How can this equate to "FIGHTER OF THE DECADE"?

[Poet682006]

Pac has made a career of fighting guys on the down slide

You mean like 38 year old Shane Mosley?

Poet

[F l i c k e r]

That right there seems so misinformed. That is the biggest misconception around here. Pac has been putting in work since 2001;.

I wasn't going to go searching for it, all frantic like other people would. I know it was somewhere early 2000s, so I just threw out an estimate.

The point is, Mayweather was putting in big time work before Pacquiao even became relevant, 1998. Always ranked in top 10 p4p, when Pacquiao was thinking about quitting boxing because he couldn't find a gym to train at because everyone would turn him down. Floyd was holding titles when Pacquiao was dreaming of getting a good coach.

That is the point but like I said. Maybe it would have been different if Floyd didn't retire and just took a layoff instead like Mosley does.

Floyd has a bigger claim to it but I can see why he didn't win it, if it is based on Floyd retiring. If it's based on Pacquiao beating MAB and so on... no. He shouldn't have gotten the fighter of the decade.

[littlemac]

Here's a post of mine from Operationsports boxing forums. I had gotten in a heated debate, so keep in mind the context. It was a debate comparing the two's resumes.

[-MAKAVELLI-]

I wasn't going to go searching for it, all frantic like other people would. I know it was somewhere early 2000s, so I just threw out an estimate.

The point is, Mayweather was putting in big time work before Pacquiao even became relevant, 1998. Always ranked in top 10 p4p, when Pacquiao was thinking about quitting boxing because he couldn't find a gym to train at because everyone would turn him down. Floyd was holding titles when Pacquiao was dreaming of getting a good coach.

That is the point but like I said. Maybe it would have been different if Floyd didn't retire and just took a layoff instead like Mosley does.

Floyd has a bigger claim to it but I can see why he didn't win it, if it is based on Floyd retiring. If it's based on Pacquiao beating MAB and so on... no. He shouldn't have gotten the fighter of the decade.

like i said, he was already a flyweight champ by 1999

and relevant to who? the US media? titles are titles bro...just because he didnt the promotional company like Floyd did with TR doesn't mean he wasn't 'putting in work' himself

[jrosales13]

I wasn't going to go searching for it, all frantic like other people would. I know it was somewhere early 2000s, so I just threw out an estimate.

The point is, Mayweather was putting in big time work before Pacquiao even became relevant, 1998. Always ranked in top 10 p4p, when Pacquiao was thinking about quitting boxing because he couldn't find a gym to train at because everyone would turn him down. Floyd was holding titles when Pacquiao was dreaming of getting a good coach.

That is the point but like I said. Maybe it would have been different if Floyd didn't retire and just took a layoff instead like Mosley does.

Floyd has a bigger claim to it but I can see why he didn't win it, if it is based on Floyd retiring. If it's based on Pacquiao beating MAB and so on... no. He shouldn't have gotten the fighter of the decade.

But, by 2001 Pac was already a two division champ that spanned 4 weight-classes.

How is that not putting in serious work?

[FLY TY]

tyde ****ed up the quote string

sorry...i'm not as "boxingscene savvy" as you are mak

I don't think Pacquiao deserved fighter of the 'decade'. Why? Because 3 years of doing great, doesn't equate 10 years of work.

That's why I think it's sad that Floyd didn't win it. Even Hopkins makes a better claim to fighter of the 'decade' than Pacquiao.

Ten years of work, Floyd was champion for majority of those years. He was ranked p4p top 10, 1 year after going pro and stayed top 10 until he retired.

Pacquiao wasn't even looked at until 03-04.... 10 years goes back to 99. What was Floyd doing in 99 compared to Pacquiao? Exactly.

Pacquiao won the fighter of the decade based on 3-4 years. So, it's popularity contest basically because 3 =//= 10. It's the Kevin Durant situation. Durant obviously had the stronger claim to MVP, yet Lebron James won the MVP.

No nuthuggery here, just stating the obvious. In 10 years, Floyd was doing much more than Pacquiao. It's his fault tho, he did retire, he should have just taken a break/layoff.

all i'm saying......**** doesn't matter to me b/c it's a "popularity" contest. if they meet in the ring, previous awards won't matter as much as who's the victor.....

What do you mean by this? Because, it does seem to easy for me.

i can think of 2. pacquiao and v. klit........

but that's 2 out of how manny?

fact is ricky hatton had never had anything going for him that he did "exceptionally well" that he could be KO'ed, and return and hang his hat on....

insinutating a move back down to 140, after being KTFO at 147 would "resurrect" his career, is not valid.

floyd got to him first, manny got to him second....now, hatton is seen as a garbage fighter, and the experts hardly give floyd credit for beating him, so let's not jump the gun, and rationalize manny's win over him, as anything other than a spectacular KO over an opponent who had already been spectacularly KO'ed in the past.

but like i say, J, manny won FOTD, and i'm not gonna knock him on that. like you, i just want to see the current best 2 fighters in the world, respectively, get into the ring, and see who's better there.

[AFTER HOURS]

hasegawa is a bum

[F l i c k e r]

like i said, he was already a flyweight champ by 1999

and relevant to who? the US media? titles are titles bro...just because he didnt the promotional company like Floyd did with TR doesn't mean he wasn't 'putting in work' himself

He was putting in work, I never said he didn't. I said he wasn't relevant, meaning no one even knew who he was.

Floyd was always on top, he was ranked top 10 p4p, 1yr after he got in the pro circuit. Being on top 9/10 years is more than being on top 6/10 years. That is why I think Floyd deserved it more.

Doesn't mean Pacquiao isn't great. But if they gave Pacquiao the fighter of the decade because Floyd retired, then I can see that. If they considered Floyd, regardless of the retirement. Then I don't see how they can honestly give it to Pacquiao over Floyd or even Hopkins for that matter.

[Khalid X]

1) marquez - first of all, there has been nothing concrete posted on floyd's fightnight weight.....it wasn't revealed by HBO, and floyd has never rehydrated more than a few lbs. between the weigh-in, and the actual fight. so your 155 is merely specualtion, just as it's specualtion that floyd was over 160, when he faces mosely.

in other words, if you have PROOF, feel free to post a link....

Because Floyd was too ashamed to show fightnight weights. Jim Lampley b4 marquez fight "Floyd Mayweather refuses to let us weigh him on fight night". I wonder why that was, especially considering that in each and every fight he never had a problem showing his fight night weight. Your a Floyd fan and you already know that Floyd is clearly 5-10lbs bigger than he was b4 he retired.

2) hatton - surely his best weight was 140, but you're going to tell me, manny deserves a ton of credit for that win, b/c he fought hatton at 140, while ignoring the fact hatton was KTFO a year earlier?

name any fighter that has come back, at any sort of resemblance to themselves, after being KTFO, at any weight.....

Do you really want to play this game?

Rafael Marquez got Knocked out in his first fight and went on to have a helluva career.

Barrera got (should have gotten) KO by Junior Jones, bounced back and went on one of the greatest runs in the FW division beating Morales, Tapia, Hamed, Kelly, Ayala, Sanchez and other great fighters.

Hell Manny has gotten Knocked out twice and went on the become FOTD...hence this thread...lol

3) DLH & cotto.....

surely it was oscar's own fought for picking on manny and taking the fight at 147. it was also a stipulation in the contract, that oscar couldn't rehydrate over 147, even for the fight....so yea it was oscar's fault for agreeing to that too. yet and still, even though it was his own agreeing to, does that make it any more of a better victory for manny, by fighting a severly weak and weight-drained dlh, who hadn't fought at 147 in 10 years, who by freddie roach's own admission "couldn't pull the trigger anymore?" i don't think oscar agreeing to the stipulations, takes away from the facts of the fight.

Oscar is the Cashking. No one can make Oscar do anything he doesn't want to do. You saw first hand, as a Floyd fan, how he made Floyd bend to each and every request (glove size, weight etc). Also the rehydration stuff is b.s. and no one has provided any proof of that ever being the case.

cotto - i doubt he "suggested" 145, as much as "agreeing" to 145, as opposed to 143. i seriously think, had cotto had it his way, he would've "suggested" 147. but cotto agreed, and manny won, but like 147 wasn't jmm and hatton's "best weights" as you suggested, 145 and 147 weren't cotto and oscar's best weights either....respectively.

whatever. It's still only one pound under his fight against Clottey. Cotto said before, after and till this day that he felt comfortable at that weight. If he is cool with it, why aren't you?

4) clottey - i "shudder" at the word's "dominating performance" when i hear pacquiao-clottey being described.....fact is, you look at each fighter's face after the fight, and you tell me who it looked like had gotten "dominated."

fact is, manny won more rounds than clottey, but as opposed to him doing more damage, it just seemed like clottey was content to show he could block most of the punches pacquiao threw. for his sake, pacquiao should be grateful clottey was intent on blocking punches, rather than throwing more of his own. with the fraction of the punches he did throw, he found his mark pretty easily, and i insist manny neither looked good, nor dominated clottey...

Since when do we judge fights by how they look post fight. Scores are added up way b4 that and you act like they wait to look at their faces b4 they announce a winner. Pac crushed Clottey end of story.

once again, i could care less about any FOTD awards, but at the same time, let's not OVERSTATE 1 fighter's achievments, and UNDERSTATE another's....

No disrespect, but if you didn't care, then why do you keep responding to this thread?

[jrosales13]

sorry...i'm not as "boxingscene savvy" as you are mak



all i'm saying......**** doesn't matter to me b/c it's a "popularity" contest. if they meet in the ring, previous awards won't matter as much as who's the victor.....



i can think of 2. pacquiao and v. klit........

but that's 2 out of how manny?

fact is ricky hatton had never had anything going for him that he did "exceptionally well" that he could be KO'ed, and return and hang his hat on....

insinutating a move back down to 140, after being KTFO at 147 would "resurrect" his career, is not valid.

floyd got to him first, manny got to him second....now, hatton is seen as a garbage fighter, and the experts hardly give floyd credit for beating him, so let's not jump the gun, and rationalize manny's win over him, as anything other than a spectacular KO over an opponent who had already been spectacularly KO'ed in the past.

but like i say, J, manny won FOTD, and i'm not gonna knock him on that. like you, i just want to see the current best 2 fighters in the world, respectively, get into the ring, and see who's better there.

Barrera, Lennox Lewis, Martinez and many more have been KTFO and comeback. Some has comeback better than ever.

Corrales got a beat down worse than Hatton did. And, Corrales resume is better after Floyd then before Floyd.

I mean throughout history you can find plenty of fighters who have comeback from a serious ass whoopin

I don't know why people act like if Hatton was not the same after Floyd? Because, he got put on ***** street against Lazcano? But, after Lazcano he stopped a top 10 JWW. And, people forget that before Floyd Hatton got put on ***** street and arguably lost to Collazo. And, Hatton had been dropped a few times before Floyd.

Both wins are valid neither win is better than the other. Yes Floyd beat him first but Pac beat Hatton at a weight-class that Hatton was better in. So those wins are even