Bernard Hopkins should have won fighter of the decade.

[Don Johnson]

Cotto,Marquez,Barrera over TriniWW,Tarver and Pavlik.

You can come with some JMM get robbed,Cotto was shot BS.

Even Shot Cotto would be a bigger threat at WW than Pavlik or Tarver at 175.

I believe pac deservedly got the nod for fighter of the decade but, Tito had already established himself as a force in the MW division when he dismantled William Joppy, Tarver was considered the best LHW in the world at the time and has stayed in the top 10 since. Pavlik is widely considered the best MW in the world, a division hopkins fought at just 2 years before the fight with pavlik, hell Kelly pavlik is a light heavyweight when he re-hydrates for a fight anyway. Watch the fight, Kelly and hops were the same size. There's no way in hell Hops wins fighter of the decade tho, he's a distant 3rd place.

[El Castigador]

Mayweather shouldve won fighter of the decade.

[Khalid X]

Since my last post got deleted...I think Hopkins should have won it. Trinidad/Tarver/Pavlik>>>>Anyone else.

Barrera = Trinidad
Moving up and beating Cotto>>>>Moving up and beating Tarver
Hatton>>>>>Pavlik (Pac fought hatton at a weight he was undeated and dominated


3 lineals >>>> 2 lineals
6 belts in 6 weight classes>>>>2 belts in 2 different weight classes


I mean please explain how B-hop had a better run than Pac...

[Ben_London]

Barrera = Trinidad
Moving up and beating Cotto>>>>Moving up and beating Tarver
Hatton>>>>>Pavlik (Pac fought hatton at a weight he was undeated and dominated


3 lineals >>>> 2 lineals
6 belts in 6 weight classes>>>>2 belts in 2 different weight classes


I mean please explain how B-hop had a better run than Pac...

Firstly he fought Cotto at 145 lbs. Secondly Pavlik pisses on Hatton.
Thirdly it was easier for Pacquiao to go through more weight divisions as at the lower weights there are less differences in lbs than at the higher weights, i,e Bantam to super bantam, feather to super feather. Barrera=Passed his best, Trinidad=Undefeated beast.

[Don Johnson]

Mayweather shouldve won fighter of the decade.

this is not surprising coming from you.....If mayweather didn't "retire", maybe so but, as it stands Pacquiao is the obvious winner. Floyd didn't fight the best in his higher divisions, he didn't fight tszyu, marg, cotto, mosley(within the decade timespan) while they were at the top of their divisions.

[Khalid X]

Firstly he fought Cotto at 145 lbs. Secondly Pavlik pisses on Hatton.
Thirdly it was easier for Pacquiao to go through more weight divisions as at the lower weights there are less differences in lbs than at the higher weights, i,e Bantam to super bantam, feather to super feather. Barrera=Passed his best, Trinidad=Undefeated beast.

Pac went from 122 to 147 which is a 25lb difference. B-hop went from 160-175 which is a 15lb difference. Also B-hop is only a two division champ while Manny is a 6 division champ in that same time frame.

The Barrera that Pac beat was one of the greatest FW of all time and just came off of beating 3 future HOF fighters, Ranked in the top 3 p4p, cemented his legacy as a HOF and one of the greatest mexican boxers of all time. Marco Antonio Barrera is alot higher in the ATG rankings than trinidad, so a when over him is alot bigger.

Also Pavlik has never looked good above 160 (expect for his one defense against Taylor). B-hop dragged him two divisions up for a catchweight at 170. Real talk....Hatton was more dominate as a champ than pavlik....and Manny beat him at the weight he was dominate at.

Really though....what's the point of arguing? It was a landslide amongst some of the most knowledgeable boxing insiders in the sport. I find it funny that you feel that many "insiders" can all be wrong

[Ben_London]

Pac went from 122 to 147 which is a 25lb difference. B-hop went from 160-175 which is a 15lb difference. Also B-hop is only a two division champ while Manny is a 6 division champ in that same time frame.

The Barrera that Pac beat was one of the greatest FW of all time and just came off of beating 3 future HOF fighters, Ranked in the top 3 p4p, cemented his legacy as a HOF and one of the greatest mexican boxers of all time. Marco Antonio Barrera is alot higher in the ATG rankings than trinidad, so a when over him is alot bigger.

Also Pavlik has never looked good above 160 (expect for his one defense against Taylor). B-hop dragged him two divisions up for a catchweight at 170. Real talk....Hatton was more dominate as a champ than pavlik....and Manny beat him at the weight he was dominate at.

Really though....what's the point of arguing? It was a landslide amongst some of the most knowledgeable boxing insiders in the sport. I find it funny that you feel that many "insiders" can all be wrong

Thank you for confirming my point. The Barrera that fought Pac (lets just say the first fight) was already considered to be past his best after his Morales wars.

Regarding Pavlik, your argument is absurd, Pavlik is a massive middleweight and he blamed illness not the weight on his own performance.

Hopkins beat Pavlik and Tarver when he was in his 40's, that in itself is simply sensational.

[Pullcounter]

Since my last post got deleted...I think Hopkins should have won it. Trinidad/Tarver/Pavlik>>>>Anyone else.

bernard hopkins should've fought roy jones a decade ago

[General Zod]

I believe pac deservedly got the nod for fighter of the decade but, Tito had already established himself as a force in the MW division when he dismantled William Joppy

Yes. Tito did establish himself as a MW with his impressive win over Joppy, but Joppy is not an elite fighter, his best win is a 50 year old Duran. Tito was completely schooled by both Hopkins and Winky so he was at best a B class MW

Tarver was considered the best LHW in the world at the time and has stayed in the top 10 since.

Tarver isn't very good, the fact that he was able to get to the top of the LHW division just shows how weak the division was. Outside of beating Jones what has he done? He got koed by Harding a journeyman and got outboxed by Johnson another journeyman. His best win since losing to Hopkins is Clinton Woods.

Pavlik is widely considered the best MW in the world, a division hopkins fought at just 2 years before the fight with pavlik, hell Kelly pavlik is a light heavyweight when he re-hydrates for a fight anyway. Watch the fight, Kelly and hops were the same size. There's no way in hell Hops wins fighter of the decade tho,

Kelly does rehydrate uo to LHW that is true just like Hopkins used to do when he was fighting at MW. But when he fought Hopkins he was outweighed by either 9-16 lbs depending on your source. He has achieved nothing at LHW so a win over him at LHW is hardly great.

he's a distant 3rd place.

Not even close

[General Zod]

Thank you for confirming my point. The Barrera that fought Pac (lets just say the first fight) was already considered to be past his best after his Morales wars.

Bareera was a bit past prime when he lost to Pac, that is true but he still had enough left to beat Morales again. Whats Tito best win after losing to Hopkins, Mayorga?

Regarding Pavlik, your argument is absurd, Pavlik is a massive middleweight and he blamed illness not the weight on his own performance.

Hopkins was also a massive MW, he come fight night he would walk into the ring as a 6'1 LHW. Pavlik has achieved nothing at LHW so beating at that weight means what exactly?

Hopkins beat Pavlik and Tarver when he was in his 40's, that in itself is simply sensational.

Tarver isn't very good and Pavlik has achieved nothing at LHW. Pavlik is at best a C plus boxer but due to his reach and power at MW, he is a A class MW. If you make him move up two divisons he loses his reach and power advantage and he becomes a C class LHW. If Hopkins wanted to be fighter of the decade he has to do a lot better than cherry picking his opponents from the lower divisons and beating a corpse of Jones. He would have to beat some elite LHW's, something which he will never do.