Where does Manny Pacquiao Rank P4P?

Ok, all thoughts are welcome:good

 

I don't base greatness on how good the fighter was personally, because in that case you'd see the likes of Aaron Pryor, Jung Koo Chang, Willie Pep etc featuring high on my lists. It's more of a resume issue imo. But it's also good to discuss the best fighters ever as well, at which time I give the right fighters (imo) their due credit.

 

Like I say, for me the method of victory isn't a major factor of greatness in terms of placement on a list. It is a major factor in how I rate the fighter on ability and how I pick him in fantasy fights though.

Each to their own though, as I say, all views are welcome by me.

 

yeah i see where you're coming from. i guess i would just say that sometimes the greatness of a fighter shines through on a resume in ways more subtle than the names that they've achieved wins against, or the number of titles collected. for example, i'd say that knocking out nigh on everyone during a title run is an achievement in its own right. someone with a title run of comparable scalps, and length, wouldn't have been as great in my opinion (all other things being equal), if their title run had been less emphatic.

 

yeah it tends to be more of a tiebreaker for me.

 

Yeah, fighters with fantastic resumes are likely fighters with great ability at the end of the day. So the debate is probably somewhat hypothetical.

 

true.

 

i agree in a way and disagree in another. i think the nature of a loss factors into the equation to a degree but looking at a tried and true example of saddler and pep: saddler had the power, reach and style to always cause a (post crash) pep trouble but no one has saddler rated higher on their lists despite the emphatic nature of at least two of the loses.

i think with pac, mayweather represents a very clear stylistic advantage over him. fair enough and he'll likely earn that win if they ever fight. but regardless of that lose, pac has proven himself over a wider variety of quality and type of competition. if both mayweather and pac had to fight the best 20 opponents in their division, i can say that pac would beat a higher number of opponents because he HAS beaten a higher number of top opponents in his respective weight classes. with pac it's facts, but with mayweather his legacy is largely built on conjecture.

one loss, to an opponent with a stylistic advantage (ala saddler vs pep) won't change that in the grand scheme for me

 

Top ten for me , could go higher with a win over Floyd or Sergio, could go lower with a loss.

 

I think you have to look at dominance of the victories. Otherwise unbeaten 168lb Unification King Sven Otke would rate highly. Also if you don't look at 'method of the win' and how good they look how are you to assess how good someones opposition is.

 

Easy PP. I assess how good the fighter is in general, so let's say the fighter is good, then if you beat that fighter (ok i'm not talking about winning by disqualifications and bogus **** like that) then it's a good win. I'm not saying method of victory doesn't factor at all, I said it is not a MAJOR factor of my criteria. Example, I rate Jones' win over Hopkins, the performance is nothing special what so ever. So would you disregard this win? I hope not.

Also, on Ottke, yes he would feature high on my all time list of 168 men. Also though, if I think the decision was wrong I adjust my rankings for the way I saw the fight, not the judges. This is my list, with zero outside influence.

 

Part of greatness for me is, does he challenge himself? Does he take those 50/50 fights? Pac does. He dares to take risks. Plenty of people thought it was madness for him to fight Cotta and Margo, but he did and it has added a tremendous amount to his legacy.

He could easily have never gone near those guys and nobody would have questioned it, but the fact that he not only moved up in weight to challenge them, but beat the **** out of both of them, moves him high up the ranks. That's the kind of thing that you will see the Alis and Durans doing, but not the Mayweathers and Ottkes. And that's a big reason why I rate Pacman right up there, especially given the dominating nature of some of his biggest fights.

:hat

 

margo? are you kidding? i fully agree on the cotto point but the margo fight was a total joke, let's not get extra brownie points in for pacquiao now.

If you're going to give manny credit for coming from a low weight class then do the same with floyd, be consistent. you can't just take from floyd because he's never the underdog, he's always the favourite because he is so good. ok then let's take away from robinson's wins seen as though he always the favourite. Also, let's not make out like manny is always the underdog either.

 

That title was a joke.....but the win wasn´t in my opinion.....
But how great would be if Ruben Olivares have fought against Eugene Cyclone Hart (just an example)???
That´s the way I see Pac vs Margo.......Great win.....Margarito was not a great fighter, but was much bigger than a WW fighter (in the day of the fight)......

 

I'd probably rate him above James Toney.