[JamieC]

If he retired tomorrow (eg before his next fight with Marquez) where could he stand on an ATG P4P list? And then what would a win/loss to JMM do to that standing?

 

[Lunny]

I find it hard to rate him as his big rivalry is full of shit decisions. Ain't nobody got time for that.

 

[JamieC]

im gonna say something controversial here that no-one will like, but i had him winning the first fight (and one of the judges incorrectly scored the first round a 10-7 when he meant to put 10-6 which would have swung it in his favour) and is the second fight a stone-cold robbery? I cant remember my exact scoring but i remember i had it close maybe even a draw, the third fight fair enough, but what about Ali-Norton?

Sasakul
Barrera x2
Morales x2
Diaz
De La Hoya
Hatton
Cotto
Margarito
Bradley

Taking away Marquez he has some good wins there? deserving of a top 20 placing? add into that decent "filler" wins along the way and youve got one of the better records of recent times

 

[084]

Agree the first 2 fights werent a robbery, very close that could of gone either way. i had the first a draw last time i scored and Marquez the 2nd. @dkos wrote a good piece a while back on Pacquiao before he went to the states which was very good. It was other the other site, maybe he could dig it out

 

[JamieC]

add to the fact that barrera, morales, de la hoya, hatton, cotto and margarito weren't just wins, they were beatings

 

[Lunny]

im gonna say something controversial here that no-one will like, but i had him winning the first fight (and one of the judges incorrectly scored the first round a 10-7 when he meant to put 10-6 which would have swung it in his favour) and is the second fight a stone-cold robbery? I cant remember my exact scoring but i remember i had it close maybe even a draw, the third fight fair enough, but what about Ali-Norton?

Sasakul
Barrera x2
Morales x2
Diaz
De La Hoya
Hatton
Cotto
Margarito
Bradley

Taking away Marquez he has some good wins there? deserving of a top 20 placing? add into that decent "filler" wins along the way and youve got one of the better records of recent times

Yeah you're right actually, I was being a peen. I've got no idea about top 20 but he's certainly one of the best of this generation.

EDIT: I don't know about top 20 as I don't have a list and find it hard comparing current fighters to old fighters. I like to have some perspective if you get me?

 

[JamieC]

Yeah you're right actually, I was being a peen. I've got no idea about top 20 but he's certainly one of the best of this generation.

EDIT: I don't know about top 20 as I don't have a list and find it hard comparing current fighters to old fighters. I like to have some perspective if you get me?

ye i get what you mean its hard to pluck a number out of thin air, you invariably keep thinking of other names to put above them. but he's up there with the sweet peas, Lewis' and RJJs of recent years. Personally i can't find enough on Floyd's record to put him in that category, i dont want to make this a pro-pacman anti-floyd thread because thats not what i ask the original question for but tbh, comparing records there is no comparison imo, pacman is just the better fighter

 

[Chatty]

Scrapes top 50, nothing other than a win over Mayweather is really gonna change much at this stage of his career imo

 

[Chatty]

I'd have him slightly above Mayweather as well if he retired now too.

 

[Vano-irons]

I couldn't have him top 20, but I would say he is around my 30 mark (ahead of Mayweather, who doesn't have the resume Pac does).

He has beaten a who's who of this era in every weight class he has fought in. Think back to 2003 when he beat Barrera. Could anyone imagine him laying a beating to one of the best Welters of this era? Not only beyond him, but smashing the absolute fuck outta him.

 

[JamieC]

I couldn't have him top 20, but I would say he is around my 30 mark (ahead of Mayweather, who doesn't have the resume Pac does).

He has beaten a who's who of this era in every weight class he has fought in. Think back to 2003 when he beat Barrera. Could anyone imagine him laying a beating to one of the best Welters of this era? Not only beyond him, but smashing the absolute fuck outta him.

ye thats key for me, he doesn't just beat these guys, in his pomp he demolished whoever was in front of him, the beating he put on margarito was savage, and look at the size difference! brutal ko of hatton, who was (i think) still the man at 140 at the time?

 

[Vano-irons]

ye thats key for me, he doesn't just beat these guys, in his pomp he demolished whoever was in front of him, the beating he put on margarito was savage, and look at the size difference! brutal ko of hatton, who was (i think) still the man at 140 at the time?

Yup, Hatton was certainly the king at 140 when Pacquiao obliterated him. When Floyd retired as Margo had been caught cheating, Cotto had a claim at being number 1 at 147 also (even tho Mosley would disagree)

 

[Boxed Ears]

I think 16-20 is a bit high, but still arguable, 21-30 is very fair and 30-50 getting a little low but still arguable and nothing insulting, considering the kinds of extreme careers we've seen in over a century. I don't think there is that much on the fourth Marquez fight. I also expect more of the same. More work done by Pacquiao, better work done by Marquez, judges take their pick and so be it. Even though a disagreed with some of the Marquez decisions, I found them all close fights, but the third, to me, just had bad cards, but the rounds themselves were mostly just close enough that the winner's outcome was more distasteful than insane. I thought Marquez won (scored the second for him as well) but not widely. And I also tend to think when the heavy favorite loses...people tend to overplay what the underdog did and how much of it he did, also. Just an opinion. And one coming from a bigger fan of Marquez than Pacquiao.

Those decisions are nothing unusual in boxing history, including for most of the greatest. But because that one's a fresher injury, I think it colors a lot of judgment on it. You usually find some gifts and robberies in there, when you fight about everyone. As indicated, I've got him shuffling in and around the 25 area. I have a feeling that he was granted by virtue of hard work, good promotion, an agreeable media personality and tremendously intense fandom an overly high rating in history during his best-looking run and will probably suffer an unfairly underrated position as a backlash in the aftermath of such high rating. For at least a few years. That's what happens with spectacularly offensive fighters when they plow through people and then drop off and wear out. People get very excited and want to rate them as highly as they possibly can and then when the tremendous physicality that their styles depend on starts to wear out and they start to look unimpressive, people almost feel like they were duped and try to kick them off the pedestal as hard as possible. Rotten produce is thrown at them, they turn into Gibson at the end of Braveheart. It gets well messy.

 

[O59]

Top forty.

 

[JamieC]

I think 16-20 is a bit high, but still arguable, 21-30 is very fair and 30-50 getting a little low but still arguable and nothing insulting, considering the kinds of extreme careers we've seen in over a century. I don't think there is that much on the fourth Marquez fight. I also expect more of the same. More work done by Pacquiao, better work done by Marquez, judges take their pick and so be it. Even though a disagreed with some of the Marquez decisions, I found them all close fights, but the third, to me, just had bad cards, but the rounds themselves were mostly just close enough that the winner's outcome was more distasteful than insane. I thought Marquez won (scored the second for him as well) but not widely. And I also tend to think when the heavy favorite loses...people tend to overplay what the underdog did and how much of it he did, also. Just an opinion. And one coming from a bigger fan of Marquez than Pacquiao.

Those decisions are nothing unusual in boxing history, including for most of the greatest. But because that one's a fresher injury, I think it colors a lot of judgment on it. You usually find some gifts and robberies in there, when you fight about everyone. As indicated, I've got him shuffling in and around the 25 area. I have a feeling that he was granted by virtue of hard work, good promotion, an agreeable media personality and tremendously intense fandom an overly high rating in history during his best-looking run and will probably suffer an unfairly underrated position as a backlash in the aftermath of such high rating. For at least a few years. That's what happens with spectacularly offensive fighters when they plow through people and then drop off and wear out. People get very excited and want to rate them as highly as they possibly can and then when the tremendous physicality that their styles depend on starts to wear out and they start to look unimpressive, people almost feel like they were duped and try to kick them off the pedestal as hard as possible. Rotten produce is thrown at them, they turn into Gibson at the end of Braveheart. It gets well messy.

good post :deal especially on how when an offensive force slows down people decide he was never all that. ive noticed that even on this forum, there was a poll for who would have won 2009 pacman/pbf, it was overwhelmingly pro-floyd, even for 2009, people were roughly 50/50 on it at the time i thought. people do the same for tyson, he really was brilliant, but people underrate him now