Pacquiao isn't appreciated enough.

If people are going to use Mosley to boost Pacs resume you can certainly do the same for Floyd. Mosley isn't even the 3rd best opponent for either of them.

Old or not, Mosley just came off one of his biggest wins and was the #1 contender. It's a good win for Floyd no matter how you slice it. But that doesn't suggest Mosley was at his absolute best. The two things are not mutually exclusive.

 

You completely missed the point. Clenelo is at his very best right now at weights far from the 152 catchweight Floyd fought him at. EVERYONE Clenelo fought post Floyd fought a better Clenelo and that includes Amir Khan. Clenelo doesn't even sit on his stool between rounds anymore.

It's not irrelevant. Most fights in boxing can't be made due to size difference. And it's the number 1 reason Pac's opponents above 135 point to that will lead them to victory (see Keith's cringe interview calling Pac a lightweight w/ T-rex arms). Was the version that Floyd fought much better than the one Pac fought? We don't know because he literally saw the speed and ran for dear life. You act like Floyd put a savage beating on Mosley and took his prime. Pac fight was one fight removed. Mosley went on to fight toe to toe with Clenelo without fear.

If Gervonta Davis fought the same version of Mosley and it was a competitive win (not a blow out or 11-1), it would be better than Pac and Floyd's victory on account of the size. If Lomachenko went up to 147 and beat the Thurman Pac beat, it would be a Top 10 best win in the history of the sport.

Pac victory was better. Period.

Oscar, yes. But again, was Pac supposed to jump 3 weight classes?

And uh, no. Hatton was the man at 140 and had never fought at 147.

You're the guy that keeps saying Floyd beat this person and that person first. How dense are you?

And Oscar called out Pac. Pac rose 2 weight classes for the challenge. JMM rose 2 weight divisions and Floyd cheated him on the scales, basically. Floyd weighing in at 144 would have been a different fight. So basically, Floyd fought a fat JMM and Pac fought a supersized chemically-enhanced JMM.

Maybe Thurman takes out Spence, Crawford, and Ugas. We do know that Pac put a severe beating on him, so let's see how it looks. Clenelo never took a severe beating.

He called out Pac. Pac said yes. He went with Floyd. Maidana's been badly hurt by Lopez, Soto-Karass, Ortiz, and even Broner. He knew he was tailor made for Pac and so he played it safe with Floyd. Maybe not a duck, but he didn't want that work.

 

I think it's simply because he has losses on his record. There's a huge obsession with being undefeated in boxing. He should be respected, literally fought the best in his divisions for a decade.

 

But Floyd was also fairly old and moving up a weight class. He also no longer had the power to bail himself out with a KO. It's a very impressive feat and certainly comparable to an old pac beating Thurman. You're acting like Floyd was a natural Jr middle and a that he wasn't also moving up from much smaller divisions. The only advantages Floyd had over canelo were hand speed and ring IQ. Canelo was bigger, stronger, more durable, hit harder, and was younger and fresher.

Never said anything about Floyd giving Mosley a savage beating. My point was simply that Floyd beating a #1 ranked Mosley coming off two impressive KO wins over Margarito and Mayorga is better than Pac beating Mosley coming off a loss and a draw. That's not up for debate.

I never said anything about what Pac was "supposed" to do. He was not obligated to fight Oscar to begin with. Oscar was done. The comparison was who beat the better version of Oscar and that's obviously Floyd. Ditto for Hatton.

Not nearly as dense as you since you think beating a guy coming off a loss and a draw is more impressive than beating a guy coming off 2 wins.

Beating someone first means that whoever beats that person after you is likely beating a worse version of the same boxer. This is definitely the case when you look at some of Floyd and Pacs common opponents.

Your problem is you're giving Pac credit for moving up while ignoring how drained his opponents are and then you criticize Floyd for moving up and facing some of the same larger opponents. You ignore Oscar and cotto being drained against Pac but you criticize Floyd for facing canelo and Marquez.

It would take a miracle of God for Thurman to finish his career half as good as canelos.

Because he had a close fight with Floyd and a rematch would win him millions and a belt. It was a no brainer decision. The first Floyd fight was very close and it would have been silly to not rematch him. Pac was going life and death with Bradley so let's not even go there. We all know Floyd wouldn't need a trilogy to convince people he was better than. Bradley.

Pac hasnt knocked out anyone except an old mathyse for like a decade. His power at welterweight is very overrated. He would not KO the iron chinned Maidana who was like 165 in the ring with Floyd.

 

Really? So two wrongs make a right?? Its not correct when Pac fans do it...

Sure. But it was ONE win over a decade. ONE WIN is supposed to erase Shane's mediocrity for an entire decade? If you hold this standard w/ Shane, you have to with everyone. consistency

 

I mean beating the #1 contender who just had two huge KO wins over Mayorga and Margarito shouldn't be held against Floyd.

Pac was fighting an unranked Mosley coming off a loss and a draw. The comparison is like night and day.

What do you mean your only one good win the whole decade? That decade he also beat Mayorga, Vargas, collazo, and Oscar.

 

Manny is nowhere near the tops in any division he ever fought in, period.

 

Dude... Floyd NEVER relied on power. Ever. He relied on his crazy skillset and speed.

Mayorga??? Shane beat a popular shot name. Means about as much as his win over Vargas. Look dude, VERY FEW here considered Margarito the best WW because that's how flo mos worked this joint. Sure it was a good win Shane had. But like I said, if you are going to excuse a decade of looking like a mere contender because of one good, recent win, you MUST hold that to everyone.

Pac's win over Shane means nothing to me.

He beat Oscar in the rematch w/ the Clear/cream. Heard of BALCO? LOL. Yeah, he beat Collazo. And?? Didn't know Collazo was a world beater himself.

You want to count wins over a shot to **** mayorga and vargas....that's all on you.

 

We are way off topic.

We were comparing wins over common opponents between Floyd and Pac. That's the only reason this discussion even started.

Floyd beat a better version of Mosley, Hatton, Oscar, and arguably Cotto as well. He beat 3 of those boxers before Pac did. Floyd effortlessly and comprehensively schooled Marquez. Pac went life and death with Marquez, never beat him convincingly, and got knocked out once.

If we're comparing Floyd vs Pac based on common opponents, Floyd is clearly superior. Floyd beating Pac is also a factor. These are all big asterisks you cannot ignore if you want to claim Pac is the best fighter of his era.

 

Yeah, didn't mean to derail. Just get tired of people trying to list Shane as a big win (For anyone) when he did little over jack **** for a decade, but get beat by better guys, and beat low level contenders.

Sure, Floyd beat a better version.... but is diarrhea better than constipation?

 

Kind of? I mean diarrhea is constant annoyance. Constipation you don't notice for a while, and then when it dawns on you what the issue is, you dread the inevitable because it's one big painful moment.

 

Terrible analogy I came up with You are right