Pacquiao Deserves BWAA Fighter Of The Decade Award

[Mr. Ryan]

It depends how you behave in the ring.

You're talking about the BWAA and their criteria, right? I'm in the BWAA and I'm telling you, not giving my opinion but the answer, that style of fighting and temperment was not a factor in the decision. It was on achievements.

If Yuri Foreman beat Bernard Hopkins, Winky Wright, Cotto, Paul Williams, Mayweather and Oscar de la Hoya, he probably would have gotten it instead.

[Vadrigar.]

You're talking about the BWAA and their criteria, right? I'm in the BWAA and I'm telling you, not giving my opinion but the answer, that style of fighting and temperment was not a factor in the decision. It was on achievements.

If Yuri Foreman beat Bernard Hopkins, Winky Wright, Cotto, Paul Williams, Mayweather and Oscar de la Hoya, he probably would have gotten it instead.

actually you have a point there. I agree.

lol, I didn't know you were in the BWAA. Sorry.

But yes, achievements is a stronger argument and if I'm not mistaken, pacquiao has held more ring titles hasn't he?

He also defeated a prime barrera.

[Vadrigar.]

there are some real troll posts going on in this forum. I have ignored some users already.

[Philrick]

nice reebok shoes floyd,too bad u not sponsored by nike cuz dey know dat ur not da best.....

[Vadrigar.]

nice reebok shoes floyd,too bad u not sponsored by nike cuz dey know dat ur not da best.....

he's allied with amir khan in reebok

[hugh grant]

Hes beaten HOF'ers and ATGs for the last 7 years so deserves it. If he did more than he has already done, then he would be not human. And as far as i know, he is human.
In the fights hes had, it is impossible to do more than he did.

[jltsmae]

last time i checked the sport was called "boxing" not "fighting"

TAKE the damn USADA test is the right argument here.

[Vadrigar.]

TAKE the damn USADA test is the right argument here.

...........................

[cortdawg25]

The appointment to declare Pacquiao as "Fighter of the Decade" was made and I respect the decision of the committee that voted, but I can understand the plight of those who feel he didn't deserve it as well. When I think about the last decade in the sport, I can think of a few fighters one could argue deserved it equally as much or greater. Despite the losses to Taylor and Calzaghe, Hopkins did soundly defeat Trinidad, Oscar Dela Hoya, Wright, Tarver, and a few others. Lennox Lewis retired early in the decade, but he was pretty solid. I think Calzaghe and the K-Bros did a very good job over that span, as well. As it relates to Floyd Mayweather jr., I won't get into another senseless debate about who deserves what, but lets look at the accomplishments and remove the names - then you decide which person you would vote for:

FIGHTER (A) - (Notable fights between '99 and '10)

KO'd Rd 3 by Singsurat (09/17/99); Draw against Sanchez (11/10/01) - (had Sanchez not lost two points on low blows, this would have been a lost for fighter (A), as well). Sanchez never received a rematch. Fighter (A) fought a couple not-so-popular fighters outside the country over the next two years before facing and defeating Barrera in 11/03. Next, Fighter (A) has a highly questionable Draw against Marquez in 05/04, then suffers a loss (03/15/05) to Morales by unanimous decision. Over the following 2 years, Fighter (A) fought Morales two more times, Barrera again, received a questionable split decision victory in a rematch against Marquez, faced 3 other decent opponents, then in 2008 began his true ascent to new heights by climbing up in weight and defeating lightweight Diaz, jr. middleweight turned welterweight Oscar Dela Hoya, jr. welterweight Hatton, reduced welterweight Cotto, and into the new decade, Clottey.

FIGHTER (B) - (Notable fights between '99 and '10)

Coming off of victories over (Angel) Manfredy and Genaro Hernandez, Fighter (B) also defeated Corrales (RIP), Jesus Chavez, Castillo by narrow decision, unanimously in an immediate rematch; followed by Mitchell, Corley, Gatti, Judah, (lineal champ) Carlos Baldomir, jr. middleweight Oscar Dela Hoya (in his natural weight division), Hatton as a welterweight, Marquez as a welterweight, and Mosley.

Fighter (A) made a great push from 2008 to current, but a few losses and repetitive competition would dampen his position in my book when you consider that Fighter (B) faced very credible opposition, and removed all doubt by solidifying questionable victories. Another key point of contention is that Fighter (B) faced several co-divisional champions; wherein Fighter (A) rarely faced and never once defeated a co-champion from any of his respective weight classes, reaching a Draw with both Sanchez and Marquez, and losing to Morales. These facts present a compelling case, but apparently those that decided never took these things into consideration.


Vivek Wallace

[Boss2k10]

If the award was for entertainment than Pacquiao deserves it. As he was clearly involved in the more action packed fights.

If its in terms of achievemnt then Mayweather clearly deserves it. Mayweather went unbeaten throughout the decade and the only time he came close to losing was due to injury. Beat the best 130lber going in Corrales, beat the best 135lber in Castillo, Hatton was the best at 140 but ducked a fight when PBF was there so PBF fights him at 147 where he had previously won a belt. Baldomir was the lineal champ at 147 and judah was the former lineal champ. Most people perceived DLH to be the best at 154 and PBF beat him.

Mosley was asked for a fight in 2006 he rejected it, Cotto rejected a fight with PBF, Pwill has never had a good run at 147 as a champ, Margarito was later caught for alleged cheating. So not as if he didnt try to fight the people he was accused of ducking.