquiao also never refused compulsory and mandatory drug testing. In fact, he was consistent in saying that he'd do any drug testing that the NSAC required.

Pacquiao was asked by Floyd to undergo drug testing paid for by Floyd in a private arrangement with USADA—an agency that had bungled drug testing for many fights including issuing a TUE for Mayweather 2 weeks after the fight and only after it became public knowledge that Mayweather had used illegal IV fluids.

Mayweather refused to undergo VADA drug testing, the gold standard that spares no one and catches everyone, which was proposed by Pacquiao. Mayweather also rejected a proposal for a $5 million penalty for each positive result.

So it's absolutely hilarious that Mayweather dodged drug testing, drug testing penalties, and was caught with a needle in his arm.

You're a biased nuthugger with an agenda. It's cool. Just own up to the fact that you're a super Stan who thinks Mayweather can do no wrong.

 

Log off. Pac couldnt load up for 2 reasons 1 he didn't want to be countered he was in with a master counter puncher and 2. Pbf isnt there to be hit and was controlling range and dictating distance on his ass and could beat him to the punch all night long

 

No, it's not the same thing. Mayweather was 2 years older than his opponent, 38 compared to Paquiao's 36.
On the other hand, Charles was 7 years younger than Louis.
Therefore the 2 fights are nothing alike.

No they aren't. Floyd would still have a better record even at 100 fights, he's just too skilled. Since the beginning of boxing, apart from SRR, nobody can would come out on top of Floyd in a best of 5 match. And just to be clear, I ****in' hate the way he fights with a passion. But he's just too good, too skilled.

The only match one might argue Floyd lost was the first Castillo match. Even if Floyd would have fought in Charles's era, I still see him getting a far better record than anyone else.

 

I'm putting you on ignore now because you are one of the stupidest people on this site.

 

No, Pac was as declined as Louis. That was his point. It's also correct.

Please. Tommy Hearns would ****ing dismantle Floyd. As would Duran, Leonard and Armstrong.

Charles' record is insane. He has 3 wins over Archie ****ing Moore! Think about that for a second. Each one of those wins is better than ANYTHING on Mayweather's résumé. He also has wins over Walcott, Marshall, Bivins ect.

Better than Marciano?
You know that in Charles' era he'd be at LW/WW, in the greatest era ever... He'd be fighting guys like Ike Williams, Beau Jack, Sammy Angott, Bob Montgomery, Henry Armstrong, Fritzie Zivic, Sugar Ray Robinson ect. if you think he goes undefeated fighting schedules like Charles' against rosters like that you're beyond help.

 

Would you pick Mikey over Pac?

 

Right now? Yeah. Prime Pac? No, there's levels which puts styles on a backburner.

 

So I'm stupid cause I don't agree with your senseless post ?!?
You have no ****ing arguments.
Mayweather is top 10 all time, whether u like it or not. Probably even top 5.

 

Pac might not have been at his peak, but neither was Mayweather.

None of them has a chance.

His resume is not better than Mayeather's. Plus he has lost fights, Mayweather has ZERO losses (apart from the Castillo fight, whom he beat in the rematch)

Apart from SRR, he'd embarrass the rest, they don't stand a chance.

 

Okay? Doesn't mean he beat a prime Pacquiao.

Go and educate yourself. It's embarrassing. A prime Archie Moore is better than anyone Mayweather beat. It's not even up for debate.

Who gives a **** if he didn't lose? All of his best wins are against guys as old as his Nana or green and drained. He didn't take the risks Ezz did and it shows.

Furthermore, Mayweather didn't even lose to Castillo, it's a fallacy by people who want dirt on him. That said, Ezzard Charles' competition is LEVELS above Mayweather's. Levels.

You think Ike Williams and Henry Armstrong don't stand a chance against Mayweather?