Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Wonderboi, Sep 22, 2020.
First day on the forum you say
welcome, thanks for signing up
Mayweather... it's not even that close
here is the problem...
1) FACT: there is only one genuine criteria for greatness
2) FACT: a lot of fans seem to have no idea what that genuine criteria is
WHO did you beat, with consideration given to when/how...
... there is also a small consideration given to losses
THAT IS IT !! ... nothing else matters, and nothing else should matter... only names !
* Mayweather has 3x wins better than anyone on Pacquiao's resume
* he also has a better body-of-work
* he is also undefeated... Pac has 8 losses
not really that close if you look at the only facts that are relevant
fans push the 8-division champ thing... but that is a little ignorant
if it did not apply back in John L Sullivan's day, then it is not even relevant now... because THE SAME criteria must be evenly applied throughout boxing history to fighters from every relevant era... and there were only 8 divisions back when legends of the past were doing their thing
anyone who insists that Pacquiao is great BECAUSE he won titles in 8 divisions... do not even understand ATG criteria, or the boxing landscape in general
Pacquiao is great because of WHO he beat... not because of achievements that do not contain the names of elite/great fighters... like divisions/espys/twitter followers/etc lol
oh, winning a title at 40yo is probably the funniest " criteria " mentioned
back in the day there was only one champ, and yet there are truckloads of titles today... super, regular, junior, interim... all sorts of rubbish... some of the guys who run around with a title today are not even top 5 in their division... some are not even top 10... LMAO
Q. do you really not think that truly GREAT fighters of the past could beat some of those guys and pick up a title if it did not involve fighting the genuine champ or possibly even a genuine top 10 opponent?
A. I think plenty could have done it... especially if they had the financial incentives fighters have today
like I say... Pacquiao is great because of the guys he beat, and was probably a lock for HOF before he left 130 sfw... but Mayweather is a little higher on that list for sure
Floyd is better (we saw that, when they fought)... AND, he is greater (for beating higher level opposition)
the only people who think that Pacquiao is greater than Mayweather... simply like him better, or they prefer Manny's style... but neither of those things are genuine criteria for greatness
The only reason Mayweather could be higher is due to all the Ped's he's consumed lol
LOL Looks like Shadow's got yet another Alt
Hypothetically, if Floyd beat Bradley in 2012, Canelo without a catchweight and Porter in 2013, Thurman in 2014, and Pacquiao in 2015, where would you rank him all time?
Porter is just another rugged contender, a good win for anyone but he doesn't stand out on Mayweathers resume. Thurman lost to pac several years after Mayweather beat him easily so I don't see what that adds either. The 2 pound catchweight against canelo overshadows a great win. We've all seen that canelo is fully capable of cutting extra weight when he wants too. Won't even mention Bradley. He's a B level fighter. We all know what Mayweather would have done to him
With all that said, for me anyways, the scenario you laid out changes very little as it relates to Mayweathers accomplishments
That wasn't the Mr. Illiterate. But then again, you must also believe:
Jermain Taylor is greater than Bernard Hopkins
Shane Mosley is greater than ODLH
Chris Johns is greater than JMM
Glenn Johnson is greater than RJJ....
Do everyone a favor, don't ever have kids...
why pull the alt-card... ?
this should be easy to refute, right... ?
that is the only criteria that genuine historians use to rank fighters for ATG consideration
no genuine historian ranks Pacquiao higher than Mayweather, only fans do that
Mayweather was on PEDs and Pac was injured.
Pac was on Peds and Mayweather was injured
fans tend to gravitate to fighters who are warriors, who entertain them and leave it all in the ring.
that's not mayweather, but he comfortably diffused fighters with these styles during his career.
it doesn't help that floyd can be obnoxious and generally unlikeable, whereas pacman is the exact opposite.
one is a great boxer, the other is a great fighter.
but floyd showed he was comfortably the best of his era imo.
higher level... thanks for the laugh troll...
well, it looks to me like... now we HAVE to discuss this issue...
Mayweather has 3x wins that are CLEARLY better than anyone on Pac's resume...
1) the Pacquiao defusing
2) the Canelo schooling
3) the Marquez shellacking
all are higher caliber wins than anything Pacquiao achieved
now take away the top 3 wins from both of their resume's, and check out the 2nd tier results...
not a good look for your argument... Mayweather beat something like 25 world champions, 16 of them were CONSECUTIVE
and no losses, you cannot pretend that doesn't count
don't get salty... Manny is still a great fighter
Pacquiao and I don't really think it's that debatable.
I have the two side by side but I can't see any realistic argument placing Floyd higher than him.