Why isn't Pacquiao's resume criticized more?

@VG_Addict is a known cuck/Floydette. Every week or so, he'll create a thread to directly or indirectly polish Floyd's knob. It's pretty sad.

 

Two of those Draws should have been changed also,

The fighter who never denied his opponent a rematch either more than once on occasion, even though he could have easily took his ball & went home with a Win & then called himself the greatest,

Never took the cheap way out.

 

Hes got 1 of the best resumes win or lose, of all time. Wth

 

He literally became champion again after fought Pacquiao and almost beat both Danny Garcia and Marcos Maidana in their primes, so I have no idea what you're talking about when you say that Morales was "shot to pieces".

 

well, it's pretty obvious what I mean. That he was shot to pieces and waaaaaaaaaaaaay past his prime when he fought pacquiao. I insist on that prime morales (morales vs barrera I) gives pacquiao the beating of his life. It's obvious as along as you have at least one eye in your face.

 

Lmao.

For one, he gets a tonne of criticism.

For another, he moved up in weight to face Diaz, Cotto was a great victory, everyone laughs at the Margo fight and gives 0 credit, Hatton was the best LWW in the world, he was younger than both Rios and Matthyse, Provodnikov was massively rated during his prime, Thurman was a top 2 WW and much younger.

 

Way I see it what's to criticize? annoying as said.

 

pacquio's resume is ridiculously good. It's not criticized because it's awesome. It's that simple.

 

I kind of get the ts point. For example you say everyone laughs at Margarito victory yet they still call Pacquiao as an 8 division champ. So apparently those people aren't laughing. Also people talk about Floyd not fighting certain fighters at certain times, yet they never mentioned Manny's team turning down Mosely when he was champ and only fighting him after he lost to Mayweather and tied with Mora. They say he ducked no one yet Crawford begs to differ. So there does seem to be a double standard. That being said Pacquiao is an ATG and his resume is stellar. You can do this to anyons resume. People tend to be super critical of fighters they don't like and very accepting of fighters they love. Either way both are ATG's I rate Mayweather higher myself due to winning against Pacquiao, but even more impressive against Canelo. He conquered the past (Oscar, Mosely) the present (Pacquiao) and the future (Canelo) of pfp ATG's. That's the same reason I have Lennox Lewis as a top 3 heavyweight. The past (Tyson) the present (Holyfield) and the future (Klitschko). Now more people are impressed with the weight jumping and if that's your thing then yes Pacquiao is your man. Most people seem to prefer weight jumping over defeating all other ATG claimants. That's fine too it's all opinion.

 

If he was WAY past his prime, then his career would've been over after he essentially gave up against Pacquiao in their third fight. It was not, though.

 

Because there is no film available to see how he actually fought. We have to rely on the comments of other boxers and boxing commentators.

 

You have two types of fan of this board. Pacquiao fans and Mayweather fans. They always criticise the other fighter. I mean we're in a thread right now we're the opening post is criticising Pacquiao.

 

Oh definitely but I think you can appreciate both even if you have one higher than the other and not have to tear down the other's comp. After all they both faced a lot of the same fighters.

 

Greatest resume of his generation with Floyd close second

Neither guys resume is perfect, but when we look back in years? They were both darn good

I feel sorry for the fanboys that can't appreciate both

2 ATG champions

Pacquiao took more chances to be great, but Floyd was clearly better

 

Pac ducked Humberto Soto and Paulie.