Tweet
Unless he really cleans out Welterweight (Mosley, Mayweather, Berto and some of the 140 prospects as they fill out), it won't happen. And that's just achievements-wise. H2H, I'll always pick Leonard over Pacquiao.
-
-
why does he have to clean out the Welterweight division? did Ray Leonard clean out the middleweight or Light-Heavy divisions?Originally posted by AmericanYeti View PostComment
-
pacquiao arguably lost to marquez twice..Originally posted by sonnyboyx2 View Post
De La Hoya was dehydrated and well past his prime..
Cotto coming off a beat down from Margarito, and an arguable close win over clottey and had to cut down to 145 instead of 147..
Hatton hadn't been the same since mayweather koed him.. hatton had almost got koed by lascano..
Pacquiao also lost to a past prime Morales and struggled to beat a past prime Morales in the 2nd fight even though Morales was weight drained and coming off a loss to zahir raheem and u wanna say morales was prime when he fought pacquiao? GTFOH..
I don't Like Ray Leonard, but Pacquiao is nowhere near Leonard's ATG statusLast edited by C.Y.; 04-23-2010, 03:29 AM.Comment
-
Originally posted by sonnyboyx2 View Post
Hmmm, ok. Everyone is a hater these days. I knew you would bring that up. It's the standard answer these days to anything someone doesn't agree with when they don't have anything better to say.
No, those guys are not rated in their divisions top ten for ATG's. That is honestly a silly call.
If you do nothing else, at least tell me who your top ten ATG's for WW with Cotto and Oscar being in your top ten? Explain the Hatton top ten at 140 too. Tell me the way you would rate them all in the top ten of their best division. Please. Or what about 126/130 for Marquez, Morales and Barrera which is where Pac fought them all and only beat Barrera at 126. He didn't beat Marquez at 126. Anyway, how are they in the top ten for these weights? Explain the top ten business for me and everyone please because I'm struggling with that one.
Anyway, first up, you obviously never saw Pac and Morales fight at 122, because if you had you would know it would have resulted in a Morales win every fight at 122.
Also, I never said they weren't comfortable at the weights where Pac beat them. Find that and show me. I said Barrera and Morales are only possible top ten guys at 122 and Pac only beat Barrera at 126/130 and Morales at 130. I didn't say those guys weren't comfortable there (except for Morales. He was shocking at 130). It wasn't their best weight though. Barrera was still absolutely great at 126 which is why it's Pac's best win. Their whole careers were defined by their respective runs at 122, anything else was just icing on the cake.
Where are you reading this stuff man? I never said they don't make a top 100. Again, find where I said that. I said, depending on who you talk to, they can be rated usually between 75-ish to 150-ish ie. around the top 100. Different people have them in different spots though the usual placing is for them all to be between 75-100. I didn't say Oscar isn't a top 100 fighter so why would you bring it up as if I did?
Now, obviously the top 1000 was an exaggeration but neither Morales or Oscar were world champs when Pac fought them nor was either P4P rated. How do you figure that? Marquez and Barrera were the only P4P rated guys when Pac fought them. Maybe Oscar had been a decade before but what does that have to do with Pac fighting him back then? They didn't fight then. Because Oscar had once been a highly rated P4P guy that means Pac beat a P4P top ten rated ATG at 147? Wow, ok. Again, Camacho must be seriously something else. He beat the number 1 ATG lightweight and top ten P4P Duran and the top 3 ATG 147 and top ten/fifteen/twenty P4P ATG in Leonard.
What does who organised the fight have to do with anything? Maybe Ali wanted and organised the fight with Holmes. Does that mean Holmes should get the full amount of credit as if he beat the best version? No, he was shot, just like Oscar. You seem to be mistaking things that happen and go on outside of the actual fight as making some kind of difference to their placing, importance and ability of said fighters or their placing of years before. It doesn't matter who organised the damn fight because when they fought Oscar was shot. What does the promotion for stuff matter in the placing and performance of the fight?
With Hatton, again, it doesn't matter who called for the fight and it was actually Roach and Pac that wanted it. It still doesn't matter. It doesn't change the performance of the fight or Hatton's recent performances and KO loss. I don't understand why you bring that up as it doesn't relate to the actual fight. What matters is where a fighter is, how he fights, what happens afterward and before etc etc. Who calls for it means jack **** to how high you then rate someone because of it.
Marquez lost the first fight? News to me. I always thought it was a draw. Maybe I'm delusional.
Yeah, Morales and Pac I and II were great fights. Amazing fights. I have watched them a million times. What does that mean for his rating against Leonard though? Should Pac be rated higher for having good, hard, close exciting wars? That would mean Gatti should be way higher than both. I'm a bit lost as to why you bring these things up? As for Morales being at the top of his game, I think I'll have to simply very, very strongly disagree and leave it at that. He is one of my AT favourites and I had watched him from near the start of his career and have seen every fight of his many times. He was not near the top of his game in any fight. It was very sad for me to watch those fights because it's obvious he is a shell of his former great self. He fought one last good fight in the first one, but it was still bad in comparison to the rest of his career. Maybe you need to actually watch and study Morales from before his Pac fights and before his 130 days to see just what kind of fighter he was at 122. There is a world of difference between the guy that first fought Pac and the guy that fought Barrera I, Zaragoza, etc.
Yes, Morales had just been in another FOTY against Barrera. He looked slower, more lackluster and easier to hit than ever before and he got beaten easier than in any other fight up to that point in his career. He also got badly beaten up just like their others fights. One more in a long line of brutal fights. He was not at his best for that fight. In fact, his performances had dropped off considerably well before even Barrera III. Try watching their fights mate.
Look Sonny. You're missing the point of my post. All you see is 'hater'. Try reading it with an open mind. Which of his big names hadn't come off a very recent loss and I would consider any KO loss pretty brutal? Maybe you take terrible drops in performance and bad KO losses lighter than I do. This is in comparison to Leonard though. That's what this thread is about. Leonard and Pac.
What Pac has achieved is truly remarkable. I think you'll find that I have high praise for him indeed and even stated that in that post. But, I don't think he should be highly rated for his resume because it doesn't compare to someone like Leonard's. His greatness comes from the way he moved up weights and still beat the champs. That's what is impressive about him. His resume is on a similar level with Mayweather. They both fought many of the same people, and they both have their biggest wins earlier in their career against very, very good fighters. Neither have wins equal to anything Leonard did. The only way they could do that is to fight each other.
Him and Leonard will be close if Pac beats Mayweather or even higher for me. The reason is not for who he beat though as the only guy that compares to Leonard's wins is Mayweather and Leonard has four wins the equal of and greater than a win over Mayweather. Four. The reason they will be close or Pac higher for some is because of the fact that he won 'titles' in seven divisions.
Let me guess right? I'm a hater.
Last edited by BennyST; 04-23-2010, 05:49 AM.Comment
-
Pacquiao beat MarquezOriginally posted by C.Y. View Post
Pacquiao was an 8/1 dog to stop Delahoya
Cotto had beaten Clottey and agreed to fight at 145lbs he was not forced to do so, Cotto also said "Pacquiao was the best he had ever been in with", Cotto was also a World Champion.
Hatton was beaten at 147 by Floyd, Hatton had never lost at 140lb and was regarded as the worlds No1 at that weight.
Pacquiao lost a close decision to Morales then avenged it Twice... Morales was no where near past it.Comment
-
Morales was 'nowhere near past it'?Originally posted by sonnyboyx2 View Post
How many of his fights have you seen? You've only seen three haven't you? Morales/Pac I, II, and III.
Nowhere near past it. Five straight losses, apart from the Pac win and he's nowhere near past it.
You've certainly got an interesting viewpoint on things Sonny. I'll give you that mate.Comment
-
i only got a quarter the way through this drivel of a reply, it reads as if you are high and talking through a hole in your head... your going on about who promoted the fights when i never mentioned that in my reply to you, then you start to claim that you never said that they was not in the Top 100 or Top 1000 so i siggest you go back and read your posts, you then start to claim that they never fought at 122 or 126 etc etc the facts are that they fought and Pacquiao beat them, you claimed that Pacquiao never beat Marquez yet he did beat Marquez wether you like it or not, then you atart going on about Muhammad Ali & Larry Holmes so i gave up reading from there onwards... you need to dry-out mate, go seek councilling for your addictionOriginally posted by BennyST View Post
Hmmm, ok. Everyone is a hater these days. I knew you would bring that up. It's the standard answer these days to anything someone doesn't agree with when they don't have anything better to say.
No, those guys are not rated in their divisions top ten for ATG's. That is honestly a silly call.
If you do nothing else, at least tell me who your top ten ATG's for WW with Cotto and Oscar being in your top ten? Explain the Hatton top ten at 140 too. Tell me the way you would rate them all in the top ten of their best division. Please. Or what about 126/130 for Marquez, Morales and Barrera which is where Pac fought them all and only beat Barrera at 126. He didn't beat Marquez at 126. Anyway, how are they in the top ten for these weights? Explain the top ten business for me and everyone please because I'm struggling with that one.
Anyway, first up, you obviously never saw Pac and Morales fight at 122, because if you had you would know it would have resulted in a Morales win every fight at 122.
Also, I never said they weren't comfortable at the weights where Pac beat them. Find that and show me. I said Barrera and Morales are only possible top ten guys at 122 and Pac only beat Barrera at 126/130 and Morales at 130. I didn't say those guys weren't comfortable there (except for Morales. He was shocking at 130). It wasn't their best weight though. Barrera was still absolutely great at 126 which is why it's Pac's best win. Their whole careers were defined by their respective runs at 122, anything else was just icing on the cake.
Where are you reading this stuff man? I never said they don't make a top 100. Again, find where I said that. I said, depending on who you talk to, they can be rated usually between 75-ish to 150-ish ie. around the top 100. Different people have them in different spots though the usual placing is for them all to be between 75-100. I didn't say Oscar isn't a top 100 fighter so why would you bring it up as if I did?
Now, obviously the top 1000 was an exaggeration but neither Morales or Oscar were world champs when Pac fought them nor was either P4P rated. How do you figure that? Marquez and Barrera were the only P4P rated guys when Pac fought them. Maybe Oscar had been a decade before but what does that have to do with Pac fighting him back then? They didn't fight then. Because Oscar had once been a highly rated P4P guy that means Pac beat a P4P top ten rated ATG at 147? Wow, ok. Again, Camacho must be seriously something else. He beat the number 1 ATG lightweight and top ten P4P Duran and the top 3 ATG 147 and top ten/fifteen/twenty P4P ATG in Leonard.
What does who organised the fight have to do with anything? Maybe Ali wanted and organised the fight with Holmes. Does that mean Holmes should get the full amount of credit as if he beat the best version? No, he was shot, just like Oscar. You seem to be mistaking things that happen and go on outside of the actual fight as making some kind of difference to their placing, importance and ability of said fighters or their placing of years before. It doesn't matter who organised the damn fight because when they fought Oscar was shot. What does the promotion for stuff matter in the placing and performance of the fight?
With Hatton, again, it doesn't matter who called for the fight and it was actually Roach and Pac that wanted it. It still doesn't matter. It doesn't change the performance of the fight or Hatton's recent performances and KO loss. I don't understand why you bring that up as it doesn't relate to the actual fight. What matters is where a fighter is, how he fights, what happens afterward and before etc etc. Who calls for it means jack **** to how high you then rate someone because of it.
Marquez lost the first fight? News to me. I always thought it was a draw. Maybe I'm delusional.
Yeah, Morales and Pac I and II were great fights. Amazing fights. I have watched them a million times. What does that mean for his rating against Leonard though? Should Pac be rated higher for having good, hard, close exciting wars? That would mean Gatti should be way higher than both. I'm a bit lost as to why you bring these things up? As for Morales being at the top of his game, I think I'll have to simply very, very strongly disagree and leave it at that. He is one of my AT favourites and I had watched him from near the start of his career and have seen every fight of his many times. He was not near the top of his game in any fight. It was very sad for me to watch those fights because it's obvious he is a shell of his former great self. He fought one last good fight in the first one, but it was still bad in comparison to the rest of his career. Maybe you need to actually watch and study Morales from before his Pac fights and before his 130 days to see just what kind of fighter he was at 122. There is a world of difference between the guy that first fought Pac and the guy that fought Barrera I, Zaragoza, etc.
Yes, Morales had just been in another FOTY against Barrera. He looked slower, more lackluster and easier to hit than ever before and he got beaten easier than in any other fight up to that point in his career. He also got badly beaten up just like their others fights. One more in a long line of brutal fights. He was not at his best for that fight. In fact, his performances had dropped off considerably well before even Barrera III. Try watching their fights mate.
Look Sonny. You're missing the point of my post. All you see is 'hater'. Try reading it with an open mind. Which of his big names hadn't come off a very recent loss and I would consider any KO loss pretty brutal? Maybe you take terrible drops in performance and bad KO losses lighter than I do. This is in comparison to Leonard though. That's what this thread is about. Leonard and Pac.
What Pac has achieved is truly remarkable. I think you'll find that I have high praise for him indeed and even stated that in that post. But, I don't think he should be highly rated for his resume because it doesn't compare to someone like Leonard's. His greatness comes from the way he moved up weights and still beat the champs. That's what is impressive about him. His resume is on a similar level with Mayweather. They both fought many of the same people, and they both have their biggest wins earlier in their career against very, very good fighters. Neither have wins equal to anything Leonard did. The only way they could do that is to fight each other.
Him and Leonard will be close if Pac beats Mayweather or even higher for me. The reason is not for who he beat though as the only guy that compares to Leonard's wins is Mayweather and Leonard has four wins the equal of and greater than a win over Mayweather. Four. The reason they will be close or Pac higher for some is because of the fact that he won 'titles' in seven divisions.
Let me guess right? I'm a hater.Comment
-
Ray Leonards best career wins was Benitez, Duran (3), Hearns (1) Hagler...
Manny Pacquiaos best career wins are, Marquez (2), Morales (2) Barrera (1) Delahoya.
Now which ever way you want to look at it all these victories are over IBHOF fighters... its no good claiming they should have fought at 126lb or 147lbs etc or that he beat him when he was past it or that most people did not think he won... the fact is that they did win... Manny Pacquiao will be ranked as the greatest fighter in the history of pro boxing if he defeats Floyd Mayweather in the coming months, should that fight not materialize then Pacquiao will still be ranked as one of the very best ATGs to claim otherwise is ridiculousComment
-
-
Really?Originally posted by sonnyboyx2 View Post
Greater than Sam Langford, Harry Greb, Muhammad Ali, Henry Armstrong, Ray Robinson, Bob Fitzsimmons, Micky Walker, Joe Louis?
Comment
Comment