Prime Pac vs Fab four- how many of the four could Pac have beaten?

Cotto or Hatton wouldn`t be at the top of any of the fab four resumes, specifically Hatton who was nowheer near the level of Benitez, Hearns or Duran who are on the resumes of a couple of the fab four, I feel Manny would have had his best chance v Ray but Leonard`s resume pisses all over Manny`s.

 

Your trolling is stronger.

Pac's resume isn't in question here. I'd agree on an ATG rankings list he's only definitely below Duran, an argument can be made for being above the others (not necessarily for me but) but in terms of head to head he's bottom of this list of 5 fighters. No shame in that, he's under-sized except possibly vs Roberto

 

Pacman vs. Marvin Hagler This fight is impossible because of the weight of both.
a limited marquez with slow hands in addition to his crystal jaw managed to put him to sleep in one of his fights in the other 3 fights he could not win by knockout is more pacman he could not even have defeated shane mosley prime and oscar de la hoya prime a Pacman is considered a welterweight monster for beating these two boxers

 

You're looking at the realistic likelihood of Manny beating those guys.

If you think that the Fab Four would have beaten him 9/10, you've obviously chosen the wrong option.

 

Not at all and you seem to be searching for something that really isn’t there.

 

It's nothing to do with nostalgic bias at all.

It's just plain common sense if you're knowledgeable of the fighters in question.

From what you've written, we know that you don't possess much knowledge of the Fab Four.

People aren't dismissing Manny's resume.

Manny has a great resume. But this is a discussion, based on H2H match ups where all fighters are in their prime.

It makes zero difference that Manny beat Hatton, Cotto and a faded version of Shane Mosley.

He wouldn't have beaten a peak version of Marvin Hagler.

You're looking at how they'd have matched up stylistically, as well as height, reach, weight and power etc.

There's just no logic whatsoever in thinking that Manny would have beaten a guy like Hearns. And anybody who seriously thinks that he'd have beaten all them, really needs a good slapping.

 

I'm not going to get into it with you.

1. Picking that option based on such a low percentage is silly.

2. Picking Manny over all of them is absolutely ridiculous anyway. There's zero logic to it.

 

This is the thing.

Would Manny have beaten the versions of Oscar and Shane who fought each other?

Those are just completely different versions to the ones who fought Floyd and Manny.

I've got huge respect for Manny.

He's one of the greatest of all time. But where's the logic in picking him over a prime version of Marvin?

What on earth would that be based on?

 

Ive gone with option that gives Manny the only pick over them.

Again it’s not hard to understand what I said, on his best night Pacquaio has every chance to win although I’d favour the fab 4 to have a majority over say 10 fights.

Again you are trying to force an argument when there isn’t one.

 

I'm not trying to force anything.

Again, if you think that Manny would only have had a 1-10 chance of beating them then picking that option is ridiculous.

The poll doesn't say that Manny COULD (possibly) have beaten them.

It says that Manny WOULD have beaten them.

You can't pick that option and then say that the likelihood of it happening would have been extremely low.

If that's your percentage, then you can't really envisage it.

 

So what should I have picked?

 

If you genuinely believe he'd only have had a 1-10 in chance of beating them, I think you should have chosen none.

 

Okkaaayyyy......

But wouldn’t that take away his 1 in 10 win?

Prime PAC beats all of them could equate to 1 lone victory or 3 out of 10 or 10, Pac beats none equates to exactly that.

(PS I cannot believe I’m discussing this).

 

Look man, you do whatever you want.

It's cool.

If it was me, I'd only pick it if I thought there would have been a high chance of it happening. That's how I would vote if it said would instead of could.

If it was could, that's different.

As it is, it's would. Yet you aren't really confident at all that he'd have done it. So then what's the point in picking it? It seems silly to me.

It's all good.

I'm surprised by the votes though. In my honest opinion, I think that most of those guys aren't that familiar with the Fab Four.

I've been watching Manny for years. But I don't know what he's ever done for people to have favoured him over a prime version of Marvin.