Why Pacquiao is the Greatest of All Time. Explained.

oh no I'm talking about when we started roasting psycopath :rofl

 

Damn ripper, that was a ripped-off marshmallow. Twasn't me, but it always feels good toasting some *******s and getting them to see the light. :yep

 

:rofl that's exactly what i was thinking!

 

This thread again...

This content is protected

 

Awwww a little jealous because women beater went into hiding for the past three years and almost nobody gives a shyt about him? I dont blame you fa&&ot...

 

Manny is the greatest of all time. You will never be wrong for saying it. 3 best fighters that reached a level no other boxer has climbed.

Ali
SRR
Manny

 

You're a dumbass and you're extremely biased to the time period in which you live. End of story. Learn about the history of boxing you *****.

 

You have made a decent argument but there are problems with it.

First try defining a criteria of who a fighter is and what makes him a great fighter, over a very good fighter, and then the best of the best fighters.

I think you have touched on it but have not actually defined it.

A fighter's legacy is defined by who he faces in the ring and what he does in the ring.

Well here is the first problem, you can not define who a fighter is, until his career is finished. i.e. you can't use active fighters. (their definition is not complete)

Who has he fought? Again only fighters with finished careers are defined.

You have identified fighter you suppose are HOF but the only fighter on the list sure to get in is ODH.

You have identified MAB as a future HOF'er. Part of what makes MAB who he is as a fighter is what he did to Nazeem, however Nazeem gets passed over year after year after year and may not get in. This may not seem to affect MAB's status but it becomes more profound as time passes and Naz becomes forgotten. Thus his status as a great fighter is not solidified as a HOF'er. I used MAB as an example because other than OSDH he is the highest rated on the list. So what does this say about the chances of the others actually being inducted? They are all great fighters but making to the HOF takes a lot of votes with a big list of really great fighters.

The ATG P4P list is not a tangible list. There is nothing there you can actually measure other than opinions. And certainly the Active P4P list has almost no meaning to a fighters defination other than a legacy footnote. What would turely add to Pacquiao's legacy is to unify a weight division and defend it. Being freakish has some merit but being undisputed speaks volumes over novelty.

Wait until Pacquiao's career is done, then compare him to the ATG and we'll see where his place in history truly is.

 

Excellent post:good
It seems like they are counting their chickens before they hatch

 

Why is the greatest of all time fighting a fighter that hasn't won a fight in two and a half years next? :think

 

So are you saying jumping in weight-classes like a weight-jumping miracle is not a feat? And unifying a weight class is a bigger oneatsch Don't get me wrong, but you truly make it sound like that.

A lot of boxers have unified the titles, but did they be as big as Pacquiao? NO. Simply because weight-jumping is a feat or

phenomenon not the even a good or even great boxer can easily accomplish. It has to be an ultra great athlete.

Going by your line of thinking......Unify? Sure, Victor Ortiz has the 147 WBC belt, let Pacquiao fight him next.

 

Yes to unify a division is way harder to do.

 

I agree that SRL was a complete chump! atsch

 

Bob fitzsimmons, whilst weighing similar to margo in the pac fight, knocked out the heavyweight champion of the world.

Pac would have to knock out the winner of the s6 whilst weighing 144 to rival that achievement.

 

I removed him from my list for being on the contender.