Pacquiao - Measured against all time.

[billeau2]

- - BALCOJuan not only ducked Manny many times in between his overseers forcing him to fight Manny, he need 2 BALCO fights to cop a 1-2-1 record vs Manny. He ducked the 5th fight in Mexico City fight for a career purse.

Y?

Mexicans like Manny more than ducker Marquez for obvious reasons dumbos will never understand...see low IQ definition...

Fool how can you duck a fighter you fought wat? 3 or was it 4 times? His overseers forcing him? How would a drunken fool like you know what his overseers asked, forced, demanded, asked nicely, what he did? He ducked the 5th FIGHT?

And I should refrain from mentioning your pickled brain? Do you even understand the concept of avoidance? versus engagement? YOU CANNOT BE SAID TO DUCK A FIGHTER YOU FOUGHT MULTIPLE TIMES!!! Low IQ indeed!

[HisExcellency]

Yeah, I'm not. Haven't critiqued his resume once. Thurman has a solid resume and is one of the solid WW's of the modern WW era. Not once have I critiqued his resume.

I have disputed your claim that he is a KO artist, because he's not and that's just a fact.



Well that's precisely the problem and why I told you to use context.

I'm aware you are not talking about ranked fighters, and again that's the problem. If being a KO Artist is having a high KO% vs unranked fighters then you can bascially pull out almost anyone.

Is Mayweather a KO artist? His KO% vs unranked fighters is what, 85+ % or something like that? Does that make him a KO artist?



Never disputed it's a good win, of course it is. It's just no the monumental win you're trying to make out it was using revisionist history.

Lol what are you talking about man? Thurman stopped 22/29 opponents (76% KO ratio) heading into the Pacquiao fight and dropped 3 of the remaining 7 opponents he couldn't get out of there multiple times including multi-weight champions like Guerrero and world title challengers like Bundu & Lopez. Also, even though he didn't stop Porter & Garcia, neither did Spence so are you going to claim that he wasn't a puncher either?

At the end of the day, Thurman would've had to have beaten (and stopped) a lot of ranked guys on his way to capturing and defending 2 world titles.

[HisExcellency]

Ok then Benard Hopkins vs Tavouris Cloud That was quite fuckin easy.

Hopkins 48 years old, Cloud 31 years old, 17 years younger.

Cloud was undefeated, reigning champion and had a higher KO% than Thurman.

Is that a great win for Hopkins? It shouldn't be because Cloud is crap but by your logic it is.

Was Cloud a KO artist? Must be, right? He has a massively high KO % against unranked fighters, but oh look it massively drops vs ranked fighters.

That's the beautiful thing known as "context".

Fair enough...that's a GREAT example. However, Hopkins is also one of the greatest fighter's of all time (like Pacquiao) so achieving this kind of feat is incredibly RARE (unless you can provide more examples?).

Anyhow, I'm not familiar with Cloud but after having a quick scroll through his resume, it seems that he has a very similar knockout profile to Thurman in the sense that he stopped most of his early opponents but struggled to get the most recent ones out of there. However, like Thurman, he still would've faced (and stopped) a number of ranked guys on his way to capturing and defending his world title which you're overlooking.

[IronDanHamza]

Lol what are you talking about man? Thurman stopped 22/29 opponents (76% KO ratio) heading into the Pacquiao fight and dropped 3 of the remaining 7 opponents he couldn't get out of there multiple times including multi-weight champions like Guerrero and world title challengers like Bundu & Lopez. Also, even though he didn't stop Porter & Garcia, neither did Spence so are you going to claim that he wasn't a puncher either?

Are you not reading what I'm saying? Or are you reading it and just not understanding?

Yes, I am well aware he has a 76% KO ratio. But what's his KO ratio against ranked opponents? That's what matters in regards to his ability as a puncher.

Andre Berto has a 75% KO ratio. Is Andre Berto a KO artist to you?

Victor Ortiz has a 75% KO ratio. Is Victor Ortiz a KO artist to you?

Brandon Rios has a 75% KO ratio. Is Brandon Rios a KO artist to you?

Use context, and more importantly your brain and decipher the data accordingly.

How many ranked fighters has Thurman knocked out? He has less KO's vs ranked opponents than Floyd Mayweather does.

He has barely even rocked, much less stopped ranked opponents so in laymans terms, that is not a KO artist. It's just not.

And no Spence isn't a KO artist either for the same reason but he's a bigger puncher than Thurman though. He's proven that.

At the end of the day, Thurman would've had to have beaten (and stopped) a lot of ranked guys on his way to capturing and defending 2 world titles.

Nothing to do with who he's beaten. This isn't about his resume which you've falsely accused I've critiqued which I literally haven't at any point.

This is about him being a puncher. And you've just said he "would've had to have beaten (and stopped) a lot of ranked guys on his way" when that's just a flat out lie (the stopped part) we have his record and we have their rankings, that's public. And we KNOW that he has barely stopped any ranked fighters in his career.

[IronDanHamza]

Fair enough...that's a GREAT example. However, Hopkins is also one of the greatest fighter's of all time (like Pacquiao) so achieving this kind of feat is incredibly RARE (unless you can provide more examples?).

Well firstly Hopkins definitely isn't one of the greatest fighters of all time but that's just an opinion.

Secondly you implied there wasn't another one and now you've had one you want more There a are plenty of examples of older fighters beating younger fighters with massive age gaps. It's not all that rare. Mayweather at 36 beat undefeated Canelo at 23, a 13 year age gap. There's a plethora of examples like that.

Anyhow, I'm not familiar with Cloud but after having a quick scroll through his resume, it seems that he has a very similar knockout profile to Thurman in the sense that he stopped most of his early opponents but struggled to get the most recent ones out of there. However, like Thurman, he still would've faced (and stopped) a number of ranked guys on his way to capturing and defending his world title which you're overlooking.

Tavouris Cloud is one of the worst world champions that has ever lived but that's neither here nor there. If anything it just entirely proves why context is needed because everything you can say about Thurman for Pacquaio you can say for Cloud for Hopkins. Yet Hopkins beating Cloud does absolutely nothing for his resume, thus the point really.

He definitely is NOT a puncher that is for sure. But by your logic, he would be. See the issue?

You've just said it again, that "Cloud would have had to face (and stop) a number of ranked guys on his way to capturing and defending his world title"

Oh really? Like who? Why are you baselessly asserting that?

I'm quite sure Cloud has a grand total of ZERO KO wins over ranked fighters, for what it's worth. If it's not zero then it's close to it.

[HisExcellency]

Are you not reading what I'm saying? Or are you reading it and just not understanding?

Yes, I am well aware he has a 76% KO ratio. But what's his KO ratio against ranked opponents? That's what matters in regards to his ability as a puncher.

Andre Berto has a 75% KO ratio. Is Andre Berto a KO artist to you?

Victor Ortiz has a 75% KO ratio. Is Victor Ortiz a KO artist to you?

Brandon Rios has a 75% KO ratio. Is Brandon Rios a KO artist to you?

Use context, and more importantly your brain and decipher the data accordingly.

How many ranked fighters has Thurman knocked out? He has less KO's vs ranked opponents than Floyd Mayweather does.

He has barely even rocked, much less stopped ranked opponents so in laymans terms, that is not a KO artist. It's just not.

And no Spence isn't a KO artist either for the same reason but he's a bigger puncher than Thurman though. He's proven that.




Nothing to do with who he's beaten. This isn't about his resume which you've falsely accused I've critiqued which I literally haven't at any point.

This is about him being a puncher. And you've just said he "would've had to have beaten (and stopped) a lot of ranked guys on his way" when that's just a flat out lie (the stopped part) we have his record and we have their rankings, that's public. And we KNOW that he has barely stopped any ranked fighters in his career.

Lol who said that you ONLY need to have a high KO ratio against ranked fighter's to be considered a puncher? I've literally NEVER heard anybody say that before because the vast majority of boxer's, pundits and fans look at a fighter's WHOLE body of work to determine whether he's a puncher or not plus we both know I could easily find a million and one articles, videos, interviews etc attesting to Thurman's power during his prime.

At the end of the day, everybody knows that even the hardest puncher's fail to knock out better opposition as they climb the ranks e.g. Golovkin against Jacobs, Canelo (thrice) & Derevyanchenko and more recently Beterbiev against Bivol. Even Tyson had 6 wins where he went the distance against guys like Green & Tillis who NOBODY'S ever heard of. Are you going to tell me that Iron Mike WASN'T one of the most devastating puncher's in history?

Also, what's your EXACT definition of a 'ranked fighter'? Tell me because in order to be in a position to fight for the WBA world title, Thurman would've had to have beaten a number of guys in the organisation's top 10 in addition to facing the champion and then defending his belt several times against '#1 ranked' mandatory challenger's.

[HisExcellency]

Well firstly Hopkins definitely isn't one of the greatest fighters of all time but that's just an opinion.

Secondly you implied there wasn't another one and now you've had one you want more There a are plenty of examples of older fighters beating younger fighters with massive age gaps. It's not all that rare. Mayweather at 36 beat undefeated Canelo at 23, a 13 year age gap. There's a plethora of examples like that.



Tavouris Cloud is one of the worst world champions that has ever lived but that's neither here nor there. If anything it just entirely proves why context is needed because everything you can say about Thurman for Pacquaio you can say for Cloud for Hopkins. Yet Hopkins beating Cloud does absolutely nothing for his resume, thus the point really.

He definitely is NOT a puncher that is for sure. But by your logic, he would be. See the issue?

You've just said it again, that "Cloud would have had to face (and stop) a number of ranked guys on his way to capturing and defending his world title"

Oh really? Like who? Why are you baselessly asserting that?

I'm quite sure Cloud has a grand total of ZERO KO wins over ranked fighters, for what it's worth. If it's not zero then it's close to it.

Disagree about Hopkins but the reason I asked for more examples was to illustrate that what both he and Manny achieved (i.e. dethroning undefeated champions with a high KO ratio in their 40s) is incredibly RARE and something only the 'best of the best' are capable of. Therefore, I DON'T expect there to be many more examples plus Mayweather doesn't count because Canelo was incredibly green (just 23yo) when they fought whereas Pacquiao beat Thurman at his peak aged 30. Canelo didn't have an exceptionally high KO ratio either.

As for Cloud, I can't comment because I've never heard of him before but if he's as bad as you say he is, what BHop achieved ISN'T comparable to Pacman's victory over Thurman because Keith was considered one of the best Welterweights around when Manny defeated him (you even said so yourself).

As for the last point, I'll wait for your exact definition of a 'ranked fighter' before commenting further.

[IronDanHamza]

Lol who said that you ONLY need to have a high KO ratio against ranked fighter's to be considered a puncher? I've literally NEVER heard anybody say that before because the vast majority of boxer's, pundits and fans look at a fighter's WHOLE body of work to determine whether he's a puncher or not plus we both know I could easily find a million and one articles, videos, interviews etc attesting to Thurman's power during his prime.

Because I've literally just explained it to you, for I think the 3rd or 4th time.

It's not difficult to rack up a high KO% against unranked fighters. You can't gauge if someone is a puncher off that. Almost anyone with even slight power can do that.

If you look at someone who is a legitimate KO puncher, like say, Golovkin for example. Or Inoue, or Kovalev, just off the top of my head. What are their KO % vs ranked fighters? 90+%. THAT is a KO artist.

Not someone like Keith Thurman who has a less than 10% KO ratio vs ranked opponents. That, is not a KO artist. It's very simple.

If that were the gauge for what a KO artist then the fightets I've listed, that you keep ignoring, would be KO artists. Such as Andre Berto. Is Berto a KO artist? He has a 75% KO ratio. So, is he? Obviously no, he's not.

At the end of the day, everybody knows that even the hardest puncher's fail to knock out better opposition as they climb the ranks e.g. Golovkin against Jacobs, Canelo (thrice) & Derevyanchenko and more recently Beterbiev against Bivol. Even Tyson had 6 wins where he went the distance against guys like Green & Tillis who NOBODY'S ever heard of. Are you going to tell me that Iron Mike WASN'T one of the most devastating puncher's in history?

What is this fallacy nonsense you are spouting? Who said you need a 100% KO ratio to be a KO artist? Oh yeah, NO ONE. So stop with the bullshit.

Everyone you just named, legitimate KO arists, have very high KO % vs RANKED opponents. Whereas Thurman, who isn't a KO artist, doesn't. You are actually disproving your own point.

Also, maybe you haven't heard of James Tillis and Mitch Green but that just shows your limited knowledge of this sport, if anything.

Also, what's your EXACT definition of a 'ranked fighter'? Tell me because in order to be in a position to fight for the WBA world title, Thurman would've had to have beaten a number of guys in the organisation's top 10 in addition to facing the champion and then defending his belt several times against '#1 ranked' mandatory challenger's.

Ranked fighters are fighters who are ranked in the Top 10 with The Ring Magazine.

Or more recently some like to use the TBRB instead.

Either suffice.

[IronDanHamza]

Disagree about Hopkins but the reason I asked for more examples was to illustrate that what both he and Manny achieved (i.e. dethroning undefeated champions with a high KO ratio in their 40s) is incredibly RARE and something only the 'best of the best' are capable of. Therefore, I DON'T expect there to be many more examples plus Mayweather doesn't count because Canelo was incredibly green (just 23yo) when they fought whereas Pacquiao beat Thurman at his peak aged 30. Canelo didn't have an exceptionally high KO ratio either.

Ok well you've just made an excuse for the Mayweather one which is the exact thing you accused me of doing to Thurman so I'm not sure how you reconcile that one.

Are you actually now going to argue that beating that version Keith Thurman is better than beating that version of Canelo? Surely you are not.

But ok if you want more of that very specific example then you've got a 44 year old George Foreman beating undefeated champion Micheal Moorer who was 27 years old.

If you want examples of older fighters beating younger fighters with a huge age gap then there are ample.

As for Cloud, I can't comment because I've never heard of him before but if he's as bad as you say he is, what BHop achieved ISN'T comparable to Pacman's victory over Thurman because Keith was considered one of the best Welterweights around when Manny defeated him (you even said so yourself).

As for the last point, I'll wait for your exact definition of a 'ranked fighter' before commenting further.

Well, that's the whole point that seems to be elluding you.

Yes, Cloud is terrible, no where near as good as Thurman. But everything you can say about Thurman, you can say about Cloud.

Undefeated, reigning champion, in the Top 5 of the division, high KO % (higher than Thurman), and also a much bigger age gap between the two.

But yet, if you use CONTEXT, and actually look at it in depth, it's a solid win at best for Hopkins. Much like Pacquaio's win over Thurman.

Thus, the point.

[BattlingNelson]

The way you degrade great fighters and insinuate they (Marquez) have illegally used PED'is pathetic. Why can't you just stick to the facts?

Plenty of circumstantial evidence that JMM was a juicer.