Why Do We Continue to Recognize the Lineal Championship When....

[OnePunch]

his fans forget its not just who you beat but when....and arum made sure to put him in with guys over 140 when they were properly softened up by tko losses and tough fights or were moving up in weight......promotional genius...i never believed the hype of manny past 140

lol so "mr boxrec" is now trying to apply context when it suits him?


but but but but resume doe

[therealpugilist]

lol so "mr boxrec" is now trying to apply context when it suits him?


but but but but resume doe

resume dont matter doe....lineal championships dont matter doe.....first 2 signs its a ggg fans posting.


bro its ok you go on boxrec....stop deflecting...get a life

[therealpugilist]

lol so "mr boxrec" is now trying to apply context when it suits him?


but but but but resume doe

name 3 fighters that he beat at 147 that wasnt moving up, at a catchweight or ACTUALLY LOOKED IMPRESSIVE BEFORE HE FOUGHT THEM?

if you cant just STFU

[OnePunch]

name 3 fighters that he beat at 147 that wasnt moving up, at a catchweight or ACTUALLY LOOKED IMPRESSIVE BEFORE HE FOUGHT THEM?

if you cant just STFU

doesnt matter........ they are on his resume....... but but but resume doe

[soul_survivor]

Would those fights have even happened for Pacquiao? Would he have even gone to WW?

Mayweather beat the guy who beat Margarito. Mayweather beat Marquez at the same weight Pacquiao did and dominated. Mayweather beat Cotto.

I dunno if Pacquiao would have moved up to 147 but 140 was looking just as likely.

Pacquiao beat Cotto, Hatton and DLH more convincingly than May beat JMM. That's all there is to it.

Take out the Pac win (which was good), Mayweathers ww resume just isnt as good as Pacs. It's just facts. No reason to try and turn it into anything else.

[soul_survivor]

Really? You can't do better than that?

You listed two weaker wins across only about a year for Floyd, while you mention twice as many for Pac and use his very best wins across nearly six years! For instance, you very conveniently forget to mention that in between the Guerrero and Ortiz wins, Floyd also happened to beat the top guy at 154 in Cotto who was on a better win streak against Floyd than he was leading up to the Pacquiao fight, which of course you list as among the best wins for Pac.

Actually, let's check what you said out properly, because overall it's pretty daft.

First of all, you say Pac beat Cotto, Bradley, Marquez and Margarito while saying Floyd only beat Guerrero and Ortiz forgetting to mention that Floyd also beat Cotto and Marquez too. You forget to mention that in that time, Pacquiao got brutally KTFO by Marquez as well and 'lost' to Bradley. Getting knocked out cold doesn't do wonders for your rankings, P4P, divisional, any rankings really. So you list two of Pac's best wins, but forget to mention that he also lost to those two guys as well.

Second, you use a massive time period for Pac's wins, starting when he first won a title at 147 and not stopping basically until he lost to Floyd. You list a tiny time period for Floyd, using two of his weakest wins in that period.

Let's flip the script using your reasoning. "I doubt Pac would have continued being a top P4P rated fighter with wins over Rios and Algieri, two fighters who had never even fought in Pac's division before, whilst also losing to Marquez, Bradley and Floyd. In the meantime Floyd beat number one rated fighters Manny Pacquiao, Shane Mosley, Miguel Cotto, Canelo Alvarez, and other champions like Hatton, Marquez, and Maidana.

Then again, with HBO and Top Rank's relationship he probably would have lol"

You can't flip the script because Pacquiao losing to JMM meant he wasn't no. 1 on any list, what are you trying to say? Pacquiao didn't carry on being no. 1 after that.

Now I don't want to go over this stupid argument. Pac has the better 147 resume, period. Mayweathers Pac win is the only one that stands out. Plus Pacquiao manhandled his opponents, Mayweather tapped to win. Like it or hate it, up to you.

[Pigeons]

Pacquiao beat Cotto, Hatton and DLH more convincingly than May beat JMM. That's all there is to it.

What kind of backwards ass fanboy logic is this?

Guess what buddy. Mayweather beat Cotto, Hatton, DLH more convincingly than Pac beat JMM. That's all there is to it.

[techliam]

he'll be the champion when he earns it in the ring...thats one thing in boxing that is consistent.

you dont get credit for fights that dont get made

you dont assume in boxing.....we have to see the fights. if fights were won by assuming then upsets wouldnt exist

So beating 3 top 5 contenders (Geale, Lemieux and Murray - as per TBRB) isn't as credible as beating a one legged Marinez (who a lot of people saw lose to Murray) or Cotto at 155. What sort of logic is that?

If Golovkin isn't the champion in your view, Canelo/Cotto should have zero chance at claiming it either. Which I can agree with sort of

[New England]

What kind of backwards ass fanboy logic is this?

Guess what buddy. Mayweather beat Cotto, Hatton, DLH more convincingly than Pac beat JMM. That's all there is to it.

yeah, there's no way you can consider manny - cotto a more one sided win than floyd - marquez. floyd's not a big puncher or a good finisher, but he won ever second of ever round, and th eshots marquez threw back looked like they were coming from a child.


pacquiao fought a more depleted version of de la hoya and hatton, but there's no argument who beat them more clearly. oscar did OK against floyd and maybe even won a few rounds. and hatton gave floyd some problems early on with his mauling and his footspeed [ricky hatton's feet were actually very fast.]

manny picked oscar apart and "rearranged his beautiful face."

and when he hit ricky hatton i told a friend, and i'm not joking when i say this, "this is boxing, man. he might not get up."


perfect examples of styles making fights, the careers of those two. a better version of cotto does worse against manny than he does against floyd. then floyd embarasses manny in '15. styles and timing in the context of a fighter's career make fights.

[New England]

So beating 3 top 5 contenders (Geale, Lemieux and Murray - as per TBRB) isn't as credible as beating a one legged Marinez (who a lot of people saw lose to Murray) or Cotto at 155. What sort of logic is that?

If Golovkin isn't the champion in your view, Canelo/Cotto should have zero chance at claiming it either. Which I can agree with sort of

you're usually an objective poster, brih. just move on. you're talking to one of the biggest card carrying floyd fans on the planet. inherent subjectivity and toxicity.