Who has more NAMES on their resume: Pac or Mayweather?

[Jiddu Dali]

DISCLAIMER THIS IS NOT A THREAD ABOUT WHO IS THE BETTER FIGHTER.......

I see this thread today about "Who's resume is better" and it was totally overwhelming for Pac like at least 100 people voted for Pac over Mayweather. It made be wonder are these people who voted really convinced that Pacquiao has a better resume than Mayweather from top to bottom? Or is it just typical Mayweather hate?

When comparing resume's I notice a lot of Pac supporters ONLY bring up the 3 mexican fighters he fought. I dont think either of them have GLORIFIED resume's but in no way from top to bottom does Pac have a tougher or better resume than Mayweather.......

Before 2003 can you name anyone on Pac's resume? Well he was 34-2 was already Ko'ed twice and was ONLY fighting scrubs in ASIA........post 2003 Other than fighting the 3 mexican legends...who else is on his resume? I think its totally unfair to rate Pac's resume with those 3 fighters (in which was a total of 6 fights) over Mayweather's resume that has many more recognizable names and world champs. Pac has over 50 fights (14 more than Mayweather) and yet Pacquiao doesnt have more NAMES ON HIS RESUME than Mayweather nor has he beat more World Champions than Mayweather....

....with that being said...from the beginning of each of their careers from their first pro fight to now....who REALLY has the BETTER RESUME from Top to Bottom?

[-MAKAVELLI-]

top to bottom, its gotta be floyd


i mean, Bruseles, Baldomir, Sharmba Mitchell...and pretty soon, he's gonna add that red headed mexican welterweight and dmitry salita

[Guest]

top to bottom, its gotta be floyd


i mean, Bruseles, Baldomir, Sharmba Mitchell...and pretty soon, he's gonna add that red headed mexican welterweight and dmitry salita

Pre 2002 Mayweather, post- 2002 Pacquiao.

[Jiddu Dali]

top to bottom, its gotta be floyd


i mean, Bruseles, Baldomir, Sharmba Mitchell...and pretty soon, he's gonna add that red headed mexican welterweight and dmitry salita

um..try again...but seriously..you can actually defend Pac's resume b4 2003 when he was 34-2 in Asia?..

lol..come on man

[Bobby_Manila]

I say Pac.

However, it´s not just the names, but at what weight. Pac has beaten a lot of people at their natural weight. That has to count for something.

[Guest]

um..try again...but seriously..you can actually defend Pac's resume b4 2003 when he was 34-2 in Asia?..

lol..come on man

I thought I answered well and unbiasedly

[Jiddu Dali]

I say Pac.

However, it´s not just the names, but at what weight. Pac has beaten a lot of people at their natural weight. That has to count for something.

man...of course names mean something.....

tell me who has fought more World Champs then...nevermind names

[Jiddu Dali]

I thought I answered well and unbiasedly

naw u cant break the resumes up..lol...im trying figure out if anyone will vouch for Pac's padded record vs nobodies in Asia?

and that response to was Makavelli...

[shadeyfizzle]

um..try again...but seriously..you can actually defend Pac's resume b4 2003 when he was 34-2 in Asia?..

lol..come on man

So your argument that Floyd > Pacquiao is because Floyd with his olympic pedigree being fasttracked to a world title shot is better than Pacquiao turning pro at 16 and having to go through the ringer of boxing beaurocracy???

COME ON MAN!!!

[-EX-]

Pacquiao as we speak...