Who is a more complete fighter? Pavlik or Pacquiao?

Pacman can't box. He falls over and he is very wild. Got schooled by Marquez in 11 straight rounds in first bout. All he has is power. Although Pavlik comnes forward he is mechanically alot sounder than Pacman. However, Roach has done a good job of sorting him out a bit but he is still wild. that's how he is. and he's effective doing it. pac will never be a jmm, coz he aint, and jmm could never do what pac does coz he couldnt.

definetly Pacquiao. Pavlik is just a one way fighter.

Versatile is the last word I'd use to describe Pavlik.

There were points where Pacquaio was out boxing Marquez( who is extremly technically correct) and thats saying something. Hes adding a lot more to his weaponary and his variety of punches are a lot better as well. Hooks, uppercuts, counter punches ect. Since we have you seen Pavlik counter ecffectively? pac never outboxed marquez... he outslugged him.

Pacquaio doesn't need defense. He can get hit and come back with 4 HARD shots, es like a nonstop punching machine, and attacks from all sorts of angles. Pavlik is not like that. But both are highly effective. I feel both are extremely tough fights for anybody. BUt Pacquaio is more tough because of his skills, Pavlik is tougher because of his credentials...(height, reach, etc.)

There were points where Pacquaio was out boxing Marquez( who is extremly technically correct) and thats saying something. Hes adding a lot more to his weaponary and his variety of punches are a lot better as well. Marquez is technical when he tries to be... but often resorts to standard brawling at a distance. Obviously he's added variety to his punches and throws them fine, but I think he throws them in the same situations though. It's kinda' like his playbook has gotten fatter but can never call an audible at the line.

I don't love Pavlik, but I voted for him. I think it's close and gave him the nod. I don't think Pavlik is the better fighter, but I think in terms of skill I might give him the nod. He can box at range and in close. It might be somewhat of my imagination given Pavlik's very lanky arms though. I'd also clearly give him the edge in defense. I think Pacquiao is probably the "better" fighter given his natural abilities + talent... but on purely talent and technique I edge Pavlik. There were points where Pacquaio was out boxing Marquez( who is extremly technically correct) and thats saying something. Hes adding a lot more to his weaponary and his variety of punches are a lot better as well. Hooks, uppercuts, counter punches ect. Since we have you seen Pavlik counter ecffectively?

It's of course Pacman. 4 Pavlik super nuthuggers has come out of the closet via this poll. The names are AREALFIGHTER, c'monmang', Live Dog and sterling. Beware of them in any Pavlikthread! I don't love Pavlik, but I voted for him. I think it's close and gave him the nod. I don't think Pavlik is the better fighter, but I think in terms of skill I might give him the nod. He can box at range and in close. It might be somewhat of my imagination given Pavlik's very lanky arms though. I'd also clearly give him the edge in defense. I think Pacquiao is probably the "better" fighter given his natural abilities + talent... but on purely talent and technique I edge Pavlik. I think a lot of people are quick to say Pacquiao just because he's recognized as the "better" fighter.

Pacquaio in every area. More proven against the elite competition, more accomplished, more in his arsenal, faster hands and is fighting in a better division.

Pac right now has more skills to his arsenal..

Pac is a more complete fighter nowadays. I honestly don't think Pavlik is going to be tested by anybody currently on the scene, at least not at middleweight. Of course if he fought Calzaghe he'd be tested alright. Pacquiao looked awesome against Diaz who admittedly is no Sugar Ray but Pavlik's last fight was against a heavy-bag with a mean face painted on it. It was one-sided but really not spectacular.

Clearly Pacquiao. Is this a joke? Ive read some people saying that Pavlik is more "technical" :rofl: Pavlik is actually pretty limited. He makes up for it with heart and power. He would be easy pickings for someone like Calzaghe on a technical level. alot of what pavlik does is textbook ie "technical". pac is all unorthodox and chaotic.

Clearly Pacquiao. Is this a joke? Ive read some people saying that Pavlik is more "technical" :rofl: Pavlik is actually pretty limited. He makes up for it with heart and power. He would be easy pickings for someone like Calzaghe on a technical level.

It's of course Pacman. 4 Pavlik super nuthuggers has come out of the closet via this poll. The names are AREALFIGHTER, c'monmang', Live Dog and sterling. Beware of them in any Pavlikthread!

Neither guy is a 'complete boxer' by any stretch of the imagination. What Pavlik does he does with greater textbook technical proficiency than does Pacquiao, but really what Pavlik does is very limited. Pacquiao can be a little ragged at times, but he is much closer to having a complete package of power, speed and movement than Pavlik is, its not even close really. Neither is that good defensively.

Who is more versatile? Who has more actual skill overall in the ring? pavlik is better technically but pacquiao has much much better speed. both guys aren't super versatile, they only do one thing and that's come forward throwing big shots after a couple range finding jabs. I've never seen pavlik or pacquaio fight well going backwards. imho if you can back up these guys you can beat them.

proberly pacman because hes been in different divisions while pavlik has only been at one and hasnt had to change anything. pacman has had to change a lot because hes been up against bigger guys while pavlik has always been against people smaller then him. The fact that he won 4 titles is a major accomplishment and a ticket to the hall of fame. He is a legend because he did beat the three best Mexican fighters of recent years and nobody has that on their resume. Some people would argue that Barrera was a young old fighter because he turned pro when he was 16 so by the time he fought pacquiao he had been in too many fights and wars with Junior Jones and Morales. I personally feel that Marquez should have won their second fight but nevertheless he won and I would say he is a legend. The Diaz fight did nothing to improve his status as Diaz was a tomato can and expected to lose like he did. If Manny loses to Valero or another lightweight fighter then it should not take away from what he already accomplished since he started at super bantamweight.

proberly pacman because hes been in different divisions while pavlik has only been at one and hasnt had to change anything. pacman has had to change alot because hes been up against bigger guys while pavlik has always been against people smaller then him.

Taylor couldn't fight inside either. Pac can't fight inside, but he has speed, his feints, and power that is so far getting him by. When he fights Valero, that is when Pac will be exposed when he has to fight Valero along the ropes. lol I had to get a shot in. you just negated your own premise by saying pac had speed and feints. so why would pac fight continuously inside when he has his footwork and speed? surely you know by now that ppl who went toe-to-toe w/ pac fell down like flies. ppl who mostly fight inside is a RESULT of them lacking what pac and some other fleetfooted fighters have, it's rarely a choice. it's called utilizing well what you have and can do.

Pavlik needs to use the ring more often.