Is Pacquiao a top 10 greatest boxer of all time?

Pac ducked Paulie and Humberto Soto.

 

Roy Jones jr.

 

15-20 imo.

 

Certainly not as low as 30.

Hes the only boxer in history to win titles in 8 different weightclasses.

Hes the first boxer in history to win Lineal titles in 4 different weightclasses.

The only fighter to be a world champion in 4 different decades.

The oldest Welterweight champion in history.

H2H he rates highly, resume wise he rates highly, achievement wise hes one of the best ever.

I don't see how he can't be in the top 20.

 

RJJ if you don't count his losses when he was past his prime.

Had he retired after Ruiz fight I guarantee some people would have him as top 10 of all time just based on his dominance.

 

I think Pac's a comfortable choice for top 20 (I've got him at 18) and is the greatest fighter since the 4 kings era but with the ATG behemoths like Robinson, Greb, Langford, Armstrong, Ali, Charles, Duran, Benny Leonard, Moore, etc., etc., it really is hard to stack up to such pugilistic giants, even if Pac's come the closest in the last half century and a bit.

 

I could see him as high as 15 and as low as about 29, depending on how I feel.

 

These are the fighters in my top 20, in no particular order :

Harry Greb
Sam Langford
Sugar Ray Robinson
Henry Armstrong
Ezzard Charles
Benny Leonard
Joe Gans
Roberto Duran
Sugar Ray Leonard
Willie Pep
Muhammad Ali
Joe Louis
Mickey Walker
Archie Moore
Barney Ross
Tony Canzoneri
Jimmy McLarnin
Bob Fitzsimmons
Terry McGovern
Packey McFarland

Do you think Pacquiao deserves to be above any of them, and if so, why ?

 

Thank you for that list , I believe some people feel he’s top 10 because they don’t know the true history of this sport. It’s no hate he’s a ATG ,but no way in hell is he top ten.

 

I absolutely love this list btw but I think Pac could be put in over McGovern, McFarland (though I do rate him very highly), and arguably SRL, and I've personally got McLarnin one slot below Pac.

 

I can kinda see him over McLarnin. McGovern's Bantamweight-Lightweight rampage is a bit too much IMO. It would take something like Pac beating Morales or Barrera, then moving up to beat Floyd, and then moving up to beat Shane Mosley, all in a single year, to put him over Terry. It was crazy.

McFarland's wins over Britton and Gibbons also give him the edge over Pac, IMO. It's insane for someone who was primarily a Lightweight to beat someone who can be ranked as high as #3 at WW, and someone who is practically a top 10 lock at Middleweight.

 

This

 

As I have mentioned several times on this forum and elsewhere, boxing has a serious anti-recency bias problem. If Manny Pacquiao was a boxer from the 40s, he would be praised to the skies and be called the second greatest p4p boxer ever. But his fault was that he fought in the 2000s which is fresh in the memories of fans.

Pacquiao makes to the top ten for me. He beat many great boxers and had good longevity. One of the few boxers who was a top-level talent for over two decades.

 

No but he was a tremendous fighter clearly inside top 100. Those defeats and knockouts indicate he was beatable at his best.