BH looked was supposedly shot in his last 2 fights, but then produces the goods?

You are not making yourself clear. So why couldnt a tecnically great BH beat RJJ more impressively. RJJ has lost his attributes and endurance and everything and is not rated p4p. RJJ isnt tecnically great so why didnt BH look great against him? Lets just face it. Pac beat a worthy opponent in margarito Margarito was a worthy opponent, when did I evr say he wasnt? but the facts are that he lost a lot after the Cotto and Mosley fights, so I couldnt really consider him prime. nor does a win over him magically make Pacquiao the greatest ever p4p, as you said in the starting post. oh and for the other statement: because Roy Jones still had more skill left than Pavlik or Pascal, even though he was severly diminished in physical attributes.(particularly his chin) also his handspeed is actually fairly good at his age, and imo speed was something that always gave Hopkins trouble. theres a reason he never wanted to fight Dawson and then instantly signed up to fight Pascal when Pascal won the title.

You are not making yourself clear. So why couldnt a tecnically great BH beat RJJ more impressively. RJJ has lost his attributes and endurance and everything and is not rated p4p. RJJ isnt tecnically great so why didnt BH look great against him? Lets just face it. Pac beat a worthy opponent in margarito

So you two agree with me that discrediting Pac just because Margarito didnt perform fantasticly in his last few fights means nothing. Margarito was a tough opponent for everyone he ever fought. He fought as good as he ever could have done against pac. No version of Margarito could have beat Pac and not even 20lbs heavier Margarito is not Hopkins. Margarito's style is based around his toughness, strength and stamina.(based around physical attributes) Hopkins style is based around the basics and strategy. a loss in the physicalities department does not effect him NEARLY as much as Margarito. two totally different situations. and Margarito, despite him going downhill, actually did decent against Pacquiao. took his punches ok, and actually landed a fair amount of punches(especially keft uppercuts and body shots) despite his power and stamina having been notably diminished.

So you two agree with me that discrediting Pac just because Margarito didnt perform fantasticly in his last few fights means nothing. Margarito was a tough opponent for everyone he ever fought. He fought as good as he ever could have done against pac. No version of Margarito could have beat Pac and not even 20lbs heavier

Margarito fights in a style in that if you start slipping you go down hill quick. Like off a cliff quick. Hopkins fights smart and takes little damage. That makes his decline slower and steadier.

Hopkins has never really looked shot. He just looks better against more favourable styles.

what loopy logic. how does Pacquiao become the greatest ever because Hopkins won? fact is that Hopkins only looks good against fighters with bad flaws that Hopkins, dispite his old age and weakness, can still school becuase he has mastered the basics. Pavlik was centered around his jab jab right hand and planting his feet....Hopkins spent all night turning him in circles and off balance, and then even used his jab against him by landing the right over it constantly. Pavlik had nothing else to fall back on, and his one offensive advantage was used against him. Pascal sucks and fights like an amateur, flurrying and running away. the only times Pascal won a round is when he luckily landed a punch against a faded old man. the rest of the time Hopkins very basically pressured him and attacked the body, which also helped kill Pascal's cringeworthy stamina. styles make fights.