BoxRec

Is Manny Pacquiao ready to be in any of you guys list in the top 10 p4p all-time?

elmersalsa wrote:Is Manny Pacquiao ready to be in any of you guys list in the top 10 p4p all-time?

Are you saying he is as good as Duran was? How do you see him against Duran, Leonard, Hearns, or Pernell? That should answer your question. Hell I don't even think he would beat Arguello, Benitez, or even De Jesus. And you are already puting him as a top ten all-time p4p. How do you think he would do against Hagler? Please stop over-rating Pac.

I would rate him behind Leonard and Duran, not far behind Hearns. Maybe as high as Whitaker, Arguello, and Benitez. He was certainly better than (and probably would have beat) DeJesus.
He has some great wins, but there are some negative fights which for some reason many people don't seem to factor in.

Of course he still could do something spectacular in his career which would help his argument.

Manny hasn't shown enough for me to believe he was a superior Lightweight to De Jesus. Surely a more accomplished fighter all things considered, but that doesn't translate to being superior head to head. On the contrary, I tend to think of Manny as more of a physical marvel (with his ability to carry his abilities up the weight classes) than a head to head monster. He's more proven as the type who can hold his own with an array (although not nearly as vast an array as some seem to believe) of fighters throughout an array of weight classes rather than as someone who's capable of beating the very best at any particular weight. For example, someone like Howard Winstone might beat him at Featherweight, but I'd back Pac to show his stuff moving up the weights better than Winstone ever could.

To reiterate, he's an excellent example of pound for pound versatility, but not necessarily an elite head to head fighter. Just my opinion, and I know I'll get some flack for it.

floyd mayweather has to be top 5 i cant see anyone beating him at s.feather & lightweight.

Idisagree wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Is Manny Pacquiao ready to be in any of you guys list in the top 10 p4p all-time?

Are you saying he is as good as Duran was? How do you see him against Duran, Leonard, Hearns, or Pernell? That should answer your question. Hell I don't even think he would beat Arguello, Benitez, or even De Jesus. And you are already puting him as a top ten all-time p4p. How do you think he would do against Hagler? Please stop over-rating Pac.

In accomplishments, he should be rated very high. He beat the very best going up in weight classes: Juan Manuel Marquez, Marco Antonio Barrera, Erik Morales, Miguel Cotto, Antonio Margarito, Ricky Hatton...Many of them, more than once. We got to remember that this guy is coming from the flyweights. He has won 8 world titles in 8 weight classes. In beating Duran, Hearns or Leonard, I cannot see it. Those guys were out of this world...Extraordinary.

elmersalsa wrote:

Idisagree wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Is Manny Pacquiao ready to be in any of you guys list in the top 10 p4p all-time?

Are you saying he is as good as Duran was? How do you see him against Duran, Leonard, Hearns, or Pernell? That should answer your question. Hell I don't even think he would beat Arguello, Benitez, or even De Jesus. And you are already puting him as a top ten all-time p4p. How do you think he would do against Hagler? Please stop over-rating Pac.

In accomplishments, he should be rated very high. He beat the very best going up in weight classes: Juan Manuel Marquez, Marco Antonio Barrera, Erik Morales, Miguel Cotto, Antonio Margarito, Ricky Hatton...Many of them, more than once. We got to remember that this guy is coming from the flyweights. He has won 8 world titles in 8 weight classes. In beating Duran, Hearns or Leonard, I cannot see it. Those guys were out of this world...Extraordinary.

Yes, he's coming from a weight class where he regularly had an easy 10 lbs. on EVERYONE he fought in the birthing stages of his career. Duran, Leonard, etc. never had that luxury.

elmersalsa wrote:

Idisagree wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Is Manny Pacquiao ready to be in any of you guys list in the top 10 p4p all-time?

Are you saying he is as good as Duran was? How do you see him against Duran, Leonard, Hearns, or Pernell? That should answer your question. Hell I don't even think he would beat Arguello, Benitez, or even De Jesus. And you are already puting him as a top ten all-time p4p. How do you think he would do against Hagler? Please stop over-rating Pac.

In accomplishments, he should be rated very high. He beat the very best going up in weight classes: Juan Manuel Marquez, Marco Antonio Barrera, Erik Morales, Miguel Cotto, Antonio Margarito, Ricky Hatton...Many of them, more than once. We got to remember that this guy is coming from the flyweights. He has won 8 world titles in 8 weight classes. In beating Duran, Hearns or Leonard, I cannot see it. Those guys were out of this world...Extraordinary.

He was out-boxed in the majority of rounds by Marquez in their first fight and only the knockdowns save him. The second fight could have gone either way. He beat fair and square Barrera and he gets credit for that. He lost to Morales. Morales lost the very next fight and was badly out-boxed by Raheem. Then Pac defeated him and clearly that was not the same Morales of the first fight. He got a decent win vs Cotto but let’s not over-rate that fight too much because Cotto is clearly damaged goods since the Margarita fight. Hatton was exposed by Mayweather first, and was over-rated by many to begin with. I consider that a good win, not a great win. Margarita minus the hands of stone has proven to be nothing more than a below average fighter.


For me as good as Marquez is, I think prime De Jesus was a slightly better. Granted not by much but he was better. Similar styles but De Jesus had faster hands. If De Jesus was good enough to out-box a prime Duran he surely would have been good enough to beat Pac.

I don’t see Pac defeating SRR, SRL, Duran, Hearns, Pernell, Arguello, De Jesus, Benitez, Griffith, Napoles, Gavilan, Ortiz, and the list goes on and on… Hell I don’t even think he would have defeated the very limited Trinidad at 147. I think Trinidad would have sent him to another zip code.

Is Pac an all-time great? Yes he is.
Is Pac a top 10 p4p all-time great? No way for me.

Are people really still perpetuating the "He's a Flyweight that won titles all the way up to Jr. Middle!" nonsense? Pacquiao is no more a Flyweight than Georges Carpentier was. He was a severely weight-drained teenager when he started off at those lower weights, and not a very good fighter, either. I consider his Flyweight title more of a black mark on the career of Sasakul than any sort of exclamation point for Pacquiao. Sasakul just wasn't the most dedicated of fighters, and it showed down the line in that one. He was dominating the fight with ease before stupidly deciding to step off the gas and try to coast to victory early. It bit him in the ass. Good on Pac for taking the initiative, but let's not make him out to be some kind of destroyer at the weight, or even worse a natural fighter there. Pacquiao was a big Featherweight for God's sake.

King Carlos wrote:Are people really still perpetuating the "He's a Flyweight that won titles all the way up to Jr. Middle!" nonsense? Pacquiao is no more a Flyweight than Georges Carpentier was. He was a severely weight-drained teenager when he started off at those lower weights, and not a very good fighter, either. I consider his Flyweight title more of a black mark on the career of Sasakul than any sort of exclamation point for Pacquiao. Sasakul just wasn't the most dedicated of fighters, and it showed down the line in that one. He was dominating the fight with ease before stupidly deciding to step off the gas and try to coast to victory early. It bit him in the ass. Good on Pac for taking the initiative, but let's not make him out to be some kind of destroyer at the weight, or even worse a natural fighter there. Pacquiao was a big Featherweight for God's sake.

He won the legit flyweight title vs a very good champion. You can make up excuses/pretend it didn't really happen but it did. Yes into his 20s he grew way beyond 112 but I hate it when peopel pretend Manny is some sort of natural welter who had been draining hard his whole career. Pacquao was not huge at featherweight either.

Pac wasn't a huge Feather? So I guess you're one who thinks he is all juiced up? Manny has the legs of a Middleweight. He is bigger than Duran was.

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:I believe this list is from fighters in Ezzard's lifetime, so Robinson, Louis, and maybe Ali would not be on it.

My bad.

Still, Hearns would have beaten Pacquiao. He was the better fighter.

Hearns would've beaten Pacquiao, in the same way Foreman would have beaten Foster --- that does not (necessarily) make the bigger man the better one, & there is no way on Christ's Earth Hearns ranks above Pacquiao career-wise.

I would place Pacquiao higher. He wouldn't be able to get Hearns at 147, but he was the better overall fighter IMO, & their career achievements aren't even debatable. Pacquiao gobbles him up there. Really, Pacquiao has at least a case for ranking above all of them, & I would personally put him over Hearns at a minimum, & possibly over all of Whitaker, Hagler & Leonard too.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:I believe this list is from fighters in Ezzard's lifetime, so Robinson, Louis, and maybe Ali would not be on it.

My bad.

Still, Hearns would have beaten Pacquiao. He was the better fighter.

Hearns would've beaten Pacquiao, in the same way Foreman would have beaten Foster --- that does not (necessarily) make the bigger man the better one, & there is no way on Christ's Earth Hearns ranks above Pacquiao career-wise.

An excellent point followed by a ridiculous one.

The rules are the same for everyone. I checked Boxrec and Pac made the stipulated weight.

“You may say he’s a drainer. But he’s not the only one.”

He has beaten and fought well against a number of top opponents. Duran lost fights. Leonard got some controversial decisions.

Hearns is judged harshly by history. Ahead against Leonard. Broke his hand against Hagler. He’d have had a great chance in rematches had they occurred…

Whittaker was an absolute ace in the ring but Pac has the better career.

King Carlos wrote:1. Harry Greb
2. Ray Robinson
3. Henry Armstrong
4. Sam Langford
5. Bob Fitzsimmons
6. Roberto Duran
7. Ezzard Charles
8. Packey McFarland
9. Joe Gans
10. Benny Leonard

Admittedly, that's an off-the-top-of-the-head list. I'm not big into listing, so don't take it too seriously.

You don’t see Packy in many top 10 lists and you usually see Pep or Moore or both. Even so, it’s all justifiable.

Always interesting to see if someone is a Joe Gans or Benny Leonard man. See you tip your hat to Gans here (just about). What was the clincher?

I would rate Whitaker slightly over Hearns and Hearns solidly over Pac. Any order of the 3 would be acceptable. Any definitive statement of one being greater than the other, as far as resumes go, is hogwash.

Ambling Alp wrote:I think you also have to consider Monzon, Ali, Louis, Ray Leonard, Wilde, and Saddler for Top 10. There is going to be a lot of close calls and a lot of fighters to consider when you are talking about all weight classes and over 100 years.

Yes, in the All-time list I leave off HWs as they are so steeped in history it's hard to really rate them with the others. So, I have a HW list and a P4P list. Just makes it easier for me.

Anyway, that's the reason why Ali isn't mentioned.

Jofre is usually in the mix too.

Ezzard wrote:

King Carlos wrote:1. Harry Greb
2. Ray Robinson
3. Henry Armstrong
4. Sam Langford
5. Bob Fitzsimmons
6. Roberto Duran
7. Ezzard Charles
8. Packey McFarland
9. Joe Gans
10. Benny Leonard

Admittedly, that's an off-the-top-of-the-head list. I'm not big into listing, so don't take it too seriously.

You don’t see Packy in many top 10 lists and you usually see Pep or Moore or both. Even so, it’s all justifiable.

Always interesting to see if someone is a Joe Gans or Benny Leonard man. See you tip your hat to Gans here (just about). What was the clincher?

Packey is still the most underrated fighter of all time. I had half a mind to put him above Duran as well, and would have been totally justified in doing so.

As for Gans and Leonard, I just tend to think of Gans's era as slightly superior (in fact I believe that era of Lightweights is in contention with the single greatest era for any weight class), and given the dominance he exhibited over all of these men I have to give him the edge. It's tough, though, because Leonard reigned supreme over an excellent era in his own right. More than that, it's the Newspaper accounts, the next-day reports, contemporary readings, etc. Gans just seemed to be in a class of his own. The next-day reports are also why I rate Packey so highly, to go along with his amazing record. He was about as dominant against such a high class of fighters as I've ever heard.

Ezzard wrote:The rules are the same for everyone. I checked Boxrec and Pac made the stipulated weight.

“You may say he’s a drainer. But he’s not the only one.”

He has beaten and fought well against a number of top opponents. Duran lost fights. Leonard got some controversial decisions.

Hearns is judged harshly by history. Ahead against Leonard. Broke his hand against Hagler. He’d have had a great chance in rematches had they occurred…

Whittaker was an absolute ace in the ring but Pac has the better career.

King Carlos wrote:

Ezzard wrote:

King Carlos wrote:1. Harry Greb
2. Ray Robinson
3. Henry Armstrong
4. Sam Langford
5. Bob Fitzsimmons
6. Roberto Duran
7. Ezzard Charles
8. Packey McFarland
9. Joe Gans
10. Benny Leonard

Admittedly, that's an off-the-top-of-the-head list. I'm not big into listing, so don't take it too seriously.

You don’t see Packy in many top 10 lists and you usually see Pep or Moore or both. Even so, it’s all justifiable.

Always interesting to see if someone is a Joe Gans or Benny Leonard man. See you tip your hat to Gans here (just about). What was the clincher?

Packey is still the most underrated fighter of all time. I had half a mind to put him above Duran as well, and would have been totally justified in doing so.

As for Gans and Leonard, I just tend to think of Gans's era as slightly superior (in fact I believe that era of Lightweights is in contention with the single greatest era for any weight class), and given the dominance he exhibited over all of these men I have to give him the edge. It's tough, though, because Leonard reigned supreme over an excellent era in his own right. More than that, it's the Newspaper accounts, the next-day reports, contemporary readings, etc. Gans just seemed to be in a class of his own. The next-day reports are also why I rate Packey so highly, to go along with his amazing record. He was about as dominant against such a high class of fighters as I've ever heard.

McFarland often gets missed off lightweight top 10s let alone p4p. Packey deserves a renaissance.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:I believe this list is from fighters in Ezzard's lifetime, so Robinson, Louis, and maybe Ali would not be on it.

My bad.

Still, Hearns would have beaten Pacquiao. He was the better fighter.

Hearns would've beaten Pacquiao, in the same way Foreman would have beaten Foster --- that does not (necessarily) make the bigger man the better one, & there is no way on Christ's Earth Hearns ranks above Pacquiao career-wise.

I would place Pacquiao higher. He wouldn't be able to get Hearns at 147, but he was the better overall fighter IMO, & their career achievements aren't even debatable. Pacquiao gobbles him up there. Really, Pacquiao has at least a case for ranking above all of them, & I would personally put him over Hearns at a minimum, & possibly over all of Whitaker, Hagler & Leonard too.

Yes it certainly debatable that Hearns should be ranked ahead of Pac. Manny does not "gobble him up". Hearns beat Duran and Benitez who were better than anyone Pac ever beat. Hearns did lose to Barkley but Pac got ko'd as well. It's very close and I give Hearns a slight edge.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Ezzard wrote:The rules are the same for everyone. I checked Boxrec and Pac made the stipulated weight.

“You may say he’s a drainer. But he’s not the only one.”

He has beaten and fought well against a number of top opponents. Duran lost fights. Leonard got some controversial decisions.

Hearns is judged harshly by history. Ahead against Leonard. Broke his hand against Hagler. He’d have had a great chance in rematches had they occurred…

Whittaker was an absolute ace in the ring but Pac has the better career.

Whitakers best performances were more impressive than Pacmans.
Whitaker fought Chavez when he was undefeated and considered the best p4p. He had moved up and beat McGirt when he was at the absolute top of his game. Whitaker moved up to Jr middle and defeated a strong dominant champion in Julio Cesar Vasquez. At lightweight Whitaker dominated everyone.

Pacman beat Hatton who had already been decimated by Mayweather. He beat Cotto who had already been brutalized by Margarito. He beat Margarito who was already exposed by Mosley. At lightweight he was beaten handily by Morales once and could be arguably 1-1 with Marquez in reality.
Pacmans been more exciting...Whitaker has been better.

theone wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Ezzard wrote:The rules are the same for everyone. I checked Boxrec and Pac made the stipulated weight.

“You may say he’s a drainer. But he’s not the only one.”

He has beaten and fought well against a number of top opponents. Duran lost fights. Leonard got some controversial decisions.

Hearns is judged harshly by history. Ahead against Leonard. Broke his hand against Hagler. He’d have had a great chance in rematches had they occurred…

Whittaker was an absolute ace in the ring but Pac has the better career.

Whitakers best performances were more impressive than Pacmans.
Whitaker fought Chavez when he was undefeated and considered the best p4p. He had moved up and beat McGirt when he was at the absolute top of his game. Whitaker moved up to Jr middle and defeated a strong dominant champion in Julio Cesar Vasquez. At lightweight Whitaker dominated everyone.

Pacman beat Hatton who had already been decimated by Mayweather. He beat Cotto who had already been brutalized by Margarito. He beat Margarito who was already exposed by Mosley. At lightweight he was beaten handily by Morales once and could be arguably 1-1 with Marquez in reality.
Pacmans been more exciting...Whitaker has been better.

No offense, but your tone is completely one-sided here. It would be just as legitimate for me to go the opposite way & say Chavez was a good deal faded (ala Hatton), coming up a division, & how Nelson was past his best years & weightclass, etc, & you couldn't really deny me doing that. Give me Cotto over McGirt, & that's before we discuss how far Pacquiao travelled in weight to reach him/De La Hoya/Margarito/Hatton. It's huge when you compare what he did several divisions below against Barrera, Morales & Marquez.

Whitaker is the greater fighter, Pacquiao's had the more impressive career, IMO (close). I am certainly a much bigger fan of Whitaker than Pacquiao, as many here will attest.

Ambling Alp wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote:
My bad.

Still, Hearns would have beaten Pacquiao. He was the better fighter.

Hearns would've beaten Pacquiao, in the same way Foreman would have beaten Foster --- that does not (necessarily) make the bigger man the better one, & there is no way on Christ's Earth Hearns ranks above Pacquiao career-wise.

I would place Pacquiao higher. He wouldn't be able to get Hearns at 147, but he was the better overall fighter IMO, & their career achievements aren't even debatable. Pacquiao gobbles him up there. Really, Pacquiao has at least a case for ranking above all of them, & I would personally put him over Hearns at a minimum, & possibly over all of Whitaker, Hagler & Leonard too.

Yes it certainly debatable that Hearns should be ranked ahead of Pac. Manny does not "gobble him up". Hearns beat Duran and Benitez who were better than anyone Pac ever beat. Hearns did lose to Barkley but Pac got ko'd as well. It's very close and I give Hearns a slight edge.

I love Hearns but I think Barrera was better than Benitez at 154. I also think that in p4p terms that Pac beat better fighters than the 154 Duran.

Benitez was certainly better than the version of Barrera that Pacquiao ran through (or any other version for that matter). Benitez actually showed some of his best stuff at 154, in my opinion.