Doug Fischer tells me why he puts PAC n Hopkins over money this era and all time

[Bushbaby]

I have Hopkins the highest of the 3. But Floyd over Pacman. All 3 are great, but when you actually put their accomplishments into context. The old man earned the better wins over better fighters hands down. Excluding Pacman's Barrera win. That was his greatest win and right up their with the best wins for Hop.

[hugh grant]

What I like about BH is he is taking risks at his age. He also beat at an advanced age and the opponents were in comparable ability to the guys Floyd is fighting now and even better. Tarver and Pavlik is better than Guerrero and Ortiz will ever be. Only minus for BH is that he wasn't overwhelming favourite to beat his opponents even when young and in his prime. I mean being underdog against Trinidad what is all that about?

[SplitSecond]

Pacquiao is unquestionably FOTD of the 2000's. Can't be anyone else, ***er was carrying the sport on his back the entire decade with epic fights against legit threats and winning no less.

[Divine Hammer]

the recent list posted in this column (in Friday's mailbag) simply named Pacquiao the fighter of the 2000s (so it didn't factor in anything from the 1990s or 2010s).

i absolutely agree with doug here. pacquiao is without a doubt the BEST fighter of the 2000s just liek roy was the best fighter in the 90s, etc.

who accomplished more than manny in the 2000s?? who was more exciting and in more dramatic, upset win, fight of the year type fights???? who ended the decade stronger????? it definitely wasn't floyd or hopkins.

it's not manny's fault that floyd decided to take a "vacation" at the last years of the decade, and that hopkins didn't nearly accomplish as much as manny did (or had better wins).

[The Big Dunn]

I emailed Doug last week surprised he replied back


This is my email and his reply...enjoy, and debate



ATG RANKINGS

Me

Why do always rate PAC over mayweather when doing your lists? PAC is a ATG and an ambassador to the sport but mayweather has the edge in to many categories to list PAC over him***8230;also that fighter of the decade accolade is pure crap considering PAC lost to a past prime morales and a draw with jmm***8230;he let Marquez back in the fight by not adjusting and being on dimensional. Mayweather went undefeated and fought better versions of hatton and DLH***8230;.also mayweather has over twice as many title fight wins, far more title defenses, defeated more champions and still took no L***8230;.also mayweather is more skilled and on par with PAC on athletic gifts***8230;you can***8217;t measure the mind so people always look at aesthetic things***8230;mayweather also better at making adjustments mid fight***8230;.no need for so many fight series if you win clearly***8230;both are ATG but in my book mayweather is the best of this era***8230;after may 2nd that has been made crystal clear. ***8211; OkDarrien


Dougie's reply

You can certainly make an argument that Mayweather is the best of this era, and thus ahead of Pacquiao on any sort of all-time pound for pound list. I guess it all depends on your criteria. Just to be clear, though, the recent list posted in this column (in Friday***8217;s mailbag) simply named Pacquiao the fighter of the 2000s (so it didn***8217;t factor in anything from the 1990s or 2010s).

I could have easily gone with Mayweather or Bernard Hopkins as the fighter of the 2000s. Like I said, it comes down to what you value in a fighter***8217;s accomplishments. All three secured their eventual hall-of-fame enshrinements during the last decade. In terms of their entire careers, I consider Hopkins to be an all-time great and I rate him over both Mayweather and Pacquiao, but I have no problem with anyone who thinks that Floyd and Pac are also ATGs (or better fighters/legacies than B-Hop).

Anyway, I slightly favored the quality of Pacquiao***8217;s opposition over those that Mayweather and Hopkins faced from 2000 through 2009. Did he dominate everyone he fought? Nope. Is he as good a boxer/technician as Floyd or Bernard? Nope. But he was fiercely competitive with everyone he fought, including Marquez and Morales (who was past his prime but still dangerous and still highly rated), and he also made for many memorable fights. Pacquiao gets a lot of points from me because he dominated Marco Antonio Barrera when the Mexican master was near the top of most pound-for-pound lists and then took on one of the most avoided fighters of the late 1990s/early 2000s in JMM. Pacquiao faced Marquez when the counter-punching technician was in his prime and they fought at Marquez***8217;s prime weight class: featherweight. The two victories over Barrera, the trilogy with Morales, the draw and split decision over JMM, the chilling KO of Hatton and stoppage of Cotto held a lot of weight with me (not to mention his winning titles and champion recognition at 122, 126, 130, 135, 140 and 147 pounds).

By the way, just because Mayweather is undefeated doesn***8217;t mean he absolutely dominated everyone he faced. He arguably lost to Jose Luis Castillo in 2002 and he struggled with Zab Judah and the 2007 version of De La Hoya.

There is a reason Dougie's opinion is so different from his contemporaries- he dislikes Mayweather ever since Floyd yelled at him and embarrassed him-a fact he omitted. A little honesty would have been refreshing.

Is what it is. Most Manny fans and those that dislike Floyd have rankings/opinions that defy logic. Then when they try to explain or justify their rankings they make themselves look like they have an agenda.

[Calabis]

Lol struggled vs Judah? Yeah Judah had his moments early, but Floyd adjusted and then dominated him.

Struggled vs DLH? He fought DLH @ 154 and although it was competitive everyone knew he won. This guy is a moron

JLC, I like how he writes him off as some scrub....this fight was similar to the Pac v Marquez fights in it could of went either way, Difference Floyd rematched and dominated him.

Pac struggled against Marquez 4 times and never clearly won one fight.

Morales was a shell of himself and they brought him back down in weight.

Hatton was already finished...dude struggled vs Lazcano and Lara was beating the **** out of him and kicked out of camp.

I dont have one issue with Pac being named fighter of decade, but the guy is cleary bias when he tries to point out negatives on one guy, then gloss over the others.

[Divine Hammer]

Lol struggled vs Judah? Yeah Judah had his moments early, but Floyd adjusted and then dominated him.

Struggled vs DLH? He fought DLH @ 154 and although it was competitive everyone knew he won. This guy is a moron

JLC, I like how he writes him off as some scrub....this fight was similar to the Pac v Marquez fights in it could of went either way, Difference Floyd rematched and dominated him.

Pac struggled against Marquez 4 times and never clearly won one fight.

Morales was a shell of himself and they brought him back down in weight.

Hatton was already finished...dude struggled vs Lazcano and Lara was beating the **** at of him and kicked out of camp.

I dont have one issue with Pac being named fighter of decade, but the guy is cleary bias when he tries to point out negatives on one guy, then gloss over the others.

judah was coming off a loss, dlh was at the tail end of his career (he even admitted he had nothing left in that fight), floyd lost to castillo easily (i scored it 8-4...castillo out-landed and outworked floyd).

manny accomplished way more than floyd from 2000-2009 which is what doug is talking about. also marquez was in his absolute prime when manny fought him twice. NAME ONE LEGIT FUTURE HOF'ER AND ATG THAT FLOYD FOUGHT IN THEIR PRIME?????? hahahahahahahaha give me a break. again, it's not manny's fault that floyd took a "vacation" (avoiding the top threats) during the last years of the decade.

[Jc8804]

I emailed Doug last week surprised he replied back


This is my email and his reply...enjoy, and debate



ATG RANKINGS

Me

Why do always rate PAC over mayweather when doing your lists? PAC is a ATG and an ambassador to the sport but mayweather has the edge in to many categories to list PAC over him…also that fighter of the decade accolade is pure crap considering PAC lost to a past prime morales and a draw with jmm…he let Marquez back in the fight by not adjusting and being on dimensional. Mayweather went undefeated and fought better versions of hatton and DLH….also mayweather has over twice as many title fight wins, far more title defenses, defeated more champions and still took no L….also mayweather is more skilled and on par with PAC on athletic gifts…you can’t measure the mind so people always look at aesthetic things…mayweather also better at making adjustments mid fight….no need for so many fight series if you win clearly…both are ATG but in my book mayweather is the best of this era…after may 2nd that has been made crystal clear. – OkDarrien


Dougie's reply

You can certainly make an argument that Mayweather is the best of this era, and thus ahead of Pacquiao on any sort of all-time pound for pound list. I guess it all depends on your criteria. Just to be clear, though, the recent list posted in this column (in Friday’s mailbag) simply named Pacquiao the fighter of the 2000s (so it didn’t factor in anything from the 1990s or 2010s).

I could have easily gone with Mayweather or Bernard Hopkins as the fighter of the 2000s. Like I said, it comes down to what you value in a fighter’s accomplishments. All three secured their eventual hall-of-fame enshrinements during the last decade. In terms of their entire careers, I consider Hopkins to be an all-time great and I rate him over both Mayweather and Pacquiao, but I have no problem with anyone who thinks that Floyd and Pac are also ATGs (or better fighters/legacies than B-Hop).

Anyway, I slightly favored the quality of Pacquiao’s opposition over those that Mayweather and Hopkins faced from 2000 through 2009. Did he dominate everyone he fought? Nope. Is he as good a boxer/technician as Floyd or Bernard? Nope. But he was fiercely competitive with everyone he fought, including Marquez and Morales (who was past his prime but still dangerous and still highly rated), and he also made for many memorable fights. Pacquiao gets a lot of points from me because he dominated Marco Antonio Barrera when the Mexican master was near the top of most pound-for-pound lists and then took on one of the most avoided fighters of the late 1990s/early 2000s in JMM. Pacquiao faced Marquez when the counter-punching technician was in his prime and they fought at Marquez’s prime weight class: featherweight. The two victories over Barrera, the trilogy with Morales, the draw and split decision over JMM, the chilling KO of Hatton and stoppage of Cotto held a lot of weight with me (not to mention his winning titles and champion recognition at 122, 126, 130, 135, 140 and 147 pounds).

By the way, just because Mayweather is undefeated doesn’t mean he absolutely dominated everyone he faced. He arguably lost to Jose Luis Castillo in 2002 and he struggled with Zab Judah and the 2007 version of De La Hoya.

You can argue that collazo beat hatton. And 147 was a bad weight for hatton. And also you can argue thatboscar was a part time fighter and very well past it vs floyd.

[The Big Dunn]

You can argue that collazo beat hatton. And 147 was a bad weight for hatton. And also you can argue thatboscar was a part time fighter and very well past it vs floyd.

Then he should have fought him when he was prime when Floyd was begging him for a fight.

ODH, Shane and Manny all had the opportunity to fight Floyd long before they actually fought and chose not to.

Fans need to live with the choices these men made.

[therealpugilist]

You can argue that collazo beat hatton. And 147 was a bad weight for hatton. And also you can argue thatboscar was a part time fighter and very well past it vs floyd.

What was Oscar when he fought PAC? @ 147 weight drained and in worse condition than all previous fights

Hatton started at 140...Floyd @130

Hatton was naturally bigger weight was never an issue for them to fight


Floyd was in his 4th division at 147 so he didn't have any type of size advantage n hadn't filled out there yet