At this moment who is the greater fighter Manny Pacquiao or Billy Conn?

[Rolling Stone]

Pacquiao and it is not even close.

idiot......

[JAB5239]

boxrec and youtube will explain

As far as I know there are only a few fights of Conn on Video. As far as boxrec goes, if you want to take that route, Conn has beaten the better fighters. So, in your opinion, why isn't it even close?

[frankenfrank]

As far as I know there are only a few fights of Conn on Video. As far as boxrec goes, if you want to take that route, Conn has beaten the better fighters. So, in your opinion, why isn't it even close?

what better fighters ?
zale who was 11.5 lbs lighter than him at the time they fought , and is also overrated btw ?
like splitting 2 fights with Young Corbett 3 and having big luck their first encounter was a mere 10 rounder cuz had it been 15 he would have been stopped instead of just losing the decision ?
like haveing 15 stoppage wins out of 77 fights at times when there were 15 rounders and not fighting a good percentage of quality opposition ?

[DR.ORGYY]

pac is obviously......

[JAB5239]

what better fighters ?
zale who was 11.5 lbs lighter than him at the time they fought , and is also overrated btw ?
like splitting 2 fights with Young Corbett 3 and having big luck their first encounter was a mere 10 rounder cuz had it been 15 he would have been stopped instead of just losing the decision ?
like haveing 15 stoppage wins out of 77 fights at times when there were 15 rounders and not fighting a good percentage of quality opposition ?

Louis, Zale, Barlund, Savold, McCoy, Pastor, Lesnevich, Bettina, Krieger, Apostoli, Yarosz, Krieger, Corbett III, Dundee, Risko, Zivic. These are the top fighters I know about, Im sure there were more. You question the quality of his opposition tells me you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Ko's don't make a fighter great, wins do. As great as Pac is, his quality of opposition isn't as good as Conn's. Winning paper titles is great. Beating the larger amount of great fighters from your era is better.

[JAB5239]

Pacfans here had developed an infamous reputation of being absurd Pacquiao fans.. Thus, I would not dare to give my answer anymore..

But I'd like to hear some answers..
there are already obvious one, that I don't need to ask
but I'd like to mention nonetheless..
who has more Ring FOY.. better w-l-d.. better KO%..

but since I barely know who Conn is..
you guys might change my perception.

-how huge was he back then?

One of the most popular fighters of his time.

-how many HOF'ers did he beat?

7 or 8, but don't quote me on that.

-who was the best guy he beat?

His ALMOST upset of Joe Louis is what he's remembered for, but he had wins against great fighters such as Zivic, Corbett III, Apostoli and other great fighters.

-what is his world title fights record?

I'd have to boxrec that, but you have to take into consideration there were many less weight classes and only one champion per, title fights were not easy to come by.

-why only 64 wins, in a time where 80 wins
is just approximately the average?

Not sure where you came up with the 80 win average my friend, but Conn did lose four years to WWII, he also had no amateur career.

[JAB5239]

the 80 like I said was approximate.. I'm probably wrong though, however 64 wins is small back then.. You can see guys in modern time racking up even up to 50+. But since he participated in WWII, that explain it all..

with regards to the title fights, don't worry i get your point.. I was very impressed w/ his quality of opposition, and if he is truely famous in his time, that's another props for him..

But I'd still give it to my man, probably biased here, can't blame me here, I'm basing it on time & recognitions.. Looking at Conn's reign of supremacy 1936 to 1941, 5-years, was a bit short. He could have made more if not for the WWII, but I feel legacies are made of records and not what could have been. If that's the case, Masao Oba would have beaten Fighting Harada as the greatest Japanese fighter.

But unlike the other poster who said it was not even close, I say it is somehow close.

I can respect a pick for Manny here. I don't personally think so, but its apples and oranges. Either way its VERY debatable.

[frankenfrank]

Not sure where you came up with the 80 win average my friend, but Conn did lose four years to WWII, he also had no amateur career.

which gave him more time and less b4 pro damage.
and i did not bring any of his early losses against him in my post , did i ?

[frankenfrank]

Louis, Zale, Barlund, Savold, McCoy, Pastor, Lesnevich, Bettina, Krieger, Apostoli, Yarosz, Krieger, Corbett III, Dundee, Risko, Zivic. These are the top fighters I know about, Im sure there were more. You question the quality of his opposition tells me you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

who are those names ? his win over zivic is like for pac to win a decision over chris john instead of KOing hatton when he did.
but the most important thing is your great knowledge in the topics you choose to discuss.

Ko's don't make a fighter great, wins do.

i had to quote this.

As great as Pac is, his quality of opposition isn't as good as Conn's.

no , not at all , maybe i will add the comparison between them two to my my comparisons thread , but i don't think i will get that bored , and if i ever do , there are more interesting and relevant comparisons to be made.

Winning paper titles is great. Beating the larger amount of great fighters from your era is better.

which is what pac did.

[JAB5239]

which gave him more time and less b4 pro damage.
and i did not bring any of his early losses against him in my post , did i ?

Lol, how you gonna use early losses against a guy with no amateur background? And actually he would take more damage without the amateur experience having to learn each fight. Any way you look at it his resume is still excellent. You saying its not even close between him and Pac is utterly ridiculous.