Canelo’s Resume vs Pacquiao’s Resume

[gamesworn]

Regarding Hopkins vs Pacquaio over 40+ yo fights. While Pacquiao has arguably better win, Hopkins is definitely better. Hopkins had more fights over 40 and many of his achievements came from those years, and the main reason why people ranks him highly.

[gamesworn]

As of right now, Pacquiao has more HOF’ers on his resume than Canelo.

Canelo has GGG 3x, Cotto, and Mosley*.

Pacquiao has, Barrera, Morales, Marquez, Cotto, Bradley, Hatton and Mosley*.

*Mosley was old and past prime.

Canelo is also not helping himself by fighting guys coming up 2 weight classes like Charlo, fighting guys like Berlanga (rumored), and ducking Benavidez pretty hardcore.

Lara, Trout, Ryder, Munguia, Plant, Saunders, C. Smith, L. Smith, Kovalev, Jacobs, Rhodes, were all top 10 contenders of his time that he HAD to fight or else critics would’ve accused him of ducking them. That’s just the truth.

To be fair though, there weren’t many HOF fighters Canelo could fight from 154 to 175. He pretty much fought them all. Which HOF fighters did he realistically have available to him? Mayweather? He fought him. Cotto? He fought him. GGG? He fought him 3x. Mosley? He was old and past it but I guess he counts in HOF bracket.

Which other HOF’ers did Canelo have available? Jacobs was a good top 3 opponent but I don’t think he’s getting in. He cleaned out 168 but who knows which one of those guys are HOF bound, likely none, they were all just good contenders.

He fought Bivol who has a shot at the HOF imo, but couldn’t beat him. He hasn’t fought Benavidez who may have a shot at the HOF as long as he stays away from Bivol and Beterbiev.

There aren’t many GREAT fighters left for Canelo to fight. Benavidez, Bivol rematch, and Beterbiev. That’s it. And beating those 3 won’t ***** Pacquiao’s resume. Canelo doesn’t really have the opportunity to surpass or even match Pacquiao’s resume.

On top of that Pacquiao has

- KO/TKO many against his best oppositions.
- A natural Lightweight/Junior Welterweight Competing AT Welterweight (which a lot people loves to ignore this). WW Fighters ballooning up over 150-160 at fight nights.
- Broke so many records that may never be broken in our lifetimes.

[IronDanHamza]

Regarding Hopkins vs Pacquaio over 40+ yo fights. While Pacquiao has arguably better win, Hopkins is definitely better. Hopkins had more fights over 40 and many of his achievements came from those years, and the main reason why people ranks him highly.

Can’t get my head round the idea of Pacquaio having a better win.

How could Thurman be a better win than Tarver for example? Who Hopkins moved up two weight classes to beat and was the #1 LHW in the world?

[Roadblock]

Can’t get my head round the idea of Pacquaio having a better win.

How could Thurman be a better win than Tarver for example? Who Hopkins moved up two weight classes to beat and was the #1 LHW in the world?

That baffled me as well Thurman was a long way from his form years earlier, I think guys run off a name without seeing what form they in, years sidelined with multiple surgery nearly stopped in his comeback by a worn Lopez who Maidana stopped, the bookies were right on it making Manny favourite, if it was Thurman that beat Danny and Porter he would have been a short favorite.


I don't know why this forum throws a wobbly with images, been broken for ages.

f391cd32963d557798b6a69de8ac41f6_xl.jpg

[gamesworn]

Can’t get my head round the idea of Pacquaio having a better win.

How could Thurman be a better win than Tarver for example? Who Hopkins moved up two weight classes to beat and was the #1 LHW in the world?

The idea is Pacquaio was supposed to be shot at this point of his career and had been in ring wars way more than Hopkins. Hopkins is older, but Pacquiao is older in terms of ring age. Pac has been in the pros since 16 years old. Hopkins started in his 20s.

Btw i personally do have Hopkins win over Tarver as better win than Pacquaio over Thurman, but i can see why some thinks Pac win is greater.

[gamesworn]

That baffled me as well Thurman was a long way from his form years earlier, I think guys run off a name without seeing what form they in, years sidelined with multiple surgery nearly stopped in his comeback by a worn Lopez who Maidana stopped, the bookies were right on it making Manny favourite, if it was Thurman that beat Danny and Porter he would have been a short favorite.


I don't know why this forum throws a wobbly with images, been broken for ages.

f391cd32963d557798b6a69de8ac41f6_xl.jpg

Injury is part of the sport, you see boxers getting in the hospital after a fight. Thurman was young and still in his prime at that time.

[IronDanHamza]

The idea is Pacquaio was supposed to be shot at this point of his career and had been in ring wars way more than Hopkins. Hopkins is older, but Pacquiao is older in terms of ring age. Pac has been in the pros since 16 years old. Hopkins started in his 20s.

Btw i personally do have Hopkins win over Tarver as better win than Pacquaio over Thurman, but i can see why some thinks Pac win is greater.

Pacquaio wasn’t supposed to be shot. Based on what?

He’d just beat Broner with ease and stopped Mattysse, and many argue hadn’t lost since Mayweather coking off a run of Vargas, Bradley, Horn, Matthse and Broner. How would that be perceived as shot?

He was the betting favourite to beat Thurman.

Unlike Hopkins who was underdog against Tarver. As well as Pavlik, Wright and Cloud also.

It’s absolutely asinine to compare the two resumes post 40.

[gamesworn]

Pacquaio wasn’t supposed to be shot. Based on what?

He’d just beat Broner with ease and stopped Mattysse, and many argue hadn’t lost since Mayweather coking off a run of Vargas, Bradley, Horn, Matthse and Broner. How would that be perceived as shot?

He was the betting favourite to beat Thurman.

Unlike Hopkins who was underdog against Tarver. As well as Pavlik, Wright and Cloud also.

It’s absolutely asinine to compare the two resumes post 40.

I'm with you with Hopkins. I'm just saying Pacquaio win over Thurman has a case and i understand why some fans arguing with it.

Thurman may not be the man on the division BUT he was one of the top WW of his time, the other one was Spence. Crawford was not campaigning yet at WW at this time, if i remember it correctly. It was really an impressive win by Pacquiao. Pacquiao had one more fight after Thurman and retired from boxing. Bernard continued to fight at top level years after the Tarver fight. Pacquiao like i said has more ring age than Hopkins even though they were both 40s.

Fans will always argue which one is better but its all going to be subjective since everyone has their own criteria. At the end of the day, these are both great wins by both fighters.

[IronDanHamza]

I'm with you with Hopkins. I'm just saying Pacquaio win over Thurman has a case and i understand why some fans arguing with it.

Thurman may not be the man on the division BUT he was one of the top WW of his time, the other one was Spence. Crawford was not campaigning yet at WW at this time, if i remember it correctly. It was really an impressive win by Pacquiao. Pacquiao had one more fight after Thurman and retired from boxing. Bernard continued to fight at top level years after the Tarver fight. Pacquiao like i said has more ring age than Hopkins even though they were both 40s.

Fans will always argue which one is better but its all going to be subjective since everyone has their own criteria. At the end of the day, these are both great wins by both fighters.

No that’s not true, Crawford was the #1 in the division when Pacquaio fought Thurman. Pacquaio was supposed to fight Crawford 3 years prior but fought Jeff Horn instead.

But yes Thurman was one of the top WW’s, #3 to be exact. And it’s a very impressive win but it’s certainly not the best win between them, in al honestly Hopkins has multiple which are better or at the very least arguable better.

Pacquaio beat one ranked fighter post age 40. Hopkins beat three #1 ranked guys, P4P guys and multiple Top 5 guys. There is no comparison.

[SouthpawRight]

As of right now, Pacquiao has more HOF’ers on his resume than Canelo.

Canelo has GGG 3x, Cotto, and Mosley*.

Pacquiao has, Barrera, Morales, Marquez, Cotto, Bradley, Hatton and Mosley*.

*Mosley was old and past prime.

Canelo is also not helping himself by fighting guys coming up 2 weight classes like Charlo, fighting guys like Berlanga (rumored), and ducking Benavidez pretty hardcore.

Lara, Trout, Ryder, Munguia, Plant, Saunders, C. Smith, L. Smith, Kovalev, Jacobs, Rhodes, were all top 10 contenders of his time that he HAD to fight or else critics would’ve accused him of ducking them. That’s just the truth.

To be fair though, there weren’t many HOF fighters Canelo could fight from 154 to 175. He pretty much fought them all. Which HOF fighters did he realistically have available to him? Mayweather? He fought him. Cotto? He fought him. GGG? He fought him 3x. Mosley? He was old and past it but I guess he counts in HOF bracket.

Which other HOF’ers did Canelo have available? Jacobs was a good top 3 opponent but I don’t think he’s getting in. He cleaned out 168 but who knows which one of those guys are HOF bound, likely none, they were all just good contenders.

He fought Bivol who has a shot at the HOF imo, but couldn’t beat him. He hasn’t fought Benavidez who may have a shot at the HOF as long as he stays away from Bivol and Beterbiev.

There aren’t many GREAT fighters left for Canelo to fight. Benavidez, Bivol rematch, and Beterbiev. That’s it. And beating those 3 won’t ***** Pacquiao’s resume. Canelo doesn’t really have the opportunity to surpass or even match Pacquiao’s resume.

Alvarez has given us many big fights

I would not call myself a fan, but I respect what he has done in boxing