Better resume: Mayweather or Pacquiao?

[Chopper417]

Manny has a better resume, Floyd wins if they fight.

[FJRod]

Pac has the better resume, but Floyd is the better boxer. Pac will also be considered greater than Floyd in the ALL TIME GREATEST list.

[junior gong]

Both great fighters, but Manny has had by far the more distinguished career. Floyd has wasted what could/should have been the best period of his career through his self imposed inactivity.

[daggum]

That's not what i implied.



It's not just about losing by KO, or losing period. It's about who you lost to and when you lost to them and the particular circumstances of those losses.

If you look at the records of most of the ATG's. I bet the overwhelming majority of them don't have 2 KO losses to journeymen in the 1st 5 years of their career. One of them being in a TITLE MATCH.

Pac's losses to sub-par opposition + a loss to a shot fighter (Erik Morales) makes his ATG ranking plummet IMHO.

I would probably rank Pac 5th or 6th among his contemporaries who are still currently active and rank as ATGs. And without a doubt below Mayweather.

how can an undefeated prospect in a title fight be a journeyman? if it's about when you lost then how can you hold 2 losses when he was a young adult against him so highly? you aren't making much sense here. people always say ko losses ruin fighters but he came back from 2 to accomplish great things. isn't that a sign of greatness? or is greatness only defined by how good you can cherry pick?

[Ryannn]

how can an undefeated prospect in a title fight be a journeyman? if it's about when you lost then how can you hold 2 losses when he was a young adult against him so highly? you aren't making much sense here. people always say ko losses ruin fighters but he came back from 2 to accomplish great things. isn't that a sign of greatness? or is greatness only defined by how good you can cherry pick?

sorry daggum, he's right.

calzaghe #1p4p ATG

[The Big Dunn]

Floyd. Manny has more names, but when he fought some of these fights those "names" were not credible opponenets. Floyd has overall quality but people assume they aren't as good because floyd dominated them so easily.

[jrosales13]

Floyd. Manny has more names, but when he fought some of these fights those "names" were not credible opponenets. Floyd has overall quality but people assume they aren't as good because floyd dominated them so easily.

The same can be said about Pac though.

[Rome-By-Ko]

IMO its even..The only way one could top the other is for them to fight...Until that time for me they are dead even...

[Paclan]

Pacquiao's featherweight resume alone beats FLoyd's entire resume

[Deal With It]

Morales was FAR from shot when he beat Manny.

How many SIGNIFICANT wins did Morales have after defeating Manny?

If Morales wasn't shot. He sure had a funny way of showing it.

how can an undefeated prospect in a title fight be a journeyman?

Easy. By not being relevant or in title contention for the remainder of his post KO of Pacquiao career.

if it's about when you lost then how can you hold 2 losses when he was a young adult against him so highly? you aren't making much sense here. people always say ko losses ruin fighters but he came back from 2 to accomplish great things. isn't that a sign of greatness? or is greatness only defined by how good you can cherry pick?

Never said Pacquiao wasn't great, or an ATG. He's just not as great as Mayweather. And it should be clear to anybody who is able to look a little bit deeper into both of their careers without bias.

It's not just the losses, it's a variety of factors. Mayweather has just been more dominant and CONSISTANT over a longer stretch of time. And without the losses to shit tier opposition and shot fighters.