Pac had a 50% KO percentage at 130, whilst Floyd 62%

[The Gambler1981]

Originally Posted by daggum

why are you trying to claim you are knowledgeable and then at the very same time trying to proclaim carlos rios a top 10 caliber fighter? i base my opinion on his resume. it sucks. hard. i don't need anyone else's opinion to tell me it sucks. i can see it sucks for myself. i don't need to watch him fight because i know he's gonna lose if he's fighting anyone with a pulse. you think its fabulous for some reason even though he lost every time he stepped up and you are pretending you saw a bunch of his fights when the only fights that were televised would be the ones where he was brought in as the opponent and lost. face it you are defending these guys because mayweather fought them and if mayweather fought them they must be good!

No, I just find your opinion hollow because you have no real knowledge of the guys. Which is true.

I don't base my opinion off a guys resume, unless you have actual knowledge of a fighter you know nothing about them I have argued that countless times on this board. Resume mean very little to me unless you have requisite knowledge to back it up.

I don't consider top ten to be anything special and I never said those guys were anything special, 6,7,8,9,10 in any division are generally all borderline guys who are easily replaceable, I don't see why you consider guys of that ilk to be anything really meaningful. Sorry that you find the top ten to be some pinnacle of perfection that only the greatest of men can reach, just don't agree if a guy goes on a run it is easy enough to get placed there.

[daggum]

Originally Posted by The Gambler1981

No, I just find your opinion hollow because you have no real knowledge of the guys. Which is true.

I don't base my opinion off a guys resume, unless you have actual knowledge of a fighter you know nothing about them I have argued that countless times on this board. Resume mean very little to me unless you have requisite knowledge to back it up.

I don't consider top ten to be anything special and I never said those guys were anything special, 6,7,8,9,10 in any division are generally all borderline guys who are easily replaceable, I don't see why you consider guys of that ilk to be anything really meaningful. Sorry that you find the top ten to be some pinnacle of perfection that only the greatest of men can reach, just don't agree if a guy goes on a run it is easy enough to get placed there.

yeah i know you base it off whether or not he's fought floyd mayweather. if he has he's amazing and if he hasn't then he's just another guy who is replaceable.

you saw juuko vs pep and now you are bert sugar? you don't need to see every fight to determine who's best. what you are saying is that the detroit lions were really good even though they kept losing over and over again but since i didn't see all their games i don't really know if they are good or not. what kind of retard logic is that?

[The Gambler1981]

Originally Posted by daggum

yeah i know you base it off whether or not he's fought floyd mayweather. if he has he's amazing and if he hasn't then he's just another guy who is replaceable.

you saw juuko vs pep and now you are bert sugar? you don't need to see every fight to determine who's best. what you are saying is that the detroit lions were really good even though they kept losing over and over again but since i didn't see all their games i don't really know if they are good or not. what kind of retard logic is that?

You need to see enough fights, just basing thing off numbers and names is not the way to go either, it is very flawed and hollow.

I don't base if off that no matter how many times you say it it does not make it true, I don't feel the guys are amazing, they are just guys that were contenders. They weren't special top ten is not special

Boxing being an individual sport and a judged sport a lot more is dependent on actually looking at fights and fighters. I know you don't actually like to watch fights you merely look at names and numbers and then run your mouth but actually knowing about fighters and fights is more important than the names and numbers..

[Wapacman]

Originally Posted by brick wall

come on now we all know this is all about a-side meth...don't be shy ***** say it...say it.

PED's....there it is.

[IronDanHamza]

Originally Posted by jrosales13

Are people really trying to make a case for Pac being a greater super featherweight than Floyd?

So it seems.

He also fought 'tougher competition' apparently.

Nothing suprises me on this forum anymore, especially when it comes to Pac. Literally, nothing.

[them_apples]

At 130 Pac could bang though. HE could drop anyone. I guess he just fought tough opposition.

I'm also going to say that although Mayweather is taller, he's got slim bones. He looks more blown up at WW than Pac does. Pac looks hard and chiseled. Floyd looks lean and watery..muscle wise.