Originally Posted by aboutfkntime
FACT: there is only one criteria for greatness
WHO did you beat, with consideration given to when/how
paper titles mean absolutely nothing, because.....
FACT: if Armstrong fought in a era that had 100+ world "titles", and 17 different divisions..... rather than a era with 8 world champions, and 8 divisions..... he would have truckloads of the rubbish that Max calls "achievements"
which is why Mayweather is CLEARLY greater than Pacquiao
Pac has anonymous paper " titles "..... Mayweather has names
" margarito "
" David Diaz "
" Chris Algieri "
" Thurman "
whoop-de-shlt
Originally posted by puga
lol and you had the nerve to tell others here they dont know **** about boxing , pretentious lil ****er
what was incorrect in that post, you silly pacstain ?
aside from struggling to match the height of Mayweather's best wins, you cannot be losing to average guys like Torrecampo, Sungsurat, Horn..... and go life-n-death with fighters who are not on Floyd's level, like Marquez and Bradley..... and then expect to be rated higher than Floyd..... it makes no sense
Because he can’t fight there again so soon after he has just fought. I believe it’s at least a month after a 12 round fight, and more if it was a knockout loss
what was incorrect in that post, you silly pacstain ?
aside from struggling to match the height of Mayweather's best wins, you cannot be losing to average guys like Torrecampo, Sungsurat, Horn..... and go life-n-death with fighters who are not on Floyd's level, like Marquez and Bradley..... and then expect to be rated higher than Floyd..... it makes no sense
Your just a complete blatant comedian , trying to be serious?
Pac s best wins easily surpass floyds the world knows that.
Pac can lose to Torecampo and sungsurat as he was not at his best or prime he was work in progress back then, and malnourished and no proper trainer so those losses impact very little on Pacs legacy. If Pac lost to those guys in his prime there would be grounds for discussion though.
Floyd went life and death with guys not on Pac s level. You can't be losing to guys like Castillo in prime and making guys like maidana look elite and beating common opponents not as dominant as Pac, and having not as in depth resume, with CWs and bloating up 2 divisions whilst cheating scales as best wins, and be rated higher than pac. It makes no sense
Your just a complete blatant comedian , trying to be serious?
Pac s best wins easily surpass floyds the world knows that.
Pac can lose to Torecampo and sungsurat as he was not at his best or prime he was work in progress back then, and malnourished and no proper trainer so those losses impact very little on Pacs legacy. If Pac lost to those guys in his prime there would be grounds for discussion though.
Floyd went life and death with guys not on Pac s level. You can't be losing to guys like Castillo in prime and making guys like maidana look elite and beating common opponents not as dominant as Pac and be rated higher than pac. It makes no sense
Yes he's a blatant, not very subtle comedian.
He thinks Torecampo loss should impact Pac s legacy? But you look at Pac back then compared to now Pac is completely different. If you look at Floyd at 18 years old he probably isn't much different to 25 year old Floyd or 34 year old. So it wasn't really necessary for floyd to pad out early career with so many bums
Your just a complete blatant comedian , trying to be serious? Pac s best wins easily surpass floyds the world knows that.
Pac can lose to Torecampo and sungsurat as he was not at his best or prime he was work in progress back then, and malnourished and no proper trainer so those losses impact very little on Pacs legacy. If Pac lost to those guys in his prime there would be grounds for discussion though.
Floyd went life and death with guys not on Pac s level. You can't be losing to guys like Castillo in prime and making guys like maidana look elite and beating common opponents not as dominant as Pac, and having not as in depth resume, with CWs and bloating up 2 divisions whilst cheating scales as best wins, and be rated higher than pac. It makes no sense
then..... NAME THAT WIN, YOU SHlT-TALKING CLOWN !!
Yes he's a blatant, not very subtle comedian. He thinks Torecampo loss should impact Pac s legacy? But you look at Pac back then compared to now Pac is completely different. If you look at Floyd at 18 years old he probably isn't much different to 25 year old Floyd or 34 year old. So it wasn't really necessary for floyd to pad out early career with so many bums
nope.....
I think that the MANY losses, some by KO... taint Pac's career
only in La-La land... and in Pacquiao-Land... do losses not count
Mayweather has better wins than Pacquiao, and NO losses
Mayweather > Pacquiao, it is... NOT..... EVEN..... CLOSE !!
I think that the MANY losses, some by KO... taint Pac's career
only in La-La land... and in Pacquiao-Land... do losses not count
Mayweather has better wins than Pacquiao, and NO losses
Mayweather > Pacquiao, it is... NOT..... EVEN..... CLOSE !!
You don't sound very convinced. People who don't sound gentlemanly are never convincing. Your as convincing as Calzaghe fans saying Calzaghe has better wins than bh. But you don't find Calzaghe fans acting as unreasonable as floyd fans. Floyd fans are pompous and love sound of own voices
Comment