What's more impressive Pacquiao's offense or Bernard Hopkins defense?

He was a machine in his prime. But I think it was more the result of his physical gifts rather than being a skilled, well rounded offensive fighter. I think you need some skills to throw and CONNECT fast 4-5 punch combinations.

saa just owned the own fl0mo fan base

Pacquiao is explosive at mid range. Hopkins can defend and counter from all ranges. He exposed Trinidad's inability to throw punches from close range. Don't get me wrong. He was a machine in his prime. But I think it was more the result of his physical gifts rather than being a skilled, well rounded offensive fighter. I'd say equal though. When Hopkins became more defensive minded he became too economical and gave away some of the biggest fights of his career.

Floyd and hopkins have every trick in the book, but that doesn't mean they are better offensive fighters.. Offense isn't just about skills... Cory Spinks is probably more technically skilled than manny, does that make him a better offensive fighter.. Oscar never had a good straight right, that doesn't mean he wouldn't bomb on guys.. Offense is landing damaging punches... Doesn't matter if it's technical or not Not oblivious to anything you said, simply saying top 10 is a stretch since Pacquiao is too limited. I wouldn't even say Pacquiao is great offensively, I've always disagreed with those who thought he was. And no, Spinks isn't, Pacquiao punches more properly and Spinks too can't fight on the inside.

To be great offensively one has to have almost every punch variation and be able to utilize that from multiple distances. We've seen Pacquiao look too limited at times. Floyd and hopkins have every trick in the book, but that doesn't mean they are better offensive fighters.. Offense isn't just about skills... Cory Spinks is probably more technically skilled than manny, does that make him a better offensive fighter.. Oscar never had a good straight right, that doesn't mean he wouldn't bomb on guys.. Offense is landing damaging punches... Doesn't matter if it's technical or not

Maybe we have different definition of offense.. I think a guy like mayorga is an offensive fighter.. I'm not worried about techinical skills, just how much offense they produce.. You would be hard pressed to find fighters that had as much offensive firepower than manny. Dempsey Tyson Armstrong Manny Pryor Tito Ggg Guys like that I consider to be great offensively To be great offensively one has to have almost every punch variation and be able to utilize that from multiple distances. We've seen Pacquiao look too limited at times.

Pacquiao is a little wild with his offense sometimes, if he'd settle down he'd be able to get alot more done, after he hurt Marquez in the 4th fight is a good example, he landed that right hand and then he's just bouncing and bouncing and reaching and fuk me, just settle the fuk down, get in range and work the guy, he only did that in the last 5 seconds of the round or something around that. With that said, defense is easier than offense from my personal experience in boxing. I wouldn't know what to choose, BHop is old as fuk and survived Kovalev. Although he really was in defense, which falls to my point that it's easier if you're focusing on that, just staying away, feinting and the very odd punch to reinforce that defense, but the actual work he does is very little. Not to say it's not impressive, but it's a tough choice.

I'm laughing here because Hopkins, especially in his prime, had a better offense than Pacquiao. Top 10 all time is a stretch man. Name the guys hopkins blowout in a few rounds?

I'm laughing here because Hopkins, especially in his prime, had a better offense than Pacquiao. Top 10 all time is a stretch man. Maybe we have different definition of offense.. I think a guy like mayorga is an offensive fighter.. I'm not worried about techinical skills, just how much offense they produce.. You would be hard pressed to find fighters that had as much offensive firepower than manny. Dempsey Tyson Armstrong Manny Pryor Tito Ggg Guys like that I consider to be great offensively

Agree with no jab and inside fighting but c'mon he has a very good right hook. At it's best probably the best right hook of any southpaw all time. He gained the right hook after Morales I, and seems to have lost a good bit of it after the KO.

Your confusing skills with offensive firepower... Hopkins has the skills you mentioned, but you can't say he is better offensively than manny... Aaron pryor and Henry Armstrong werent textbook fighters but were offensive whirlwinds... One doesn't need every punch in the book to be offensive, they just need to be able to beat the hell out of people, and manny beat the holy hell out of a lot of world class and HOF level talent I'm laughing here because Hopkins, especially in his prime, had a better offense than Pacquiao. Top 10 all time is a stretch man.

Agree with no jab and inside fighting but c'mon he has a very good right hook. No he doesn't, he has hurt/ drop guys with it but it's success is too far in between to qualify as "very good".

Now what happened the rest of the fight? Yeah, of course it ending up being a great fight... But people are claiming manny isnt great offensively, and that marquez didn't get roughed up.... Like I just said,,, posters get confused when talking about a single trait... If strictly offense, manny is great... Anyone that doesn't think he put a whipping on marquez in the first fight is crazy.. It doesn't matter if marquez has wolverine like recuperative powers, the fact remains manny was an offensive juggernaut

Um,,,, watch the first fight,,, broken nose and 3 knockdowns and pretty much bleeding everywhere, and your gonna claim manny didn't put a beat down on him and didn't have offensive success.. A lot of you guys get confused when talking about a single trait... Offensively manny is a whirlwind of punches... You can't watch marquez 1 and claim marquez left unscathed... Something smashed Marquez's face Now what happened the rest of the fight?

Pacquiao never beat Marquez down Um,,,, watch the first fight,,, broken nose and 3 knockdowns and pretty much bleeding everywhere, and your gonna claim manny didn't put a beat down on him and didn't have offensive success.. A lot of you guys get confused when talking about a single trait... Offensively manny is a whirlwind of punches... You can't watch marquez 1 and claim marquez left unscathed... Something smashed Marquez's face

I gotta go with manny's offense... He was literally a tornado during his prime Some of the most destructive beat downs I have ever seen were manny vs barrera, marquez 1, morales 2,3, diaz, hatton, cotto, margarito.... Just brutal stuff.. Hopkins is a great defender but manny is a top 10 offensive fighter in history... Pacquiao never beat Marquez down

Top 10 offensively? Not possible, doesn't have a jab, a right hook worth noting and he can't fight on the inside. Your confusing skills with offensive firepower... Hopkins has the skills you mentioned, but you can't say he is better offensively than manny... Aaron pryor and Henry Armstrong werent textbook fighters but were offensive whirlwinds... One doesn't need every punch in the book to be offensive, they just need to be able to beat the hell out of people, and manny beat the holy hell out of a lot of world class and HOF level talent

How did he clean out the division? Cotto, Clottey, Margarito. These guys were elite, proven welterweights. Bradley was an elite lighwelterweight.

Of course and without a doubt Pac offence. Those who voted for Bihop defence forgot that Pac is a small fighter even for lightwelterweights and he cleaned the whole welterweight division when he came to it. How did he clean out the division?

Top 10 offensively? Not possible, doesn't have a jab, a right hook worth noting and he can't fight on the inside. Agree with no jab and inside fighting but c'mon he has a very good right hook.