Pac’s win over Thurman best of any 40+ year old fighter

[D4thincarnation]

MD as if Thurman didn't have a SD vs DSG and a close win vs Porter?

Moorer was a top three HW heading into the Foreman fight after beating Holyfield. Thurman was also seen as the third best WW right now...Only difference is he was inactive and didn't look good in his last fight.

Thurman ranked number 1 before and after those wins.

Nobody knocked him off his perched or even matched his record at welter till Pacquiao did it.


Moorer also had a few losses on his record.

[Tutsa]

No way , GF at 45 to win HW title is the best . Moore was a fast south paw and if he listened to his trainer to watch out for his one two and just coast the last 2/3 round s there be no George Forman Grill but MM grill but he didn’t listen and history was made and made GF multimillionaire overnight. Lol from a grill

[KTFOKING]

Thurman ranked number 1 before and after those wins.

Nobody knocked him off his perched or even matched his record at welter till Pacquiao did it.


Moorer also had a few losses on his record.

Buddy, Moorer was UNDEFEATED going into that fight with Foreman.

Thurman absolutely didn't have his #1 status going into the Pacman fight. No one saw him as the #1 WW. Let's stop trying to re-write history please, let's not do that.

[hugh grant]

I said he would choose Thurman. His history shows he likes fighters that have lost in there last few fights or looked bad. Look through Pacquiao's record, full of fighters that are coming off recent losses/bad performances. His team know how to pick them.

Floyd just ducks them. I bet thurman looking bad against lopez intimidated fkoyd. You can't increase your legacy being scared on sidelines. Floyd shouldve cherrypicked his way to 9 division titles, and it's strange he didn't as he's often associated with cherrypicking
Thurman was the proven welterweight and was no1. Spence and crawford needed to beat thurman but dragged heels too much. Thurman had 2 years off so anyone with a heart would excuse him being a little rusty.

[Robbie Barrett]

Floyd just ducks them. I bet thurman looking bad against lopez intimidated fkoyd.
Thurman was the proven welterweight and was no1. Spence and crawford needed to beat thurman. Thurman had 2 years off so anyone with a heart would excuse him being a little rusty.

Name 1 credible source that had Thurman #1 at WW, nobody did. Pacquiao beat the 3rd best WW coming off a bad performance after a return from injury. FACTS.

[hugh grant]

Name 1 credible source that had Thurman #1 at WW, nobody did. Pacquiao beat the 3rd best WW coming off a bad performance after a return from injury. FACTS.

History won't know what thurman was or wasnt one fight before the Pac fight. History will see a young undefeated champ who a 40 year old beat to become oldest ever WW champ.
A win historically better than anything on flouds resume

[GhostofDempsey]

Buddy, Moorer was UNDEFEATED going into that fight with Foreman.

Thurman absolutely didn't have his #1 status going into the Pacman fight. No one saw him as the #1 WW. Let's stop trying to re-write history please, let's not do that.

You guys keep getting hung up on rankings. Have a glance right now around various sources and you’ll see how fighters are ranked differently across different sanctioning bodies and media sources. We all know how promoters can influence rankings, which was especially true while George was on the comeback scene.

George was losing that fight, one fortunate punch turned it around for him. His win was impressive for his age, but he was losing the fight and it was Moorer....a blown up light heavyweight. Not a natural HW. Thurman is a natural WW.

[True That]

Like I said, George was behind on all three cards. Was getting out worked and just standing in the middle of the ring. Moorer got sloppy and George landed his one big punch. Great win, and I respect what he accomplished. But PAC being older, smaller, and Thurman being a top three of not the top welter seals it for me.

And that's fine, you can have your opinion. In my opinion the George Foreman improbable win at 45 years old takes the cake for me. For me Pacquiao was already favored to win, everyone knew it was going to be a 50/50 type fight, then Pacquiao wins a close decision as he was favored to do. If Pacquiao can beat Spence or Crawford then I will probably give it to Pac, but as of right now I got George Foreman's win sealing it for me.


Edit:
(Actually for wins, Foreman for me would be biggest, for best performance I would go with B-Hops performances over Tarver and Pavlik. For me Pacquiao is a close 2nd though. But just my opinion just like y'all have your opinions.)

[hugh grant]

And that's fine, you can have your opinion. In my opinion the George Foreman improbable win at 45 years old takes the cake for me. For me Pacquiao was already favored to win, everyone knew it was going to be a 50/50 type fight, then Pacquiao wins a close decision as he was favored to do. If Pacquiao can beat Spence or Crawford then I will probably give it to Pac, but as of right now I got George Foreman's win sealing it for me.

But George's was just like a one off victory. Pac s supposed to beat these guys one after the other, day in day out.
Plus Pac s a former flyweight and traditionally flyweight are in.prime around 28 years of age

[sargo]

It's not just the win, it's how one wins.