Erik Morales looked like **** against Raheem who was average at best. Then immediately fought pac and looked horrible and got stopped. Morales was on roids Lance that helped his late resurgence of his career post Pac he got popped for it. Quit acting like you arent aware of that.
They're ATGS not elite atgs that are anywhere near Duran Hagler and Hearns. Not to mention Pac didn't beat a prime Morales and he lost to a faded version of Morales as well in there first fight.
Oooh... there's ATG, and then there's ELITE ATG's. Which, I'm sure, only YOU really know who they are. jesus christ....
Norris is a top 5 ATG at 154 in his prime was a beast that was the version of Norris who SRL fought in SRL's second to last fight.
So Erik Morales was prime when Pac beat him??? LMFAO! He was coming off a horrible loss to Raheem got stopped then got stopped again then started using roids to help continue his career. It was quite sad really. I take it back you probably didn;t know that.
Here's the thing, every single. Person on this thread is correct. None of you are wrong. There's no official list. If Pacquiao is whatever number for you, then he's that number for you. The reason it's causing so much debate is because too many if you are still caught up in fanboy mentality. For example, Ezzard Charles has no hardcore fans nor hardcore haters any more. So people can rate him objectively without emotion, and discuss it between themselves maturely. Pacquiao still has hardcore fans and haters, so people aren't able to rathe objectively and aren't able to discuss it maturely. I don't understand why the conversation isn't just "ah, you rate him at number xxx" what's your criteria" "my criteria is....." "fair enough, I respect your opinion"
More proof that you like to argue just for the sake of arguing. I'll ask you this and answer the question who's the least great fighter of this group? 1.Duran 2.MAB 3.Hagler 4.Hearns
