Wrong, that has been used to argue why Roberto Duran is greater than SRL, why Chavez is greater than Whitaker, why Louis is greater than Marciano.
Diaz didn't take a dive. Cotto didn't take a dive. Margarito didn't take a dive. They all accepted the circumstance of the fight and the negotiations, they fought and were beaten
Adressed this.
Strawman is a fallacy that is giving the impression of refuting my argument which I didn't advance. You argued my argument is mute because Many fighters accomplish things that floyd didn't do, yet they are not ranked over or under, I never said that therefore It is a strawman fallacy. My argument is because Pacquiao and Floyd are in the same Era their accomplishments can be compared, Floyd beat Paccquiao head 2 head, but Pacquiao accomplished far more things thn floyd therefore that is enough to override the victory in terms of legacy. You did not understand my argument.
Manny and Floyd are in the same generation, therefore their accomplishment is compared since they are in the same era and in the same race.
No it hasnt because they didn't accomplish more. You used accomplish to mean winning more titles in different weight classes.
You missed the point. I referenced The criticism Broner got for having a powerful promoter. I didn't say he didn't win. You need to read more carefully.
I understood your argument and it's ridiculous. That's one of those convoluted NSB only points that doesn't hold weight outside of nsb.
Yeah I couldn't rate Pacquiao ahead of Floyd. Floyd won head to head and has never lost. Manny has. Several times. Those reasons alone are all I need to have Floyd ahead of Manny in the ATG regard.
Comment