Ok...Who's the P4P # 1 right now?

Exactly. And before Mayweather-Mosley, The Ring had Mosley #2 at welterweight with PBF #3, and yet in the prp rankings Floyd was #2 in the world despite retiring as a welterweight champion years before. P4p is a smelly pile of horseshit

 

I'm sorry but that just doesn't go. For one, they could've fought at 130, 135, 140 or 147 and Floyd would ALWAYS had that height and strenght advantage. Just like Manny would always have that power advantage. Saying Manny would beat him if he had Floyd's size and strenght advantage is like saying "Well Floyd would beat Manny for sure if he had Manny's power and speed advantage". This two guys have different advantages they were born two and are now fighting at their best at 147. That's why is fight is so fucking huge. I'm really gonna get broken hearted with boxing if it doesn't happen.

 

I doubt they will and for good reason. With Floyd haven so often failed to prove himself against the best you have the "he don't gotta" thinkers who mythically see him beating everyone from Cotto, Clottey, Margarito and Paul Williams without having to actually fight them. So Floyd dominating Manny will only reinforce that he don't gotta belief and in fact might actually kind of give it a bit of credibility to a certain point. He still won't have accomplished as much as Manny but he can be considered the better fighter IMO, which is all subjective anyway. Floyd is more of an all around fighter both offensive and defensive while Manny is mostly just offense with a lot of KO's and stoppages. It all depends on what you prefer.

I think the reason Floyd moved into the 1 spot on the divisional rankings is because Mosley was the champion at welter and Floyd just beat him even though he didn't take the championship belt. It actually makes sense that he's number one from that perspective but I don't think he should be p4p #1, that honor IMO goes to Manny on the greater accomplishments overall.

 

This is a very fair and balanced presentation of both fighter's recent accomplishments. Refreshing to see after so many numbskulls around here proclaim one guy to be the clear best and the other guy to have accomplished shit.

I think that coupled with the retirement, and JMM as an opponent at 147 pounds (even if it was his first fight back) - Pacquiao has overtaken Mayweather as the #1 P4P fighter.

Now, I still think Mayweather is better and is clearly the best fighter in the world - but Pacquiao has earned the #1 ranking in his recent bouts imo.

 

What's wrong with you crazy fellas!

22-10 for Pacquiao?

Most people here believe that Floyd is the better fighter of the two. Floyd is undefeated. We can still remember Pacquiao getting schooled by both marquez and morales.

Sure...I can accept Pacquiao ascending to that status when Floyd was on sabbatical. Floyd wasn't around, Manny was teh best active fighter, bar none.

But Floyd is back now. He embarrassed Marquez (without using his size and physcial strength advantages)..and then utterly dominated Sugar Shane Mosley.

The best has returned and hasn't missed a step..and yet y'all wanna say that Manny is still the head honcho?


"And Fightbeaters love them some Pacquiao, Manny
But Floyd is official H.N.I.C.
And my job is to write just what I see
So a visual stenographer is what I be"

artie:

 

:notallthere: don't forget your popcorn emoticons

 

I feel like Mayweather lost his spot when he retired. Then he came back to fight a much smaller fighter, then Mosley whom Cotto defeated.

Its true you can say that Mosley beat Margarito who beat Cotto... and also that there was loaded gloves in one fight (Cotto-Marg), normal gloves in one fight (Mosley-Marg) and that one fighter might have been ruined (Cotto in the Pac fight)

But i still think that Pacquiao's dominant win over Cotto truly launched him over Floyd. There are great points to be made either way. Bottom line is it will have to be settled between the two of them.

 

I don't see any historians ranking Hearns over Duran despite how Hearns put him to sleep.

 

You really think the disparity in size between Mayweather and Pacquiao is even close to that of Hitman and Duran?

 

everyone's opinion here is clearly biased. to phonetap, P4P means all things being equal (meaning weight divisions) who's the best. accomplishments don't mean much because fights are always settled in the ring. and since mayweather and pacquiao fight in the same weight division (and are doing it well) this will be settled. while you may be more impressed with manny's resume, floyd is the better fighter in phonetap's book, period.

 

I do:hammert:

 

They both made 154 the day of the fight unlike today when guys can sweat down to a weight.

I believe you're talking about the difference in height.

 

not everyone

 

I was definitely, in addition to Hitman's general frame and the fact that he was the much bigger man, height/reach/size/strength.. basically everything.

 

and yet, that smaller Duran managed to fight a much closer and tougher fight with Hagler than Hearns.

Based on your logic wouldn't Hagler have had more of a size and strength advantage over Duran?

And again...no one ranks Hagler above Duran in a historical sense.

 

Shut the fuck up, Fin!

You can't even speak English properly and you havethe temerity to try to argue with us Westerners? :kidcool:

 

you are correct, sorry...change that to "most people".

 

:atu:

 

Yeah, that's how I rate p4p too.

I'm just not so sure Floyd is better at this point, although I do still favor him head to head with Pacquiao. But its not the automatic Floyd pick it was a couple of years ago.

 

this is also reason why it confounds phonetap as to why people think manny is better P4P than floyd. there isn't a single fighter manny can beat that floyd couldn't. couldn't see miguel cotto or clottey knocking out or pressing floyd to the limit under any circumstances.

 

Damn...all a y'all a crazy!

I'm going to go to my car and get my other gun...shoot everybody's ass!

 

But they should, imo.

 

But they should, imo.

 

Good point... add in the Barkely-Hitman fights and Duran-Barkely fights and it makes your point even stronger.

I wouldn't have said Hagler would have more of a strength advantage - Hitman had a bigger frame than Hagler too. Eh, who knows.

My main point was I don't think its an apt comparison to compare Mayweather-Pac and Hitman-Duran. Mayweather and Pac are much closer in size than Hitman and Duran were.

Duran's success above and beyond 154 and against similar opponents speaks to why he is rated higher, in addition to a stellar career below 154. The more you analyze their careers, the more you realize that it was just a bad style matchup.

Pac and Floyd are both similar in height, they both competed at similar weights as 17/18 year olds, they varied as pro's, but have met at 147 and unlike Duran, Pacquiao hasn't shown any ill effects moving up in weight and he isn't facing a guy who has distinct reach and explosive power advantages.

I just don't like the comparison, especially since I don't see Floyd one-punching Pacquiao inside 2 rounds. If Floyd tactically outmatches Pacquiao, dominates and KO's (or lopsided decision) him, then it doesn't really seem appropriate to me.

 

So we shouldn't salute Pacquiao for moving up in weight as much as we did Duran, since Pacquiao isn't struggling as much?

 

Sure, and that's a fair point also. I still think that Floyd and Pac are much closer in size than Duran and Hitman were

 

Pacquiao because of the KO victories. Yes, I know PBF stopped Hatton before Pacquiao and that DLH was weightdrained and shot against Pac, but they were still spectacular.

Floyd had dominating performances aside from the DLH fight which was still an 8-4 win.He was out of his weight class there,while DLH wasn't.

It's a tough call but I'll go with Pac. I won't pick Pac over PBF but he deserves the #1 ranking until PBF takes it away.

 

So that'll be another pair of default wins to Mayweather Jr by KTFO, huh?

MTF :shit:

 

You couldn't see it? Floyd made pretty sure of that. You get great by beating cunts. Not by not fighting them and us all just 'not imagining' he would lose.ray: Fuck sake.

 

Exactly. Lets just add every fighter that fought between 130-147 this decade to his resume, too. Can't imagine him losing to any of them can you? Lets get some fighters from the 70s and 80s we can't imagine him losing to and throw them on too. Inexplicable reasoning.