which is more relevant Pac's "8th" or Fmjr "0"?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by hofbrau, Oct 14, 2011.


  1. MichiganWarrior

    MichiganWarrior Still Slick! Still Black! Full Member

    26,793
    7
    Mar 20, 2010
    Ruiz was a heavyweight champion. What was Margarito champion of at 154. Who has Margarito beaten at that weight?

    Stupid poster is stupid.
     
  2. Manjanek

    Manjanek ESB Double Whopper Full Member

    1,460
    8
    Jun 11, 2006
    The truth is this... both fighters are rapidly becoming overhyped... and therefore overrated.

    Giving Pac the nod in a time when there are additional weight classes, fighting with CATCH weights, in a time when there are 4-5 'champions' per weight class far discounts how epic his accomplishments are. I am not taking away the legitimacy of MOST of this fights- but, to say that Margarito had earned ANYTHING except being showed the door out after he was found to be a cheater is incredulous... Pac is guilty also of cherry picking floyd's CHERRY PICKED leavings... On paper the 8 is impressive... in reality, in my mind it has a little * which stands for bull**** attached to it.

    As for floyd- He has 0 losses... immediately his fight with Castillo comes to mind. He got by with the w... I don't suspect conspiracy, just poor judging. He did the RIGHT thing and impressed in the rematch though. Several of mayweathers last outings have involved people who had no business setting foot in the ring with him. Mosely, Hatton, Gatti, De la Hoya... on paper these victories look excellant. Hatton was 40 something and 0... Mosely has several victories to his name in his storied career, gatti i think has been involved in more fights of the year than any fighter ever! The reality is, they were hand picked because they were past prime or had exploitable weaknesses. On paper that 0 looks really good, in reality it has a little * next to it that stands for bull****.

    Pacs '8'* = Floyds '0'* Both are great fighters who are built up to be superhuman. Both have different machines driving their stardom. h2h is the only way we will see which counts for more ;)
     
  3. PH|LLA

    PH|LLA VIP Member Full Member

    79,438
    2,646
    Feb 1, 2007
    Pac's 8 division titles and 4 lineal titles of course as it has never been done before.
     
  4. tarugojones

    tarugojones Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,877
    0
    Jan 22, 2010
    Okay. What about Pacquiao's 6 or 7 ? It's still better than Floyd's 0.:deal:lol:
     
  5. Jordan_Davies

    Jordan_Davies Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,502
    0
    Jul 28, 2011
    Mayweathers 0 - its legit (depending on the Castillo fight and whether or not you think Cotto/Margarito would have beaten him)

    Pacquiaos 8th world titles mainly consist of the IBO/Ring belt and a catchweight against a welterweight.
     
  6. JASPER

    JASPER Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,214
    8
    Jul 21, 2007
    I love both guys but I think both of their hardcore fans overrate both achievements.

    Belts a dime a dozen today, if as many belts and weight categories existed since the 1900s I am sure there would have been a few fighters that might have held belts in 10 divisions

    What does an 0 mean . . . that you never faced a fighter that could beat you. you could have hidden out in England like joe C. or fought a lot of bums early on in your career (essentially, using that as an extension of your amateur career) like JCC or fought in a weak era like Marciano.
     
  7. DavidChao

    DavidChao A contender,.. a somebody Full Member

    1,224
    0
    Sep 19, 2009

    :-:)-:)-(

    This fight is still fairly recent. YouTube some interviews or such leading up to it. It will be very easy to find exactly why you are wrong.

    (p.s. if you're too lazy to do so: Cotto has stated himself that he not only had no trouble making 145, but felt great at 145. He looked strong and not like he lost a step at all)
     
  8. DavidChao

    DavidChao A contender,.. a somebody Full Member

    1,224
    0
    Sep 19, 2009
    With the draws? :!::!::!::!::!::!::!:
     
  9. kingmurkaveli

    kingmurkaveli Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,020
    0
    Apr 5, 2011
    I dont give a fuk what cotto said...No fighter is going to go into a fight saying "I feel bad cuz Im drained"....come on bruh-bruh..put it together
     
  10. Concrete

    Concrete Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,982
    2
    Jun 21, 2009
    The 145 catch weight wasn't the problem for Cotto. The problem was that he only hydrated to 150 on fight night. Don't know why he choose to do that other then look to match Pac in speed or something. He should have stuck to his strength and looked to come in like a rock.
     
  11. Kampioni

    Kampioni Good Boy Full Member

    5,850
    10
    May 23, 2007
    Funniest post I've read all day. You don't watch much boxing I take it ? :rofl:rofl
     
  12. bobotnaman

    bobotnaman ★★★★☆ Full Member

    3,884
    1
    Sep 8, 2011
    pac's 8 > fmj 0
    pac's 7 > fmj 0
    pac's 6 > fmj 0
     
  13. Bladegunner

    Bladegunner Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,424
    4
    Jun 18, 2010
    Last time I checked pac's 8 goes up against floyd's 5. Then you have to mention floyds 0.

    Thread fails.
     
  14. crimson

    crimson Boxing Addict banned

    5,899
    0
    Dec 8, 2009
    You are an idiot.

    Pac vs Margo was NOT for the title until one of the sanctioning bodies figured they can make money out of it and voluntarily made it for the belt. That was AFTER the fact. Neither Margo or Pac asked for it. It was given for the fight.

    Second, Ruiz was not considered THE champ of the division. He was the easiest out of the belt holders of the division.

    Third, Pac or RJJ never defended the title to another belt holder or even a top 3 contendrd. In fact that was their only fight at that weight.

    So yes you are stupid, with your knee jerk reaction instead of understanding the history and context of both.
     
  15. bballchump11

    bballchump11 2011 Poster of the Year Full Member

    63,174
    23
    Oct 27, 2010
    **** off with that.