Why isn't Pacquiao's resume criticized more?

[VG_Addict]

Why doesn't Pacquiao get as much criticism for his resume as Floyd does?

Pacquiao fought David Diaz, who was AT BEST, the 5th best lightweight in the world at the time, for a belt. He fought Cotto at a catchweight, Margarito, who had already been busted for using plaster, for a vacant strap at 154, Hatton, who Floyd had already beaten, Rios, who was tailor-made for him, Matthysse, who was past-it, Algieri, who went life and death with limited Provodnikov, and Thurman, who was coming off a long layoff.

[Tatabanya]

They're both great fighters. Those who criticize them are wrong.

[IronDanHamza]

Pacquaio is just more liked because he's a nice guy with an exciting style.

Both have great resumes, both have some duds in there. That's normal for any great fighter which both of them are.

[elfag]

Pac had a great run and then he hit a wall where he stopped getting knockouts. But look around at all the other fighters before and after him. I been watching boxing since 1999 and Pac still has like one of the best resumes there. Probably 2nd best behind floyd

[BodyBagz]

I've been criticizing his lame resume for a while.
When his fans blurt out ''8 div king'', I ask them to name those 8 fighters.
I get no names.

His WW resume is the most pathetic run for such a notable fighter (Bud is doing his best to ''top'' it but isn't nearly active enough).

[Cash in]

I've been criticizing his lame resume for a while.
When his fans blurt out ''8 div king'', I ask them to name those 8 fighters.
I get no names.

His WW resume is the most pathetic run for such a notable fighter (Bud is doing his best to ''top'' it but isn't nearly active enough).

The X amount of divisions thing does nothing for Cash, either. It's all about WHO you beat. Broner won titles in 4 divisions, Ricky Burns as well I think, and Ricky was just a good domestic fighter in reality. It's easy to make things look better than they are. Pacquaio did well vs a legend in Marquez, yes, he lost all 4 fights, but he did them Shawn Porter style. Did himself proud. Beat Cotto, pushed Khan close in sparring. The man did well. Cash in.

[BodyBagz]

The X amount of divisions thing does nothing for Cash, either. It's all about WHO you beat. Broner won titles in 4 divisions, Ricky Burns as well I think, and Ricky was just a good domestic fighter in reality. It's easy to make things look better than they are. Pacquaio did well vs a legend in Marquez, yes, he lost all 4 fights, but he did them Shawn Porter style. Did himself proud. Beat Cotto, pushed Khan close in sparring. The man did well. Cash in.

Hell yeah....

Who and WHEN to be more precise
Pac (AKA The Catchweight King) is an ATG compiler of shot fighters.

[Cash in]

Hell yeah....

Who and WHEN to be more precise
Pac (AKA The Catchweight King) is an ATG compiler of shot fighters.

Yes, BodyBagz, all about who and when. Cash, the long-lost cousin of Boxingscene Hall of Famer Nash out, completely agrees with you. Cash in

[Flickergrab98]

Why doesn't Pacquiao get as much criticism for his resume as Floyd does?

Pacquiao fought David Diaz, who was AT BEST, the 5th best lightweight in the world at the time, for a belt. He fought Cotto at a catchweight, Margarito, who had already been busted for using plaster, for a vacant strap at 154, Hatton, who Floyd had already beaten, Rios, who was tailor-made for him, Matthysse, who was past-it, Algieri, who went life and death with limited Provodnikov, and Thurman, who was coming off a long layoff.

Cause it’s a good resume. I don’t care how you spin it.
Diaz being fifth best or slightly lower still makes him a top 10 LW. That’s not something to sneeze at.
People always bring this up, but was there even any sign that Cotto had any trouble making that catchweight?
Shouldn’t you be more shocked that a guy who started his career at flyweight is even capturing belts at 154 at all? When was the last time that happened? And how long will it take before that happens again?
“Hatton, who Floyd had already beaten”. And? A guy suffers one loss against one of the best of his era, so that means he’s suddenly worthless?
I’m surprised you didn’t how Tim Bradley was someone else who had to go life and death with Provodnikov. That Russian may not be the technically sound boxer, but he’s more dangerous than you’re making him sound.
Pacquiao’s win over Thurman looks even better now in hindsight. We just saw Thurman look pretty sharp against Barrios after coming from even longer break than against Pacquiao (not to mention that Thurman did have a chance to shake off the ring rust in a bout with Lopez months before the Pacquiao fight.) Also, Pacquiao was 40 by that point, give the old guy some credit.

I don’t like it when people nitpick boxers’ pro records; it’s so easy to anyone no matter how many times they’ve proven themselves. I even avoid doing it with boxers I don’t like, such as Floyd Jr.

[Charlie Zelenoff]

Because he's a guy with an exciting style and was built up to be the Anti Floyd but when you take a closer look at his resume, the criticisms with Mayweather's resume can also be applied to Pacquiao's.