Youngest Flyweight champion and the oldest welterweight champion.

I agree with you but what does 20 losses have to do with anything ?? Those guys fought 10 times as much and constantly against the best , fighters of today would have many more loses to . I just dont see how many loses a fighter has effects their all time status. Never have . Alot of those loses old.timers fought said guy 8 times and won most of them. It was a differnt game back then , so Imo not fair to judge any fighters all time status off their loses it's about the content of their wins and loses etc . Avenged loses . Etc dont u think ?? Yeah you have to take into account the landscape of boxing at the time when judging these old fighters! Its like Ray Robinson's record you have take into account how often he fought, how long he went undefeated b4 losing, who he lost to, how many times they fought, how many losses he avenged, the weightclass he jumped when he lost, and the his age when he started to lose. If you a study the game nobody should have to explain these things. When i first got into boxing the second thing i did was research the history of the sport and the respected fighters from back in the day to gain perspective.

Benitez became lineal champion at age 17.

Pacquiao has ridiculous amounts of record that none achieved in the history of boxing but he only gets "top 20" in ATG rankings. While guys with 20 loses are top 5 because they are from the 20's. If he was fighting in the black and white era he'd be worshipped.

Great fighter Second best of his era

Yeah, the Thurman fight was the most damaging fight that Manny took since 2012 Marquez fight, the Jeff Horn fight wasn't damaging, with Horn smothering his own work. Imo Manny at the age where he has to be matched very careful. People can get upset all they want but Manny is not Superman its a reason he opted out of fighting Spence. Physically thats the type of fight where he will age over night and take too much damage. People see that he edged Thurman and fanboys disregard the details of the fight. Manny cant not keep up an intense pace for 12rounds. In the Thurman fight he had to take breaks then steal rounds which still almost cost him the fight cuz Thurman start connecting alot during the second half. Fights with Spence, Crawford, and even Porter just might be too much on his body. Now guys like Mikey, Danny etc are perfect both guys arent relentless and tend to wait for on their punches

Pacquiao has ridiculous amounts of record that none achieved in the history of boxing but he only gets "top 20" in ATG rankings. While guys with 20 loses are top 5 because they are from the 20's. I agree with you but what does 20 losses have to do with anything ?? Those guys fought 10 times as much and constantly against the best , fighters of today would have many more loses to . I just dont see how many loses a fighter has effects their all time status. Never have . Alot of those loses old.timers fought said guy 8 times and won most of them. It was a differnt game back then , so Imo not fair to judge any fighters all time status off their loses it's about the content of their wins and loses etc . Avenged loses . Etc dont u think ??

To be honest it dont make any sense that he is still competing at the highest level at his age and his fighting style and the amount of damage he has taken and at a size disadvantage. ****s baffling to me. Most of the men who lasted long were defensive slick or crafty guys, Pac style of fighting isn't supposed to last longer than the age of 30. I still dont know how he is able to compete while being a Senator, it just goes to show you these younger cats are lazy or spoiled if old ass tiny Pac is still competitive while holding other jobs, these young bucks need to train harder since thats all they do they dont got any other responsibility other than to fight. I think he gets knocked out in his next fight, no way that Thurman fight didnt take its toll on him he was eating power shots flush to the chin from Thurman. But the thing about is... Manny start to develop very underrated boxing skills after the Morales fight. Think about his career... 1st phase: Brawler/Slugger 2nd phase: Slugger/boxer/puncher 3rd phase : Boxer/Puncher He started to not take too much damage as time went own, and got to the point he could outbox guys and not rely on his punching power or aggression. If he didn't evolve he would have accumulated too much damage and most likely not ve active right jow

Whats amazing is who would think he would last so long. Go back to The that killer with the flame trunks, no way anybody could have predicted that animal would still be active at 40 let alone body still intact. That Morales lost was probably the most important fight of his career To be honest it dont make any sense that he is still competing at the highest level at his age and his fighting style and the amount of damage he has taken and at a size disadvantage. ****s baffling to me. Most of the men who lasted long were defensive slick or crafty guys, Pac style of fighting isn't supposed to last longer than the age of 30. I still dont know how he is able to compete while being a Senator, it just goes to show you these younger cats are lazy or spoiled if old ass tiny Pac is still competitive while holding other jobs, these young bucks need to train harder since thats all they do they dont got any other responsibility other than to fight. I think he gets knocked out in his next fight, no way that Thurman fight didnt take its toll on him he was eating power shots flush to the chin from Thurman.

An incredibly unique accomplishment, would be highly improbable that anybody individually beats it. Pac’s longevity is crazy when you think about it. Pacs longevity is amazing and the fact that he's an offensive fighter and still fighting at the elite level is incredible.

here is why.... those " records "... are not criteria for greatness there is only one criteria for greatness who did you beat, with consideration given to when/how nothing else matters when evaluating greatness... just names nameless achievements are not a criteria for greatness I agree. That's why floyd would never be greater than pac because he beat only past prime fighters and pick the weakest with a high reward opponent and floyd achievements was so much inferior compared to pac.

Floyd waited til he slowed down before he fought him. Cmon now don’t make stupid arguments like “floyd is older” because time favors his style.

Pacquiao has ridiculous amounts of record that none achieved in the history of boxing but he only gets "top 20" in ATG rankings. here is why.... those " records "... are not criteria for greatness there is only one criteria for greatness who did you beat, with consideration given to when/how nothing else matters when evaluating greatness... just names nameless achievements are not a criteria for greatness

Whats amazing is who would think he would last so long. Go back to The that killer with the flame trunks, no way anybody could have predicted that animal would still be active at 40 let alone body still intact. That Morales lost was probably the most important fight of his career

If you think about it, you could hardly name other fighters who became lineal champion at 19 years of age.

An incredibly unique accomplishment, would be highly improbable that anybody individually beats it. Pac’s longevity is crazy when you think about it.

That is amazing when you think about it. Yeah. So ****ing amazing and add the other achievements. 4 DECADE CHAMPION 8 DIVISION CHAMPION 5 DIVISION LINEAL CHAMPION And only one boxer achieved all of these.. UNBELIEVABLE!!!!

That is amazing when you think about it.