whose RESUME is better Manny Pacquiao or Floyd Mayweather Jr.?

My my, how times change.:yep

 

still a good win nonetheless. pac's ko/tko win would have to be regarded as a good win considering that em has never been knocked down or stopped prior to the fight..

pac's annihilation of hatton has nothing to do with floyd's previous win off hatton. pac fought hatton at 140lbs, the division where hatton hasn't lost and clearly the man at that division. pac hasn't fought in that division prior to the said fight..

em3, larios and julio wins are nonetheless good wins for pac considering the manner he won it.. pac clearly was toying with larios in that fight and decided not to finish him off and coasted to a ud. still it was a decent win considering how tough the former champ was..

 

i don't consider pbf's win over castillo 1 a good one because pbf struggled in the fight and arguably he lost.. but as they say a win is a win and so it stays..

morales fought raheem at lightweight prior to the pac-em 2nd fight which was fought at super feather where em ought to be.. and considering how pac dealt em the 1st knockdowns and stoppage of his career, the em 2 win for pac would turn still out to be a good..

pac's wins over hatton, cotto and even dlh were great wins imo. these were highly impressive wins from a man going up in a weight nobody expected him to be at.. in the dlh fight, nobody gave pac a chance to win. regardless of how dlh looked during and after the fight, as some bitter fans would later claim, pac's domination of dlh was great just the same..

 

He gets votes from his fans or Fanatics I should say. Floyd has a very good resume but he's clearly not able to compete with Manny on this particular subject. Fans of Floyd who are honest wouldn't even vote for Floyd on this topic....and the poll indicates that.

But Pac Fanatics are not any better....the poll could ask if they think Manny is the #1 figher of all time and I bet you get votes saying YES!atsch

 

Barrera close to retirement? I don't even need to answer this. Go and do your research.

 

Why is Sasakul rated as a decent win and not in the good wins column? Pac was outboxed for most of the fight, but he did manage to KO him and take his title...and Sasakul was a pretty good fighter.

 

I think that, at best, Gatti and Manfreddy should count as decent wins. As much as I love Arturo, he was nowehere near being an A-class fighter. Hhe got stomped on by every single A-class fighter he ever fought, and by a number of B-class fighters. Plus Mayweather's bout with Gatti was after Gatti had absorbed all the damage from a long career. Gatti's record post-Floyd? 1-2 with both losses by TKO. Not impressive.

And Manfreddy had decent technique, but the highlight of his boxing career is being the title holder for the WBU. Let me repeat that: the WBU. That is nothing worth bragging about. The defining moment of his career was beating Gatti, and getting beat every time he tried to challenge for a legit title. Not impressive.

For that matter, why is Judah a good win, despite Judah being one of the worst underperformers and front runners in the history of the sport? And I question even counting N'dou as a decent win. Heart aside, he was pretty terrible.

And that's not even getting into the matter of age with Oscar and Mosley, who are far and away the biggest names on Floyd's record. (I don't care about the age issue with Oscar, because in my mind it's negated by Floyd going up to a higher weight class and the fact that Oscar was still turning in respectable performances at that point, but Mosley looked every day of his 38 years).

If Pacquiao gets less credit for fighting Barrera and Morales when they're old, (and I've seen some people say Barrera was old in their first bout, at age 29) why aren't Floyd's wins against a 34 year old Oscar and 38 year old Shane similarly discounted?

 

Pac won as the underdog time and time again.

 

Pacquiao, no question.

Barrera and Sasakul were prime champions. Clottey was also prime and had only questionable losses before. Marquez was also prime both times (arguably Pac won twice, although the second time I had Marquez by one point).

De La Hoya was past his prime for both, Judah was past his prime for May (just like Cotto was for Pac), Corrales was just before jail. In fact the only prime p4p top 10 fighter Mayweather ever faced was Castillo, and many think he lost the firs encounter against him (which leads to the conclusion that in fact May also has a loss on his record).

Summing up, Pac I think slightly has the better resume.

 

HMm....DLH because he was MUCH BIGGER, Cotto because he was bigger, Hatton because of his strength and pressure style, Barrera because Pac wasn't that huge of a name at the time, Morales for almost the same reason as Barrera.
He's overcome a TON of adversity. Of course some of his fights were made mismatched in favor of him whenever it was suppose to be the opposite (like DLH being so damn weight drained), but originally he was definitely the underdog in all of those.
Mayweather has never been the underdog that I recall. :yep

 

Floyd Mayweather, his resume of Castillo x2, Corralles, De La Hoya, Hernandez, Manfredy, Chavez, and Mosley outweighs Pacquiao's resume of Cotto, a shot Morales, Marquez, Barrera, and Saskul also Pacquiao has losses, Mayweather doesn't. Close, but Mayweather wins it and if this is HOF rankings, Mayweather swamps with his Amateur record of 88-6 and his bronze.

 

Who the **** is undefeated ????

And who the **** has been knocked out twice --- once in one and the other in two --- both times got ****in hurt by an average fighter and looked like a ****ing dog scared shitless ???

 

by the same logic, PAC of today is shot. fighting pro at 16, and hes 32 now.

i love to see fighters as shot as PAC.

 

And that OLD MAN Barrera after that lost to Pac went on a 6-win streak against Ayala, Morales, Peden, Fana and Juares (2x) and even won the belt at a higher division. Pretty awesome for a past prime fighter, right?