Pacquiao is Henry Armstrong in this era, who is PBF?
Collapse
-
-
-
Comment
-
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
In training, esp. Pac's training, he prepares for the worst possible scenario. It's like when I was still in college, preparing for an exam is sometimes more difficult than the exam, itself. In the preparation, u never leave any stones unturned because u never know, one missed topic might lead to ur downfall.
So saying that boxers of today will never surpass any boxer of yesteryears is b*ll****. and for the topic, Pac, without question, is the Henry Armstrong of this era. Without Pac, Henry Armstrong's name would not even be mentioned in today's mainstream media.Comment
-
Which one of those champions were undisputed? Did any of them unify the division championship? Was David Diaz the best in the Division? Are Guzman and Valero included in that? Or the best at 135? Does the win over Cotto include that it was a 145 pound welterweight championship? Which one of those fighters is as good as Barney Ross was? Did Pacquiao ever defend his title 19 times? In any division? That's what I thought. This doesn't compare to what Armstrong did but I'm pretty much finished arguing with fools that want to believe it because of what Merchant said(as if it's gospel). If Merchant had said something complimentary about Mayweather most of the same people that think his word is bond would call him an old fool. I know that's how the game is played. Especially when I see how Max Kellerman, who is every bit as good as Merchant, is hated on here because he respects Mayweather's skills. And that lineal crap is the biggest bunch of BS I've seen in boxing today. There are too many variables surrounding it. Hell, Leon Spinks was a lineal heavyweight champion. In no way does it represent the best fighters in the division.Last edited by Calilloyd; 02-16-2010, 04:01 AM.Comment
Comment