Wow. That's some impressive stalking you're doing there. How long have you been on Bladerunner's back now?
Also his ATG standing won't be based on being a 7-8 division world champ. If that was the case DLH would be top 10 on everyone's list. The impressive list of great fighters he's beaten and the way he's dominated alot of guys he wasn't supposed to will be what they rank him by
Dizzle, what FORMIDABLE has just posted there, is all you need to be concerned about. It's not the titles he's picked up which impresses us, it's the list of opponents he's swepped aside in the process. Considering the unfortunate mentality of fighters (and promoters) in this day and age, I think Pacquiao easily stands out from the crowd; thus deserving all the praise he gets.
5 world titles in my book yaw can play fairy tales all you want but we all know its 5 world titles not 7....Record books *****
Yes, he is. The BWAA said so. FOTD, baby!:deal Oh, wait...I forgot that you have the final say. :roll:
Henry Armstrong and the real old timers COULD NOT have won a belt fighting the number 2 or number 3 guy because there was one ****ing belt and 8 weight classes. Right now, there's 3 titles mostly accepted as major, 1 that's semi-legit, and 1 that's absolutely accepted by pretty much everyone. Margarito is ranked number in the top 5 by the WBC, that's who's belt he's fighting for and that's what matters to the WBC. Crooked, corrupt, doesn't matter. Like it or not, it's their rankings. And weighing 151 isn't going to affect Marg at all, he's still going to be way bigger than Manny. He's fought between Welter and JMW 9 times, it's NOT going to be a factor since Manny will probably only weigh 148/149 at most and that will be his ring weight. And Hearns has won belts at all those classes except for heavy. I think one of them was a minor title, IBA or something. For the record though, I don't consider Hearns to be one of the old timers. True Old Timers is probably from around 1965 and before without all the bull**** commission antics we have today.
135 WBC title--diaz was his first fight at 135. He was just testing the water floyd fought gatti @ 140 instead of tszyu(*****) 145-cotto agreed to the fight. He made no excuses that he was weight drained. He actually did more damage to pacquiao than pac previous opponents hatton-delahoya-diaz and even clottey. 151- margarito shouldn't be a title fight but don't give me this margarito will be weight drain @ 151 when he spent most of his career fighting @ 147. Anyways he would be fighting mayracist/wifebeater but the dude decided to take a vacation then beat up his GF to get jail time to completely avoid pacquiao. :hi:
If you take away all the new weight divisions, Pac still has titles in 4 of the original 8 weight classes. Hank Armstrong has 3. One can argue his legacy is slightly distorted, but you also have to look at how he's beaten his opponents. The catchweight king they call Pac, but no one ever points out that catchweights were more common in the past when there were less weight divisions. Given all the Pac has done to "manipulate the system", is there even one boxer, or even a hint of anyone, ever being able to duplicate his feat at the moment given all these so-called modern advantages? Simply ignoring all Pac has done because of a few technicalities is just plain ignorant.
errr.... are you saying that Pacquiao has been conspiring against your view of what a true legacy is? Thats what it sounds to me... You dont have to beat a #1 fighter in the weightclass to be a titleholder, that view is flawed in itself. So thats a useless point. You become a champion/title holder when you beat that person who has that belt. So feasibly, which is your point, you can be a 7title champion who have never fought a true #1 fighter in a weightclass. But fighting #1's i believe is a wholly different subject than fighting a titlebelt holder. Building one's legacy is truly subjective and is only relative to that timeframe, its never going to be perfectly matched against another's legacy from another era. Trying to match up fighters from different eras are just as useless and predicated purely on speculation. So, exactly why care whether Pacquiao's legacy is going to match up and be comparable from others from a different era? Its moronic. So Pacquiao was won 7 different weightclass titlebelts but not a #1 boxer, according to your opinion. And so you take that into consideration. So whats the big deal then?
Pac's resume is very good....cant agree about how the tittles are coming lately but still his resume kinda overshadows alot of shyt...he's paid his dues.