That's my favorite emmanuel win. I thought he showed the most versatility I ever seen from him. I had to boycott it due to marg, but it was coo to download and watch.
That slick champion was winning and Pac looked very amateurish then. He's come a long way, but he hasn't fought anyone with slickness since. But there hasn't really been any opponents around with that style, besides Raheem and Guzman, back when he was in their divisions. That guy doesnt hold a candle to Guzman then, who wanted to fight Pac with a passion then. But Pac is much better than that version who only really had one punch, that was his only plan, to land his left.
Sasakul was actually a good fighter, but Pacquiao was a different animal then. He was able to succeed against a slick boxer using sheer youthful physicality, rather than the explosiveness and skill he has picked up under Roach.
On ESB, for Pac to get FULL CREDIT the opponent must be a slick African-American. Slick Asian doesn't count, slick African doesn't count (Ledwaba). It must be slick African-American as Bernard Hopkins stated.
What did BHop say SLICK Black-American? All I remember him saying is that emmanuel must fight a black n*gga, Bhop was just talking **** to get his buddy Mosley a fight.
He's an underrated former champ and was fairly slick for a Thai, but that statement is a bit of a reach IMO. That shouldn't matter. Just because Pacquiao jumps up in weight successfully doesn't mean everybody can be held to that standard. A better question would be "was he more effective p4p than any of those guys?". Of course someone who only ever competed at flyweight and super flyweight (and was knocked out at both) wouldn't beat lightweights-welterweights. Pacquiao is the exception, not the rule.