Pacquiao is one of the greatest fighter of all time -Bert Sugar

Bert Sugar once said that Manny Pacquiao is the greatest southpaw that ever lived. Meaning, he ranked Manny Pacquiao above Pernell Whitaker. Now, since majority of boxing historians ranked Pernell Whitaker above Floyd Mayweather Jr. That only means that Pacquiao is way above Floyd Mayweather Jr. in the boxing's ATG rankings. what " boxing historians "..... ? name one ! not saying I co-sign this list... just giving an example... years back, bleachreport had Mayweather ahead of Whitaker https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1436191-the-top-50-pound-for-pound-boxers-of-all-time#slide22 that was AFTER Whitaker had retired... and BEFORE Mayweather beat Canelo, Pacquiao, etc

Bert Sugar once said that Manny Pacquiao is the greatest southpaw that ever lived. Meaning, he ranked Manny Pacquiao above Pernell Whitaker. Now, since majority of boxing historians ranked Pernell Whitaker above Floyd Mayweather Jr. That only means that Pacquiao is way above Floyd Mayweather Jr. in the boxing's ATG rankings.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZsZlmw4neQ Too many boxing experts and historians already think that pacquiao is one of the grestest of all time. one year later, Sugar said that Pacquiao could be top 50 Sugar also said that he would need to see the result of Pac/May before giving an opinion from the other thread..... you silly pacstains do this before/after EVERY pac fight LMAO Yo PacWacko, How come you haven't responded to the above post yet by aboutfkntime?

just names... not nameless achievements and not just lineal.... same with other " titles " David Diaz... wtf ? I KNOW, I KNOW... Floyd has a couple of those " titles " as do others... especially in more recent era's that is why..... just names... not nameless achievements

Then why u r so butthurt that pac was in the conversation of the GREATEST FIGHTER OF ALL TIME? nobody disagreed Pac is obviously a great fighter

I'm well aware of that fact, as well as that GrandPac is just a 6-division titleholder... What I'm trying to say is, The Ring and Lineal Championships were held by the old-timers when multiple major belts were yet to exist... That's why many observers and historians considers them as valid championships... Hence, recognizing GrandPac as an 8-division champion... Can't say I agree with them nor I don't, but they know way better than I do to decide... Still, no other people not named Manny Pacquiao achieved that, even with the easiest path possible (fight the weakest champs/#1 contenders for vacancies in every division and using catchweights without skipping divisions)... no, they weren't... can you give an example of that... ? " old-timers "... did not need a lineal champion, because they had a real champion tracking/recording lineage only became a factor (a REAL small one imo, because triangle theories do not work in boxing) when the championship became fragmented with the advent of the 2nd/3rd/4th sanctioning bodies... before the other ABC's were formed everyone knew who the REAL champ was, because there was only one title nobody needed a lineal champ and the lineal champ is often not the best in his division names > nameless titles The Ring had Canelo ranked the #1 middleweight and lineal "champion"... despite the fact that he had never weighed more than 155, and despite the fact that he had never faced a middleweight opponent Canelo never fought an actual middleweight opponent for nearly 2 full years after The Ring named him champ all because of lineage at the SAME time... The Ring had Stevenson ranked the #1 LHW over Kovalev... because of lineage just names... not nameless achievements

Pacquiao is one of the greatest fighter of all time -Bert Sugar There are thousands of ''one of the greatest'' The ''one of the greatest'' compliment is practically ordinary. Unless names can go with it :) You're trying hard to convince yourself Then why u r so butthurt that pac was in the conversation of the GREATEST FIGHTER OF ALL TIME?

they are not " titles " The Ring, does not sanction, and does not mandate they are just a magazine lol I'm well aware of that fact, as well as that GrandPac is just a 6-division titleholder... What I'm trying to say is, The Ring and Lineal Championships were held by the old-timers when multiple major belts were yet to exist... That's why many observers and historians considers them as valid championships... Hence, recognizing GrandPac as an 8-division champion... Can't say I agree with them nor I don't, but they know way better than I do to decide... Still, no other people not named Manny Pacquiao achieved that, even with the easiest path possible (fight the weakest champs/#1 contenders for vacancies in every division and using catchweights without skipping divisions)...

How insecure do you have to be to make a thread like this come on now This. Is Pacquiao paying that guy? 11,000 posts is all about Manny.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZsZlmw4neQ Too many boxing experts and historians already think that pacquiao is one of the grestest of all time. ...and the thing is this interview was before the cotto fight too and pac has done much, broke records since then he will be near the very top when his carreer is over for sure

PacWacko = not good with names :lol1:

JUST google pacquiao and u will see 8 Division champion or u can Google 8 division champion and u will only see one name and that's manny pacquiao. I did google is wrong FACT: Pac did not win a title at featherweight also, his JMW title is utter rubbish also..... David Diaz, wtf ? luckily, historians and grown-ups just go by wins/losses Mayweather..... * tamed Pacquiao at 38yo * schooled Canelo at 36yo * schooled Marquez at 32yo (Pac nearly died trying this one) he also..... * beat many more credible world champions that Pacquiao did * NO losses your turn, name Pac's 3x best wins..... stuck..... ? THAT, is why Mayweather ranks higher than Pacquiao

I know what you're trying to say... He just won Lineal and The Ring at 126 and 140... Old-timers only rely with such titles though... they are not " titles " The Ring, does not sanction, and does not mandate they are just a magazine lol

He didn't win titles in 8 divisions. Actually do some research instead of just believing nonsense. Just google 8 division champion and u will see only one name.

yea, Pac did not win a featherweight title, and his JMW title is rubbish none of that stuff matters, because it did not exist back in the day Armstrong would have truckloads of that rubbish if he fought in a 17-division, 100+ "titles" era..... rather than the 8-divisions, 8-titles era..... he would have truckloads of that rubbish names are the only thing that counts still waiting for PasaWacko to gimme dem names JUST google pacquiao and u will see 8 Division champion or u can Google 8 division champion and u will only see one name and that's manny pacquiao.

He didn't win titles in 8 divisions. Actually do some research instead of just believing nonsense. I know what you're trying to say... He just won Lineal and The Ring at 126 and 140... Old-timers only rely with such titles though...

It's not the present-day boxer's fault that we have 4 major belts and 17 weight divisions... You guys said it, the old-time legends could've won bunch of it if they had that lots of titles during their time... But come think of it, if it's that easy to win titles in 8 divisions, why is it that only 1 person achieved that? I mean, the path could've been easy... Mthalane or Edwards (Flyweight champs with the similar height as GrandPac) could do this easily by fighting at catchweights and choosing to fight the weakest champs in every division, but they don't... Boxing's most powerful boxers: DLH and TBE (not The Best Ever) - can't...

If ber t was alive he'd have Pac no3 or thereabouts now Bert Sugar DKSAB!

Name the divisions where he wona WBC/IBF/WBA/WBO title, i guarantee there isn't 8. It's lies. yea, Pac did not win a featherweight title, and his JMW title is rubbish none of that stuff matters, because it did not exist back in the day Armstrong would have truckloads of that rubbish if he fought in a 17-division, 100+ "titles" era..... rather than the 8-divisions, 8-titles era..... he would have truckloads of that rubbish names are the only thing that counts still waiting for PasaWacko to gimme dem names

I will not use pac achievements as the gauge because it's an off the chart standard. i will lower the standard. If u can find me just one boxer from the past to present who achieved only 2 of the following. 6 Division Champion Fighter of the decade 4 Division lineal champion If u know atleast one then I will concede that pac achievements is overrated. but, that stuff is all just rubbish rubbish that did not even exist back in the day that stuff is all just..... new fanboy-rubbish nonsense Mayweather is maybe close to top 20, or just in the top 20..... not exactly sure, and I can't be bothered checking..... and he is definitely higher than Pacquiao..... who is probably top 25-30'ish..... again, can't be bothered checking who did he beat, with consideration given to when/how with some (not as much, but some) consideration given to losses Mayweather..... * tamed Pacquiao at 38yo * schooled Canelo at 36yo * schooled Marquez at 32yo (Pac nearly died trying this one) now your turn, name Pac's 3x best wins..... stuck..... ? THAT, is why Mayweather ranks higher than Pacquiao you're welcome !