Should Pacquiao be ranked ahead of PBF in P4P ranks?

Everyone knows Floyd is fighting Oscar next, what about Pacman? Who is he fighting next?

Good arguements.

you must be blind not to see that pac improved a lot since his fight w/ mab and marquez. even hbo's analysts steward and merchant agrees. and it's a scary thought that w/ all pac's accomplishments, he is STILL improving. its a tough choice on who's p4p now. but barring no accidents and lousy fights, im sure it'll be PAC next yr clearly. you must be blind, if you do not understand what i wrote: if freddie roach improved pacman's game so much that he could have multiple plans, he still has to show it did I write that pac did not improve? no, and i could not have done otherwise since he did and a lot (using the right hand was a pretty big sign of improvement) what i wrote is that i see no evidence of him getting so much better, that I can see that he is a flexible fighter. If you want to beat mayweather without bullying him around, you better have a couple of back-up plans, since he will change the way he fights during the match. That unless you are way bigger than he is, but since we are talkng p4p, that cannot be the case.

Everyone that mattered at 140 and 147 has ducked Mayweather. It's a fact. You are delusional

what the fuck were you tryin to say ? Manny Pacquiao is #1 P4P case closed this is how you respond to me after i make a fair argument for floyd, you come back with a silly question like this one? goes to show giving facts with opinions is not important to many people on here, and you are the poster boy for it, you dumbass. floyd is the best fighter in the sport is what you really meant, case closed.

if freddie roach improved pacman's game so much that he could have multiple plans, he still has to show it. you must be blind not to see that pac improved a lot since his fight w/ mab and marquez. even hbo's analysts steward and merchant agrees. and it's a scary thought that w/ all pac's accomplishments, he is STILL improving. its a tough choice on who's p4p now. but barring no accidents and lousy fights, im sure it'll be PAC next yr clearly.

you still dont get it. it was made for 130. its a fact. if you think PBF is # 1 then fine its your opinion. but are you fine if i thin PAC is #1. as we both agreed that pound for pound is subjective. if you think PBF schools PAC if they are the same size then fine with me. BUt are you fine if i think that PAC kayoes Mayweather knowing thats its a mythical match up? I certaily know what im talking about anyone that comes up with a list have his own categories. and i dont think u know what youve saying coz as subjective as it is. you keep on slamming your priorities in our throats in terms of deciding who is #1. while at the same time you agree that it is subjective. and in case you dont know. there is no official definition of pound for pound. maybe u want to make yours official so that i can finally agree woth you :D for the last time: "The contract weight for the scheduled 12-rounder was 134-pounds; however, when Morales first weighed in he tipped the scales at 134 ½ and was compelled to drop the extra half-pound." http://www.boxingtimes.com/analyses/2005/050910morales_raheem.html go read any article from before the fight and you will read how raheem was to be morales' first step at lightweight. for the 100th time: the best in boxing between two fighters is the winner of the fight. best pound for pound means the best fighter regardless of weight. therefore best pound for pound means the winner of the fight if they were the same weight.. I dont agree with pac being p4p no.1 because I believe (SUBJECTIVE) that if he was the same weight as mayweather, mayweather would hand him his ass on a gold plate. You believe (SUBJECTIVE) that pacman would KO mayweather if they were the same weight. I tend to think that pacman being your national hero plays a role in what you believe: after seeing pacman loss to morales and most important his fight with marquez i dont think anyone with two eyes would possibly believe that pacman would beat mayweather. if freddie roach improved pacman's game so much that he could have multiple plans, he still has to show it. mayweather on the other hand can fight two or three differenet types of fight whenever he enters the ring. (most of the time this means switching to defensive when his right hand starts hurting, hence boring) (sometimes he becomes more offensive, see the judah fight, and fights against lesser opposition). he can stay in the pocket, he can run around, he can counter, he can lead, he can fight in the center of the ring, he can push (when paired with someone of simiilar size), he stay on the ropes.

If PBF beats DLH then no doubt, he's p4p the best. But if he loses and Pac beats, say, Valero, Guzman and Barrera then undoubtedly Pacman is on top What if they both win?

If PBF beats DLH then no doubt, he's p4p the best. But if he loses and Pac beats, say, Valero, Guzman and Barrera then undoubtedly Pacman is on top

I dont see why people argue about this cos its only to do with opinons. There is no way to prove any one person right or wrong.

if someone here does not know what he is talking about that's you. you even invented that morales-raheem was supposed to be at 130 i am sorry if you did not understand my simple post: "pound for pound" means "pound for pound" or "gram for gram" if you are more familiar with the metric system. the "categories" you mention may all help you decide which fighter would be better if they were at the same weight. "better" in boxing, like in any competitive sports, means who wins, not who is more powerful, flashier, slick, skilled or whatever. you still dont get it. it was made for 130. its a fact. if you think PBF is # 1 then fine its your opinion. but are you fine if i thin PAC is #1. as we both agreed that pound for pound is subjective. if you think PBF schools PAC if they are the same size then fine with me. BUt are you fine if i think that PAC kayoes Mayweather knowing thats its a mythical match up? I certaily know what im talking about anyone that comes up with a list have his own categories. and i dont think u know what youve saying coz as subjective as it is you keep on slamming your priorities in our throats in terms of deciding who is #1. while at the same time you agree that it is subjective. and in case you dont know. there is no official definition of pound for pound. maybe u want to make yours official so that i can finally agree woth you :D

Judah isnt overrated, and Gatti wasnt shot. Pac has done nothing to deserve the number one ranking. He faced Morales again for no real reason, when it was clear who was better. Morales was more shot than any opponents Floyd faced. Judah isn't overrated huh? He has lost every major fight he has been in with the exception of beating feater fisted Spinks once after losing to him the first time. He was KTFO by Tsyzu, he was beaten by Baldomir a journeyman with nine losses. If he can't be prepared for a fight wit the biggest fight of his life on the verge depending on the outcome of the Baldomir fight tells you a little bit about his focus and mental state. Judah has all the talent in the world but can never mentally get it together. All the talent in the world doesn't mean shit if your not mentally strong. He melts down in every major fight and your gonna tell me he's not overrated. Onto Gatti. I love Gatti but he was old and way past his prime when Floyd fought him. He hadn't beaten an elite opponent for years now. People want to say things like Oscar fought Trinidads left overs which was bullshit but if you wanna go that rout Oscar destroyed Gatti long before Floyd ever fought him. So if you wanna say that you can say Floyd fought a guy that Oscar already destroyed. Finally Morales should have stopped after the secon fight with Pac, but inb there first fight he was still very good and determined and the way he fought proved that. You wanna say that Morales was more shot than anyone Floyd faced, when Floyd has made a career out of fighting hand picked opponents and Morales in the first fight and Marquez are better fighters and more technically sound than anyone Floyd has faced. So get off his nuts and open your eyes. Like someone with the screen name PBF34 is gonna be able to be objective about anything when it comes to Floyd. Pac has never ducked a fight and has continuosly fought elite competition and won impressively. Even against lesser opponents as Baldomir he bores us with less than impressive performances while he wins fights by decisioin after decision. Don't give me this Baldomir was the lineal champ crap either. Although Baldy was a nice Cinderella story in reality he was nothing more than a journeyman who had hid fifteen minutes of fame, and Floyd couldn't even win impressively against him. Baldy was slow flat footed and old, and he won the title by beating an underacheivig overrated Judah. Floyd never even hurt Baldy he just did exactly what he was suppose to do. So what he won every round against Baldy, like everybody didn't already know that was gonna happen. Baldy never was a real threat like many of Floyds opponents. He continues to win unimpressive decisions against mediocre opposition. If Pac continues to win the way he has against top level opposition than at some point he should be put ahead of Floyd. Shit he should already be ahead of Floyd.

Thats nice coz its seems that you dont know what you're talking about. you somewhat agree that pound for pound is subjective and yet you're eliminating categories that you dont like. peace and have a nice day :) if someone here does not know what he is talking about that's you. you even invented that morales-raheem was supposed to be at 130 i am sorry if you did not understand my simple post: "pound for pound" means "pound for pound" or "gram for gram" if you are more familiar with the metric system. the "categories" you mention may all help you decide which fighter would be better if they were at the same weight. "better" in boxing, like in any competitive sports, means who wins, not who is more powerful, flashier, slick, skilled or whatever.

PACMAN kayoes PBF if they are the same size. actually this makes me want to write more first let me note the following: your statements come from a someone who is supporting his national hero. my statements come from a boxing fan, who follows more than one fighter and is not of the same ethnicity and/or nationality of any of the fighters involved in this discussion second, let's get to the match up: if they were the same size, pbf would give pacman a schooling for the ages. pacman is way too undisciplined to beat a fighter who has mayweather skills, speed and stamina and, most important, comes to the fight in with plan A plan B and can adjust to plan C during the fight. when was the last time you saw pacman adjusting during a fight? and dont say that pacman would not need to do any adjustment against mayweather, bcos you would only sound ridiculous. also, go watch mayweather's fights at 130 to see what happened when he was not the smaller man in the ring

key word: POUND FOR POUND namely, if fighter A and B were of the same size, who would win? if it was otherwise it would not be called #1 p4p, but 1.#1 KO ratio 2.#1 defense 3.#1 level of competition 4.#1 acrobatics (??) the fact that more ppl agree with you does not influence my opinion at all: Adolf Hitler was voted by a majority of germans, was that majoriy right? Moreover the reasons i read for pacman rated number one are a load of logically inconsistent bullshit. In fact this is my last post on the subject, since i am tired of wasting my time on debates of this level. PACMAN kayoes PBF if they are the same size.

key word: POUND FOR POUND namely, if fighter A and B were of the same size, who would win? if it was otherwise it would not be called #1 p4p, but 1.#1 KO ratio 2.#1 defense 3.#1 level of competition 4.#1 acrobatics (??) the fact that more ppl agree with you does not influence my opinion at all: Adolf Hitler was voted by a majority of germans, was that majoriy right? Moreover the reasons i read for pacman rated number one are a load of logically inconsistent bullshit. In fact this is my last post on the subject, since i am tired of wasting my time on debates of this level. Thats nice coz its seems that you dont know what you're talking about. you somewhat agree that pound for pound is subjective and yet you're eliminating categories that you dont like. peace and have a nice day :)

Key Word ====> SUBJECTIVE. Fan #1 : For me P4P #1 should KO all his opponents Fan #2 : he should be a defensive wizard like Willie Pep fan #3 : He should fight all contenders from around his division Fan #4 : He should be able to do stunts like Naz 'SUBJECTIVE' at least as of this minute more people agree with me than you :D key word: POUND FOR POUND namely, if fighter A and B were of the same size, who would win? if it was otherwise it would not be called #1 p4p, but 1.#1 KO ratio 2.#1 defense 3.#1 level of competition 4.#1 acrobatics (??) the fact that more ppl agree with you does not influence my opinion at all: Adolf Hitler was voted by a majority of germans, was that majoriy right? Moreover the reasons i read for pacman rated number one are a load of logically inconsistent bullshit. In fact this is my last post on the subject, since i am tired of wasting my time on debates of this level.

A1. Elite competition who? fighters who just lost and/or are moving up in weight. go read again my year by year comparison A2. sure, no doubt about that A3. ??? A4. a legend who was slipping and just lost to Barrera, Raheem, and struggled badly with chavez. a legend who amidst these mediocre performances managed to beat fighter A. B1. if you want to compare their resumes, you are free to do so, but i am afraid you would find unpleasant surprises. B2. what does that have to do with p4p? did fighter B win that fight? yes. did he win it hands down? yes. the ppl who walked home better go watch ufc next time B3. like Margarito? give me a break Key Word ====> SUBJECTIVE. Fan #1 : For me P4P #1 should KO all his opponents Fan #2 : he should be a defensive wizard like Willie Pep fan #3 : He should fight all contenders from around his division Fan #4 : He should be able to do stunts like Naz 'SUBJECTIVE' at least as of this minute more people agree with me than you :D

honestly i was not impressed by either but, suppose I was extremely impressed with Pacman dismantling Morales and i thought that he was the most deserving fighter of the year in the history of ring magazine... now let me ask you question: in how many years the fighter of the year award coincides with p4p number one? HHmmm i cant remember any fighter of the year coinciding with p4p My question is just that. it has nothing to do with p4p.

I agree with that However this may also apply. Fighter A is better than fighter B when Fighter A 1. Continuosly fight Elite competion 2. Kayoed a legend who was considered p4p #3 3. 'Technically' beaten a dangerous man who was 'avoided' 4. Kayoed another legend 2 times Fighter B 1. Fights handpicked opponents from time to time 2. Is not agressive enough that fans walk out of his fight 3. Accused of ducking certain fighters. A1. Elite competition who? fighters who just lost and/or are moving up in weight. go read again my year by year comparison A2. sure, no doubt about that A3. ??? A4. a legend who was slipping and just lost to Barrera, Raheem, and struggled badly with chavez. a legend who amidst these mediocre performances managed to beat fighter A. B1. if you want to compare their resumes, you are free to do so, but i am afraid you would find unpleasant surprises. B2. what does that have to do with p4p? did fighter B win that fight? yes. did he win it hands down? yes. the ppl who walked home better go watch ufc next time B3. like Margarito? give me a break