Who will be remembered as the greater fighter..

[D-MiZe]

And? So has Hopkins. Is he above Holyfield too?

Before Pacquaio, Oscar De La Hoya had achieved feats no one else in the sport had, was he above Holyfield then? No.

And, Pacquaio isn't now, IMO.

In 20 years time, he may be considered higher due to his popularity.

But, to legit historians, it's not set in stone, at all.

Hopkins isn't comparable to Pac nor is De La Hoya in the sense I'm talking about, I hate to put his name in the same sentence but Henry Armstrong is comparable.

Holyfield has the better win, is the more complete fighter, is the greatest fighter in one division and top 12 in another. Pac's popularity has nothing to do with it.

[IronDanHamza]

Hopkins isn't comparable to Pac nor is De La Hoya in the sense I'm talking about, I hate to put his name in the same sentence but Henry Armstrong is comparable.

Holyfield has the better win, is the more complete fighter, is the greatest fighter in one division and top 12 in another. Pac's popularity has nothing to do with it.

Hopkins certainly is comparable to Pacquaio.

And, both Hopkins and Oscar (Before Pacquaio) had "done things in the sport that no one else has" so by the same logic, they should also be above Holyfield.

Pacquaio's has acheieved great feats. Jimmy McLarnin achieved similar feats in the sense he beat HOF'ers from Flyweight to Welterweight also.

And of course his popularity has a lot to do with it. He's much more popular than Holyfield and which will most likely why he will be ranked higher on most lists.

Thankfully, that won't stop the legit historians from ranking them rightfully around the same place.

[D-MiZe]

Hopkins certainly is comparable to Pacquaio.

And, both Hopkins and Oscar (Before Pacquaio) had "done things in the sport that no one else has" so by the same logic, they should also be above Holyfield.

Pacquaio's has acheieved great feats. Jimmy McLarnin achieved similar feats in the sense he beat HOF'ers from Flyweight to Welterweight also.

And of course his popularity has a lot to do with it. He's much more popular than Holyfield and which will most likely why he will be ranked higher on most lists.

Thankfully, that won't stop the legit historians from ranking them rightfully around the same place.

Dan, please stop being a pedantic ****.

I've already clarified what I meant by Pacquiao doing 'something no one else has done'.

'Legit' historians?



You'd agree Bert Sugar was a 'legit' historian, perhaps the most legitimate of them all? He ranked Pac top 20, possibly higher. I wouldn't have Pac there and even though he's ahead of Holyfield, it would be by a few places. Don't think I'm one of these people who thinks Duran should be replaced by Pac or that he deserves to be anywhere near top 10.

Popularity isn't stained onto a fighter's resume, achievements and in ring ability. I have no list at hand, so I can't say precisely who'd be where. But to ridicule the poll results is a bit ****** in the sense that Pac is winning, the fact Holyfield has received so few votes and is under JMM is even more ridiculous...

[Cuauhtémoc1520]

Floyd or Manny. What they have done supersedes anything other fighters have done on that list.

[bojangles1987]

I know most of the fighters in the poll careers are not over..But you can't just take prime fighters,I would have to look at overall career...No??

Mayweather's resume doesn't compare to Holyfield's or Roy's. That's usually how greatness is determined. Unless you really care that much about popularity.

[SplitSecond]

dont know sht about holyfields achievements
but if he does suppossedly have the best achievments from the list fine, but i know pacquiao follows after that, and then jones, then hopkins, then mayweather, then mosley/marquez

[D-MiZe]

Mayweather's resume doesn't compare to Holyfield's or Roy's. That's usually how greatness is determined. Unless you really care that much about popularity.

Maybe in the sport of Pugilistic Origami, but in the sport of boxing you have to physically get in the ring and fight. Your resume on a piece of a paper isn't everything.

[bojangles1987]

Maybe in the sport of Pugilistic Origami, but in the sport of boxing you have to physically get in the ring and fight. Your resume on a piece of a paper isn't everything.

A resume is a record of who a fighter physically got in the ring and fought and who they beat. How does that not prove greatness?

[IronDanHamza]

Dan, please stop being a pedantic ****.

I've already clarified what I meant by Pacquiao doing 'something no one else has done'.

'Legit' historians?



You'd agree Bert Sugar was a 'legit' historian, perhaps the most legitimate of them all? He ranked Pac top 20, possibly higher. I wouldn't have Pac there and even though he's ahead of Holyfield, it would be by a few places. Don't think I'm one of these people who thinks Duran should be replaced by Pac or that he deserves to be anywhere near top 10.

Popularity isn't stained onto a fighter's resume, achievements and in ring ability. I have no list at hand, so I can't say precisely who'd be where. But to ridicule the poll results is a bit ****** in the sense that Pac is winning, the fact Holyfield has received so few votes and is under JMM is even more ridiculous...

I'm sorry if I came across that way. That wasn't my intention.

No I don't really consider Bert Sugar I legit historian, to be honest. I actually met Bert Sugar a few years ago, and we had quite a discussion that became quite heated But that's a tale for a rainy day.

It certainly is, though. Popularity being stained on a fighter's resume is a great way to put it. It's no coincidence back in 2008, before the Oscar fight, he wasn't considered to be on any Top 50 ATG lists despite the great work he had done up to that point.

In terms of you clarifying what you mean by Pacquaio doing things that no one has done and how that differ's to Hopkins now and Oscar a few years ago, I must have missed it. And I don't see how there situation and Pacquaio's differs and all 3 are irrelevant in regards to what's being questioned.

[D-MiZe]

A resume is a record of who a fighter physically got in the ring and fought and who they beat. How does that not prove greatness?

Seriously?

BoxRec warrior or you're just trolling?