Just Realised Arturo Gatti was COMPLETELY PAST PRIME vs Floyd Mayweather!

Depends on who you ask. Objective fans consider it close.

There are things you can nitpick about either man's résumé, and they ultimately balance out. Both accomplished quite a lot.

 

Ivan Robinson beat a prime Gatti. Don't know why people thought Floyd would have problems with him.

 

RJJ gets more props because he became the 2nd fighter ever to win titles from MW to HW, and the first to start at 154, and win a title at HW.

 

^ Comparing what they did before they became mega-famous, in both cases starting at welter or light welter - which is when you can start nitpicking them, Pacquiao for the catchweight stuff and Mayweather for "stacking the deck" in terms of contractual stipulations and opponent selection, or cherry-picking if you want to go that far...and both of them for "catching guys at the right time" - you can't say either has a massive edge over the other. Remember - this means we're talking about everything pre-2008 for Pac (his "pure, un-nitpickable" period) and for Mayweather everything pre-2004 (his own "pure, un-nitpickable" period).

Beating the likes of Sasakul, Hussein, Ledwaba, ATG Barrera x2, Larios, Solis, ATG Morales x2, and ATG Márquez once (at least officially) is excellent. Not more excellent, however, than Chicanito Hernández, Manfredy, Juuko, Goyo Vargas, unbeaten p4p #1 Chico, Famoso Hernández, Jesus Chávez, JLC x2, and Olympic bronze medalist Sosa. Even if you think on the surface Pac's ten best there in his respective body of work south of 140lbs trumps Mayweather's, you have to calculate in that he also has three losses in there (twice knocked out cold, once defeated by a Morales so cocky he recklessly turned southpaw at the end and got away with it) along with two draws, which does bring his score down a bit. You can make the "well Mayweather would have losses and draws too if he weren't ducking the best" argument, but meh. Torrecampo and Singsurat (or even Agapito Sánchez) were "the best"? The sort of guys you can picture Mayweather getting kayoed by or drawing with? No. So to be totally fair those get factored in and equalize things somewhat. And if you want to pedantically attack Mayweather over the glossy spots on his record for A) getting a gift in JLC 1 and B) facing a "drained" Chico and C) only beating either Hernández when they were "past their prime", then you have to balance the scales applying equal standards by admitting that A) Pacquiao got a gift in Márquez II (arguably the draw the first time as well, as Márquez should've really had enough of a share of the remaining eleven rounds to offset the 1st even had that one judge not messed up his scoring of that round...but that's a whole can of worms. For the sake of argument let's just keep it to Márquez II canceling out JLC I), and B) fought the rubber match with a drained Morales who looked shot to bits and yet somehow miraculously reverted to a capable fighter when he moved up in weight, and C) fought Barrera - even the first time - past his prime.

They're neck and neck, honestly.

Then at 140lbs and up their résumés become complicated messes where, yes, they both added big names, but there are SO MANY asterisks on both. It makes the most sense to just concentrate on everything pre-2008 and pre-2004 respectively, which is where both of them really cemented their HOW status...long before they were PPV stars or rivals.

 

Solid post, but I have points I disagree with.

First, Pacquiao's competition was greater than Mayweather's. He has more depth. And you just cannot compare Barrera, Marquez and Morales to Castillo and Corrales. That is a step up in class there, quite simply.

Second, Pacquiao's decision to offer Marquez a shot in 2004 would be unheard of today. He was literally just coming off of his signature win. A performance that would he could just never surpass. Then he fights Marquez at 126 pounds an excellent counter-puncher despite being a top p4p fighter himself. Marquez was the ultimate high risk-low reward fighter.

People always shrug off the Marquez fights as a negative for Pacquiao. Hey can you imagine any p4p type MW ever challenging Golovkin in 2012? Because that's a close equivalent IMO.

The critiques over the Marquez fights operates under the premise that Pacquiao should have won by wide decision or won by KO.

Why should we have expected Pacquiao to KO a prime Marquez?

 

I think Floyd is top 10 all time ability-wise.

 

Also IB, Pacquiao came from an impoverished situation. Where he didn't have access to proper technical training or food.

There is a clear difference between Pacquiao at 112 pounds where he didn't have access to proper training compared to him at 122+ pounds.

I largely dismiss the Flyweight KO losses due to these circumstances. Some might call that being an apologist. What say you?

 

...but see, you're doing what Gannicus does here - reaching beyond your grasp to shill for Manny and inflate the worth of his deeds with emotional appeals to his upbringing or downplaying the controversy of the judges being so generous to Pac in Márquez I & II or claiming that even by having competitive matches with him (that should've been defeats) they elevate him just on the sheer enormity of Márquez qualitatively h2h). The likes of MVC! et al do the same for Mayweather by comically exaggerating certain technically-true flattering-on-paper aspects of his résumé or downplaying the less flattering - and people call it trolling, but that sword cuts both ways.

Ultimately, the objective and unimpeachable facts - leaving aside subjective fluff such as the above tidbits, or those espoused on the Mayweather side by his nut-huggers - are:

1. both have clear Hall of Fame worthy résumés before either of them hit 140lbs.
2. estimating the value of either man's résumé at or above 140lb gets a bit murky, given that all the biggest names are compounded by a plethora of asterisks for various reasons that do cancel one another out. (Canelo for PBF/DLH for MP were drained, Maidana for PBF/Márquez for MP was robbed, Márquez was hampered by the bulk up for PBF/Cotto was in a bad place in his career for MP and not yet recovered from Margarito I, Berto for PBF/Margarito for Pac were stylistically tailor-made, Hatton was stopped faster by MP and more brutally/PBF did it first and left him ruined & softened up, Judah for PBF/Bradley for Pac ran them way too close for comfort and bagged a bunch of rounds, etc. - they all cancel out, any pedantic niggling argument you want to make about one can be mirrored by one about the other...and they can all just about be argued either way)
3. Examining their best ten wins beneath 140lbs, yes Pac's list has the better names at the very top - all three of the ATG Mexicans of the era in his weight range, whereas Mayweather doesn't have a single ATG scalp, just a handful of HOF or near-HOF ones - but again, Pacquiao also has losses and draws to iron things out, since Mayweather doesn't (and if you want to go and "correct" the scoring in their controversial fights, Pac ends up with five losses including Márquez I & II, compared with Mayweather having just one in Castillo I)...and besides the ATG Mexican trio, Pac's quality in the next seven down by no means stands apart from Mayweather's quality. They're close.

Anything else said to disparage or pump up either fighter's résumés is down to bias. It really is a game of inches and whoever says either man is hands-down greater, based on the above facts, is trolling.

 

It's critical to note that Pacquiao's losses above 140 have come against steroid cheats and one of the worst robberies in the history of the game.

 

On a macro level about half the ringside people thought Marquez won and half thought Pacquiao won.

Next though I think you are underrating Marquez's H2H ability at 126-130 where he was younger and not undersized.

Nobody has ever convincingly defeated Marquez ever until Mayweather did it at 144 pounds when he missed weight. He's never been KO'ed. Simply, he's a H2H nightmare at 126-130 pounds.

The thing is the first two Marquez fights do elevate Pacquiao (which he won) because Marquez is that good H2H.

BTW Pacquiao won the second fight.

You're dismissing three ATG's too much. You can't just say subtracting their top 3 opponents and then compare resume. The fights with those Mexicans happened because they did.

 

What would Hagler's resume look like without the Hearns and Duran fights? Not nearly as good as it does.

But those fights did happen. It's like a pitcher saying well if I didn't give up those 7 runs in 1 inning my ERA looks pretty good. Ok, but it happened.

 

Yeah!

G'dam noob.

 

Gatti was a great white hype that Mayweather cashed out. Gatti should not be in the Hall of Fame.