...but who is your hit-&-run victim? Shane Mosley (1998) vs. Manny Pacquiao (2008). Though greater exploits lay at other weights for both men, this was arguably their best division as fighters. I like a very close, debatable Pacquiao decision. What do you think?
Stylewise...the only way Shane could beat Pacquiao is by body shot KO. Otherwise Pacquiao by unanimous decison all the way. Too much workrate. Shane was a spurt fighter even in his prime.
Cool. Funny enough..although Shane is naturally the bigger fighter, he has a better chance at Lightweight than he does at Welterweight IMO. Still I'll take Pacquiao by decision.
You laugh, but thats a true story. Back on the old S/O forum Sly said that Mamadou Thiam could beat Shane.
But I thought Mosley was a big Mosley fan? What's up with that? That would be like me claiming to be a Pacquiao fan and then picking Urango to beat him. :dunno:
At best, you could probably make a case his prime ended eight years ago, as he never really, truthfully got back on-track completely after the Forrest debacles. Personally, though, I think he was never better than as a Lightweight, & by 1998, he was essentially at the peak of his 135lb. powers, as experienced here as he was going to get, having moved to Welter in 1999.
Lightweight Mosley is an overrated creature. Any good fighter would look very good fighting the competition he fought there.
I agree the competition wasn't great, & maybe you could say he was, in fact, over-rated, but I would not agree if you said he wasn't an excellent Lightweight. I always thought he was, myself.
