Pacquiao wins world titles in 7 weight classes? Bullshit.

Only if you accept that the IBF is a legitimate 'title' and the ring title isn't. I honestly don't see any reason to. Quite the contrary tbh.

 

Bottom line, if you point to 126 and 140 as proof that Pac isn't a seven weight title holder, you should start following competitve fishing instead.

 

aye

 

So let's hear how you determine 'legitimate' world titles.

This will be nice because the same people who deride there being too many world titles will ultimately create even more as they try to answer this question. Or they will spout bs that is pretty transparent. But good luck.

 

How Bout YOU Tell Us who Pac SHOULD have Beaten @ 126 & 140, OTHER than Barrera & Hatton???...Who was Rated HIGHER than those Guys @ those Particular Weights, when Pac Beat Them???...



REED:hammert:

 

Legit title = one of the 4 main or the ring title. (with ring title being the most significant)

True Champ = standing alone in the division above all other 'titlists' due to a lineage of recent victories involving an adequate % of the other top guys in the division. Not exactly the same as 'linear champ' but related to it, within reason. Usually the ring titlist basically.

 

I hate the Ring corporate belt.

So because Ricky Hatton had won one significant fight at 140 in 2005, he was still the legit champ at 140, despite winning and competing for a world title at welterweight afterwards, then competing again and getting KTFO at 147. The whole ring belt is BS, if you don´t have to defend it against the best available challenger at 140 for four years. Tim Bradley had unified belts at 140 in the meantime.

Israel Vasquez is still the ring champion at 122 and is ranked below every other titleholder at 122 by boxrec, because he hasn´t fought anybody but Rafa Marquez since 2006. If we went by this BS how are Caballero, Lopez or Nishioka ever supposed to claim that they were a Super bantamweight world champion? The way Vasquez is looking he´ll drop the Ring championship belt to some scrub or Marquez, which then will result in a fifth fight between the two. So Lopez and Caballero are supposed to wait five years for a title shot, that is half a career.

 

He should have beaten someone with a legit world title belt if he wanted to be considered a world champ at those weights. I don't count The Ring belt because it is flawed in too many ways.

I agree that sometimes The Ring belt (or the IBO or the WBU or the WBC International or the IBF Interim, etc.) is held by someone who 'seems' like a world champ or someone who 'should' be a world champ, but if you want to be a world titlist, you need to legitimately hold a legit big 4 title.

 

Nah, I won't go in circles with you. This topic is upsetting to me.

 

So Because he Didn't Fight a LESSER Fighter w/a Trinket, U're DIMINISHING Pac's 7 Weight DOMINANCE???....


REED:shit:

 

Pacquiao fought MAB in 2003 for the money. If he was worried about his legacy, he would have fought Derrick Gainer. I'll always hold that against him.

 

What about the other way around?

Hopkins and Calzaghe had no interest to fight a young stud like Dawson, Pascal or even Cloud, so getting the alphabet belt wasn´t really an option. So how long have they held that title hostage now without fighting a single LHW contender ranked within the top 5? 3-4 years? Winky, Pavlik, Calzaghe, Jones none ranked top 5 at light-heavywieght at the time of the fight.

 

Did he really dominate 7 weight classes?

 

I'm not diminishing his dominance, I'm clarifying his accomplishments.