How is Pac still ranked P4P #1 on BS?

[Bushbaby]

Everything about the reasoning was rather ******.

[.:: JSFD26 ::.]

I agree but beating Bradley doesn't make you number 1. And I thought he lost to Marquez so I don't understand how he's ranked number on this site.

Why not? Bradley was/is ranked P4P as well. So how does beating another P4P fighter not make you stay at #1 P4P?

[NearHypnos]

Well the reasoning is this. Most think he "lost" to Marauez but hecause he actually won..keeps the spot. He "beat" Bradley, but lost, rank still doesn't move. For the opposite reason as the Marquez. AKA, ranking wont change even if he gets knocked out. Thats just one persons opinion, dont let it bother you. Pac being number 1 ever is actually up to dispute, dont worry about it. We shouldnt even consider Pac or Floyd number 1... Their unwillingness to prove it (Or Arums..whateves) is ******. Floyd is really only number 1 by default.

[pdei47]

Those that keep saying pacroid beat Bradley must didn't see the score cards. The official report was a loss for pacroid. Face it *******s, he lost so he should even be mention as a p4p anything. He should be mention when it comes to PED's though since his punk ass ran away from 40 million dollars like the ***** he is.......

[Jcsuper]

Just edging JMM after underestimating him, and then beating never beaten Bradley is doing ok for no1 spot. Those 2 are better than anything Sergio has ever beat.

underestimating an opponent is one of the characteristic of a bad fighter.


Your reasoning is ******, oh well it doesnt matter if Marquez beats him cause he was underestimating him. please...

[cisjay]

it's not boxingscene's P4P, it's Cliff Rold's P4P. unlike the Ring or Yahoo, its the sole opinion of one guy, so he could have the worst list ever but it wouldn't matter, so it really means nothing.

It means nothing, until a p@ct@rd references it in an argument.

[.:: JSFD26 ::.]

Well the reasoning is this. Most think he "lost" to Marauez but hecause he actually won..keeps the spot. He "beat" Bradley, but lost, rank still doesn't move.

Well all 3 of the Marquez's fight were way closer than the one with Bradley...

[PAC-BOY]

I agree but beating Bradley doesn't make you number 1. And I thought he lost to Marquez so I don't understand how he's ranked number on this site.

He beat Bradley...a Undefeated Fighter...And even though he wasnt 100% up to himself as expected with JMM...He still won that fight. Although different people have different views od a REAL close fight. JMM wasnt robbed. He lost a close fight. Could have gone either way fight! Despite that...He won! As for Bradley...a blind man could see he beat Bradley. Dominated for other words! So why would he not be #1. Nothing has Changed!

[Jcsuper]

lol at people revisioning history. Pac-Marquez I and II were close fight.

Par-Marquez III was not, Marquez won that fight.

[Toyman]

I still rank him #1 p4p because he has been the most impressive fighter in the last few months.

I still can't see how anyone scored the 3rd fight for marquez - i tried scoring it being as generous as i can for jmm, and i still have manny winning it 7-5 [my unnbiased scorecard is 8-4 for manny]

As for the bradley fight, the ranking might be based off the fact that even though he lost, pacquiao was by far the more impressive fighter that night. The only reason he didn't win was because he took his foot off the gas and laid back for the 2nd half of the fight. This didn't sit too well with the judges - but from watching that fight, it was clear that pacquiao hurt bradley on several occasions, and was not even once hurt by bradley. If they fought again, pacquiao would in all likelihood, KO bradley.