All of them are clearly boxing_master alts, clearly trying to convince everyone it will be a great win hoping PAC will get more credit than he deserves. Boxing_master would give pacquiao a 10 for coming into the ring and beating his ****, let alone an actual opponent.
Why would it bother me, I'd love to see chris beat pacquiao just to watch you go full circle and start making excuses for PAC, just so I could bump all your posts and threads hyping Algieri up. You'll not be able to make any excuses this time if by some miracle Algieri actually beats PAC.
All of which are excuses. You should not take this into account when rating a fight lol. Like the great JMM said, if you step in the ring then you have no room for excuses.
If Algeri is an 8-10, then there's more elite A boxers then I ever thought was possible.. He's no better (or proven better) than anyone Pac or Mayweather faced between 140-154.. If Algeri is a 10, there's no way Rios and Ghost isn't a 10 as well (or at least close to it).
Depends how he does it, if he stops him then you have to say that's impressive; Provo broke his eye-socket and he kept going!
How dare you come in here with logic! The *******s are trying to hype Algieri up to make it look an incredible win against a proven A+ fighter and you've come in here talking sense! Unacceptable!
If Algieri is a 10 to them, what is Rios? What is Bradley? What is Morales? All 10's? Rios was about a 3 IMO, Bradley is 9, Marquez is a 9. His only 10's would be Floyd or a top fighter at 154. Thurman would be a 7, Porter would be a 6. Maidana would be a 6. I give Morales a 10. A 10 IMO is an elite, potentially ATG.
:deal I'd give PAC a 5 if he muddles his way to a somewhat competitive decision. 7-8 if he looks really good and really outclasses him. CA has the potential to do big things, I think and does have good skills and focus. So putting him on the level of Thurman and Porter etc is fine. Putting him up with Bradley or JMM let alone MAB is silly. (I assume you meant MAB not Morales who was good but no 10)