'Pacquiao more influential than Kobe, LeBron and Tiger'

[VatoMulatto]

Just making sure you knew you were properly owned.

At first I thought they were joking with all this unrealistic Manny talk, but that's obviously not the case. They are indeed clueless and completely out of touch with reality.

[ThePunchingBag]

I love your "lol" - but ummmm, read up dude, everything I said pertained to my writing on topic. Fail. I got more facts and polls and articles coming for you and your boyfriends dumb ass. Sit tight, while you're flapping your gums at will based on your views, I'm PROVING to you, that you're just plain and simple wrong. Unless you want to show ME SOME FACTS. So, back to owning your ass' some more. This is too fun to quit.

Baracuda is right. You went off topic by talking about how much money Woods makes over Pacquiao and how much he's done for golf, instead of talking about each of their global influence. Seriously you're posting like an incoherent ****** who ignores the subject at hand and only wants to argue about conclusions he's derived from irrelevant facts. Not worth arguing with if every time you post you think "I PWNED J00 WIF MAI FACTZ" when your facts have nothing to do with Pac's or Tiger's global popularity.

[roundingace]

https://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29569,1894410,00.html

Scroll down to "heroes and icons" Notice where Tiger ranks and where Manny ranks. Gee, I guess Time magazine is behind askmen.com too huh?

[roundingace]

Baracuda is right. You went off topic by talking about how much money Woods makes over Pacquiao and how much he's done for golf, instead of talking about each of their global influence. Seriously you're posting like an incoherent ****** who ignores the subject at hand and only wants to argue about conclusions he's derived from irrelevant facts. Not worth arguing with if every time you post you think "I PWNED J00 WIF MAI FACTZ" when your facts have nothing to do with Pac's or Tiger's global popularity.

I think my previous post should help on that subject of "global popularity"

[roundingace]

https://www.forbes.com/2009/06/03/forbes-100-celebrity-09-athletes_slide_11.html?thisSpeed=15000

Manny is ranked 57th. Fail in comparison to Tiger who is 5th.

[Sweet Pea 50]

lol......proves nothing!......like i expected!

OMG! You got me! The first 9 figure athlete, EVER, not a Formula 1 driver, not a "footie" player. Nope. A gawdamn Yank raised in "Fat Yank Land."

[ThePunchingBag]

https://www.time.com/time/specials/p...894410,00.html

Scroll down to "heroes and icons" Notice where Tiger ranks and where Manny ranks. Gee, I guess Time magazine is behind askmen.com too huh?

You mean Time magazine gets to decide who is more popular globally? Isn't that what a public poll is for? Isn't that what the AskMen.com ranking is? I think that proves the point.... Stop bringing up irrelevant links since you can't find an article where the global internet community has actually voted Tiger over Manny... Good luck finding that one buddy..

[roundingace]

You mean Time magazine gets to decide who is more popular globally? Isn't that what a public poll is for? Isn't that what the AskMen.com ranking is? I think that proves the point.... Stop bringing up irrelevant links since you can't find an article where the global internet community has actually voted Tiger over Manny... Good luck finding that one buddy..

And by globally, do you mean 500k voters? Is THAT your definition of GLOBAL INFLUENCE based off of 500K VOTERS?

"The ranks associated with each of the men on the Top 49 list were determined by a vote hosted on AskMen.com. Readers were presented with a list of approximately 200 candidates and asked to vote for those who had influenced them the most throughout 2009 - the men who had the greatest impact on how other men behave, dress, buy, and think. After more than 500,000 votes were tallied, the results were averaged out with AskMen.com's staff's own ratings. The resulting final scores provided the basis for the list of the Top 49 Most Influential Men of 2009."

So, as well as it being the most anorexic of sample sizes in voter turn out, it wasn't even an accurate one because the results were averaged with AskMen.com staffers LMAO. Can I say I owned you now Mr. I'm basing all of my argument on 500k voters LMMFAO. God this was fun.

[ThePunchingBag]

And by globally, do you mean 500k voters? Is THAT your definition of GLOBAL INFLUENCE based off of 500K VOTERS?

"The ranks associated with each of the men on the Top 49 list were determined by a vote hosted on AskMen.com. Readers were presented with a list of approximately 200 candidates and asked to vote for those who had influenced them the most throughout 2009 - the men who had the greatest impact on how other men behave, dress, buy, and think. After more than 500,000 votes were tallied, the results were averaged out with AskMen.com's staff's own ratings. The resulting final scores provided the basis for the list of the Top 49 Most Influential Men of 2009."

So, as well as it being the most anorexic of sample sizes in voter turn out, it wasn't even an accurate one because the results were averaged with AskMen.com staffers LMAO. Can I say I owned you now Mr. I'm basing all of my argument on 500k voters LMMFAO. God this was fun.

So only 500k voters and Pac stills comes on top over Woods? You'd think if Woods was as popular as you claim, with that amount of voters, most probably being American, then he would be higher ranked than Pacquiao. You are having too much fun for losing an argument by not providing any substantive evidence other than the above post. Thanks for proving me right. Try again next time.

[roundingace]

Oh, and just to show how small it was, AskMen.com, if you look above their logo on their homepage, says "7 million readers a month". Also, how many women played a role in these votes? How many woman read AskMen.com? So it's also fair to say not only was the sample size SMALL, but it was NOT ACCURATE, and was seamingly sexually biased. So, you lose again.