So is Pac an 8 division world champion or not?

[sweetpea87]

I don't even care about this 8 division champ thing. There are 9 more divisions than there used to be and now days they practically give these alphabet belts away. The only real belt is the Ring belt and plus it shouldn't be about what belt a fighter holds, but who he fights instead. I don't even think about him having a belt at 154, if the Margarito fight wouldn't have been for a belt I would give him just as much credit just for fighting such a bigger fighter.

[jrosales13]

I see Pacquiao as a legitimate two division lineal champ winner. At Flyweight & Featherweight. Before all the bogus Super, Junior straps were created, boxing was only 8 divisions. Belts are belts, but the ATG's of the past earned there mettle by beating the best in the division they competed in. Pacquiao fighting and beating Berto will make him the man @ WW, and give him recognition over Floyd IMO because Floyd @ this point simply is not fighting enough. If he does that, then I will have no further argument against Pacquiao.

But, 130 and 140 have a rich history... It has been around for like close to 80 years.

Tony Canzoneri and Barney Ross should be considered legitimate 3 division champs since they won the titles at 140 in the early 1930's..

But, that just me I guess.

[JDezi4]

I don't know if I agree with that.

Whitaker didn't win the lineal title at 154 and just won one of those useless ABC belts, but he beat a very good fighter and title holder and the much bigger strong guy. And, Whitaker won like 10 rounds against Julio Cesar Vazquez who was 53-1 and had wins over Castillejo, Marshall, and Winky. And, Pernell beat him decisively.

Doesn't get the credit for the lineal title but he SHOULD get credit for beating a true good title holder in that division even though he never defended the title.

However, that circumstances is different than Pac claim.

I said that u don't get the credit as a CHAMPION. U credit for the win. There doesn't even have to be a belt on the line at all for u to get the credit for the win. That's not what I was talkin about.

[Bastian Loc]

*******s got seriously owned in this thread and I didn't even try...

[Canelo Phresh]

Tua your a man I can respect. That said, Diaz was a joke at 135 but its a belt, he whipped Hattons ass no arguments, the cotto fight was bs catchweight, the clottey fight was gonna be pathetic just because it was clottey, and he definitely does not get a 154 title in my mind. you can legitimately argue 7 weight belt winner.

[S H A R K B O Y]

Titles are so worthless now. They're just that, a title, and since the sport is saturated in them, they don't mean as much as they did before.

[jrosales13]

I said that u don't get the credit as a CHAMPION. U credit for the win. There doesn't even have to be a belt on the line at all for u to get the credit for the win. That's not what I was talkin about.

But, I agree if we're talking about Pac 8th title.

But, Whitaker does deserve credit as a legit title holder at 154 against a good champ at the time.

[RoyalFlush]

in terms of boxing history, say a hundred years from now the number 8 will always be there and pac`s name will be tossed around as one of the great boxers of all time. under the existing rules in boxing where you have multiple belts at each division you can technically be a champ at those weight classes and pac is surely entitled to it though still arguable.

[BattleHardened]

He's an 8 division belt holder, and even then he's just a 6 division belt holder...

But to say he is a 8 division champ is sad and pathetic. He's an ATG and will always be remembered as such, but come the fuck on.

[oc9979]

He should of bought his belts here

http://www.masisboxingbelts.com/wbc.htm