Where is Manny Pacquiao in your Top ATG list?????

[B.U.R.N.E.R]

shit changes man, that's how boxing it is today .

I would love to see Manny against Mosley, that will be Pac's REAL test for Floyd.

I understand it changes but its a luxury Armstrong didnt have. Henry is a legit Top 5 all time fighter. NO fighter deserves to be compared to him.

I think after the Mora fight Shane should hang em up. he loked like he didnt even bother to prepare. He was fat and dry.

I think a good test for Pac in a sense of preparing for Floyd would be Joan Guzman at 140 Pounds.

[Ragnar Lothbrok]

hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah aha



Yes and David Haye is comparable to Joe Louis.

what a horrible comparison. how do you come up with joe louis & david haye?

there's a reason why boxing analysts, historians, & writers all who went to college, get paid to write, talk, about boxing, & whose opinion matter compare the two.

& there's also a reason why you, who lives in a deadbeat area like detroit michigan, who is a laughing stock of boxing scene, who didint go to college, who is proud to be making 15bucks an hour,


CANT GET/UNDERSTAND THE COMPARISON.

[Ragnar Lothbrok]

He's sitting around the top twenty for me at the moment. If he beats Floyd that's the only way he can get close to the top ten in my opinion. For me, unless he is going to beat the only other guy who could be considered an ATG, you can't reach the top ten. His weight accomplishment get him very close along with his excellent resume, but beating guys he is meant to beat easily isn't a feat worthy of moving him into the top ten. When was the last time he was in an even fight or an underdog that was meant to lose? Oscar? Well, Oscar wasn't an accomplishment worthy of much at all. It hasn't been since Marquez that he's had a fight that was 50/50 and unless he's fighting guys who are an actual challenge where is the greatness? Don't say "Beating big guys" because it's been done by a hell of a lot of fighters, who often won when they were meant to lose. Not won fights against bigger guys who were meant to lose the fight.

He just needs that one fight against the only fighter that will be even with him. It's great to beat guys who are decent fighters and all, but until you are beating guys who you are probably meant to lose against or that are even, hard, close fights you don't get into the top ten.

The reason he makes it as high as he does is not so much because of his resume, which is brilliant but not good enough to put him in the top ten, but his weight accomplishments. He doesn't have that one win against another prime ATG that can put him up above 15-10.

His greatest win still is Barrera. You can bring in other 'name' fighters that will make it to the HOF, like Oscar, but beating Oscar at that point is just not a good reason to get him further up. To get to the top ten he'd have to have the only other guy that can make a case for being an ATG on his resume as a win. What he has done otherwise isn't enough to put him in the top ten.

What's funny is that people are using the Marg win as a reason and huge amazing accomplishment, while forgetting that Pac was a huge favourite and was meant to beat him exactly as he did. That's not a great accomplishment. Excellent fight and good win, but top ten worthy? I don't think so. If you do what you are meant to do, what makes it so great? If he had fought the Margarito that had just finished beating Cotto and as such would probably have been an underdog, then I can understand putting him up toward ten. He was meant to easily beat and knock out Margarito though. Having accomplishments that you are meant to have, guys that you should beat on your resume doesn't equal an amazing accomplishment. Beating a guy who is bigger, but who is also meant to beat you and is the big favourite is a great accomplishment worthy of jumping into the realms of the top ten ATG's, but beating a bigger guy who is very, very beatable and is himself the huge underdog that was meant to lose....well, it's not really the thing that will put him up there.

i respect you as a boxing historian benny, but how come oldschool fighters can get credit for fighting so many times yet not always against ATGs, yet modern fighters get so tightly scrutinized for their resume & beating guys they were supposed to beat?

its ok for old school fighters to rack up wins & pad their record vs guys with 10,15,20 losses & use it as ammo for greatness, yet modern fighters get a handicap for not fighting 100 fights when it comes to ATG rankings?

[B.U.R.N.E.R]

Guzman? that man is a joke.

I would rather watch him fight Bradley instead.

Guzman has a much better chance than Bradley imo. Guzman professionally is a joke but he has a style that can give Pac some major major problems.

[TheBoxingBanger]

...Only one PROBLEM with your thread dawg...

Where is your option for:

Top 5 of all time?

[B.U.R.N.E.R]

is he a counter puncher?

Yeah. Hes like a poor mans Floyd.

Here some high lights if youve never seen him fight.

[hugh grant]

He's sitting around the top twenty for me at the moment. If he beats Floyd that's the only way he can get close to the top ten in my opinion. For me, unless he is going to beat the only other guy who could be considered an ATG, you can't reach the top ten. His weight accomplishment get him very close along with his excellent resume, but beating guys he is meant to beat easily isn't a feat worthy of moving him into the top ten. When was the last time he was in an even fight or an underdog that was meant to lose against another great fighter on the same type of win streak he has had? Oscar? Well, Oscar wasn't an accomplishment worthy of much at all considering he had lost 50% of his fights in the last five or six years. It hasn't been since Marquez that he's had a fight that was 50/50 and unless he's fighting guys who are an actual challenge and showing greatness themselves where is the greatness? Don't say "Beating big guys" because it's been done by a hell of a lot of fighters, who often won when they were meant to lose. Not won fights against bigger guys who were meant to lose the fight. That's my only beef at the moment with people putting him in the top ten. When was the last time he beat someone who hadn't lost a fight in years and can also be considered an ATG that would be an even fight?

Beating fighters who you are meant to beat and who are said to have next to no chance is not top ten worthy. Beating bigger guys is great and puts him right up there, but beating bigger guys he's meant to beat just doesn't cut it as a top ten ATG. Beating a bigger guy for an eighth title in a weight class that bigger guy wasn't even meant to be a contender in doesn't make you a top ten fighter.

He just needs that one fight against the only fighter that will be even with him. It's great to beat guys who are decent fighters and all, but until you are beating guys who you are probably meant to lose against or that are even, hard, close fights you don't get into the top ten.

The reason he makes it as high as he does is not so much because of his resume, which is brilliant but not good enough to put him in the top ten, but his weight accomplishments. He doesn't have that one win against another prime ATG that can put him up above 15-10.

His greatest win still is Barrera. You can bring in other 'name' fighters that will make it to the HOF, like Oscar, but beating Oscar at that point is just not a good reason to get him further up. To get to the top ten he'd have to have the only other guy that can make a case for being an ATG on his resume as a win. What he has done otherwise isn't enough to put him in the top ten.

What's funny is that people are using the Marg win as a reason and huge amazing accomplishment, while forgetting that Pac was a huge favourite and was meant to beat him exactly as he did. That's not a great accomplishment. Excellent fight and good win, but top ten worthy? I don't think so. If you do what you are meant to do, what makes it so great? If he had fought the Margarito that had just finished beating Cotto and as such would probably have been an underdog, then I can understand putting him up toward ten. He was meant to easily beat and knock out Margarito though. Having accomplishments that you are meant to have, guys that you should beat on your resume doesn't equal an amazing accomplishment. Beating a guy who is bigger, but who is also meant to beat you and is the big favourite is a great accomplishment worthy of jumping into the realms of the top ten ATG's, but beating a bigger guy who is very, very beatable and is himself the huge underdog that was meant to lose....well, it's not really the thing that will put him up there.

Are you trying to be a salesman with this? Maybe everyone thinks Pac is supposed to beat Margarito because everyone thinks and knows Pac is GOAT.
Pac is supposed to beat everyone he fights, for good reason. Because they can see how great he is. Its the reason he gets steroid accusations thrown at him.
Margarito fought Cotto with plaster. So no more of this if Pac beat the margarito who beat Cotto nonsense please.

Pac has already beat people he werent supposed to beat in guys like DLH. But after he beats them the excuses came. So why not make the excuses before Pac beat DLH? Always trying to discredit Pac.

[jpunieves]

i don't really know but one thing's for sure, he's wayyy up there and floyd is in his knees

[Check]

Just outside the top 10. If he beats Floyd he will be top 5 imo.

[Jim Tom]

Vote and discuss .

He never beat champions at their weight,they had to be weight drained everytime so he's basically a nobody.What makes it worse was his failure to do random blood tests and who cares about such fighters.To me he's not a great fighter,I rank him alongside Marquez