Max Kellerman: Manny Pacquiao Is Possibly The GOAT (!!!)

Because that goes against the whole point of P4P, which is to determine who would be the best if everyone were the same size.

 

He participated in some of the most ridiculous catchweight fights. Being p4p means you can actually fight at multiple division limits not try to drain your opponents down so you have an advantage and aren’t fighting on a level playing field. The guy was in several of these types of fights and they absolutely cheapen the sport.

 

Even though I'm glad Rico and his fellow chincheckers with the whole "its irrefutable" gimmick, aren't as prevalent here as they were on the old ESB forum, simply replying "You're dumb as hell" isn't exactly helping your case here. I have no doubt Rico has got some knowledge, Pakkuman

 

Good point and I totally get what you mean.I'd never go so far as calling him GOAT but I would call him extraordinary for him running through the divisions like a mad man.Styles makes fights and imo Floyd would have his number every time..

 

You fight enough top guys, you get losses. It's what you win and who you beat that matters more in the long run.

Duran went 1-4 against the rest of the Fab 4 and has more "bad losses" than all of them, yet is usually the highest rated P4P.

Roy got beat by Calzaghe H2H and has numerous bad losses, yet is a higher rated P4P fighter than Joe.

It goes on and on.

What Pac's done is unique in the sport and will never be seen again. That puts him in elite company. Where people want to rank him from there is up to them because everyone in that tier has done stuff we'll never see again. That's boxing.

 

Nobody comes close 12345678

 

Sorry in advance for the long post, but their seems to be revisionist history with the older ATG's so I figured I'd chime in.

People don't want to give the old time fighters credit because of a lack of film footage. Lots of film used pre-1950's were heavily nitrogen based (highly flammable) thus most of it was destroyed/discarded.

Manny's achievements are wonderful but pale in comparison to someone like Langford who started at 135 lbs and moved up to HEAVYWEIGHT. Let that sink in for a second. Harry Greb took on all comers at 160 lbs- literally anyone he could fight both inside and outside the ring (great story of his streetfight with Mickey Walker right AFTER they had fought a brutal 15 round war.) That dude fought nearly 300 times and half his career blinded in one eye. At his peak, the HW champion of the world Mr. Jack Dempsey didn't seem like he was interested in fighting Greb who was 163 lbs soaking wet at the very most.

Ray Robinson didn't lose at WW ever and compiled a start to his career of around 124 wins and just 1 loss- the singular loss coming from a full fledged MW in Jake Lamotta- a fight Ray avenged several times over.

That's 3 guys that are clearly superior resume wise to Manny pacquiao. 3 guys who fought at a time when there were only 8 weight classes, no alphabet titles and it was very hard to get a title shot due to the mafia running boxing for a long, long time.

History should be kind to Manny since he achieved a lot of great things but history should also maintain its kindness to the fighters of yesteryear. Some of the elite ATG's have resumes that read like a fiction novel. We're talking about guys who fought 20+ times a year and have 150+ fights as pro's on their resume.

I want to make one last point- while current fighters have the advantage of innovations in science, technology and nutrition, the talent pool is nothing like it was in boxing pre-1960. Boxing used to be king of sports in the United States, hence a lot of young kids gravitated towards the sport and had ambitions of becoming professionals. It used to be in the NCAA (collegiate athletics,) thus kids could even make their way into college on full scholarships if they had enough talent. Boxing was the most popular sport for a long time pre-1950 and was eventually usurped by baseball, basketball and american football (the king of all sports in the united States.) That means the talent pool was exponentially better than what we've seen in modern boxing by large measures.

Look no further than the UK for comparison sake- it's arguably the second most popular sport in the UK behind soccer, thus the reason the talent pool is so great there given how small of a population they have compared to the US. Boxing is a niche sport in the states, and the best athletes do not become professional boxers.

There's this old saying that the HW champion of the world is playing in the NFL. If people actually think guys like Wilder, Ruiz Jr or whoever else from the states is the best talent America has to offer, than you don't know how populated our country is and the percentage of kids that gravitate towards pee-wee league football, AAU basketball and youth baseball. All our best talent goes to those 3 sports, specifically basketball and football.

Boxers of the pre 1950's- those guys were the best the United States had to offer since their were a lot more boxing gyms nationwide compared to now and a much better amateur system than the current mess here.

 

PIMPLE you need to get rid of those rose colored glasses
Froid never dominated Pac. he was juiced to the gills again hence the IV GATE debacle but barely scraped by an injured fighting in pain Pac even FLOYD sr called him a coward
AS FAR AS FIGHTER OF THE ERA GOES THAT TITLE GOES TO ..................
!!!!! SENATOR EMMANUEL DAPIDRAN PACQUAIO !!!!!!

 

I've heard people who know their stuff say that losses don't matter. I've never understood this line of thought. I think what they're trying to say, alongside the obvious truth that losses don't diminish great wins, is that context matters. In other words some losses don't matter as much as others. Roy's loss to Calzaghe caught him past his prime, Pernell didn't actually lose to Ramirez, Duran (among many others) has a prime loss in non-title fight, Robinson (among many others) has a prime loss vs a bigger guy, Greb (among many others) has some losses in a time when guys fought every 5 weeks without the benefit of extensive fight footage of opponents or an 8 week training camp. None of this implies that no losses matter. And if anything, it implies that Pacquiao's losses in a modern age matter a lot more than, for example, Greb's.

 

Can you plz explain? Who are the missing fighters for the "better " resume??

 

They only gave it to Pacquiao because Mayweather retired, Also Pacquiao didn't deserved it for all the times he robbed Marquez

 

they gave it to Pac because he is a FIGHTER!!!! FlIVd didnt deserve mention because he was a jealous cheating diva
end of story