Weight hopping doesn't mean much to me. Hagler would certainly beat every man Pac ever faced, P4P, including JMM & Morales. I can't really wriggle Pac out of that one.... A guys body type, late development, style in terms of being effective against bigger men....none of those things are in any way the same as being 'better'. Hagler was better than Pac.
I cant win with you guys. As soon as I favour a modern fighter, youre on me for that as well!! :: Pacquiao wouldnt beat Haglers MW challengers pound-for-pound? It runs both ways there. Pacquiao, to me, was a superior fighter, whos achieved more by a good distance at this stage. Thats no knock, theyre both legends. I just cant see Hagler as a better boxer or a more accomplished one.
Agreed... There's far too much emphasis placed on the "multi-division" thing a guy fights in one division for 15 years and beats pretty much everybody worth a damn over that period while losing only one uncontroversial fight, he's a great fighter... if he wins portions of the junior middle belt, middle belt, super middle, and light heavy belts over the same period but spends no significant stretches of time in any of the weights but with a similar record, it also makes him a great fighter, but not necessarily any greater than the guy who stuck to where he liked to be
Its CRAZY to rate Pacquiao over Hagler? I know whos done the more amazing things, and it sure aint Hagler. In terms of opposition, I'll put his competition against Hagler's any day of the week. It's been a quarter century since Hagler retired and we've seen a comparable Middleweight in Hopkins...& we had a comparable MW immediately before him, in Monzon. I bet we're waiting a whole centenary to see someone make a decent likeness to Pacquiao's career.
Pacquiao's opposition post 130 is EVERY BIT as suspect, maybe even MORESO than Floyd Mayweather's... they are both being insanely overrated by their respective fanboys on this site based on fighting "use-to-be" guys in a SHIT era Furthermore, Thomas Hearns would have decapitated Manny Pacquiao
In a straight fight at Welter? Yeah, he would. Doesnt really compare to Hagler beating Hearns at Middle. Guess what Holyfield would do if Hagler worked his way as high as Cruiser? Itd be homicide. Besides, Pacquiao has been proven at the highest level or near to it since, what, 118? To 147/154!? Thats INSANE. There isnt anything Hagler did to match that, and I stand by my claim Pacquiaos comp compares favourably through their careers. I take the opposite view on Pacquiaos post-130 career. Yes, there have been calculations, but I consider that reasonable. And there is WAY too much criticism about the quality of foe above 135. There has not been one single guy in the last three or four years who wasnt both at least a legitimately good fighter AND top 3-5 of their division, and Pacquiao has WALKED through everyone sans Marquez. Im not a fan of the division hopping either in general, but sooner or later a guy has done enough. Pacquiao has Hagler pretty convincingly beat IMO.
It's the worst 140-154 divisions I have ever seen, bar none... its not even a contest Hoya, Mosley, Hatton, Marquez had all been beaten comprehensively by Floyd Mayweather well before Pacquiao defeated them (the last man in controversial fashion) Hoya was a tired, old man who had looked like absolute dogshit against STEVE FORBES before he fought Pacquiao, for fuck's sake Mosley was coming off of a draw with Sergio Mora, of all people and had already been beaten up by Mayweather before Pacquiao did a far less impressive job on him Margarito had recently been thrashed by that same old man Mosley Cotto had already taken a career-altering battering from Margarito and had barely gotten by Josh Clottey before tangling with Pacquaio (having to make a fake weight limit to boot) Clottey is obviously turtling garbage who loses to every halfway decent welterweight ever, so that win is meaningless (he was coming off the Cotto loss, no less) You know what that list looks like to me? It looks like the type of opponents a welterweight prospect in a better era would have faced on his way to a title shot If Floyd Mayweather's place in the 147 pantheon is to be looked at with considerably raised eyebrows, than Pacquaio's should be arguably moreso All Pacquaio has proven to my eyes above 130 is that boxing sucks and is in pitiful shape and that a fast guy on numerous performance-enhancing substances can beat a sad cast of names
See, this is what I dont care for --- before Pacquiao moves north of 135, all these fights, all of them, are OBSCENE mismatches. Not only does Pacquiao lose, he gets killed. After he not only beats the odds, but makes it look easy, its tear-down time --- as if Hagler faced a murderer's row at Middle. And youve COMPLETELY ignored Pacquiaos considerable list of accolades below 140 anyway. I could pretty readily go after Hagler's resume. Care to see it?
Hut & cdogg have already summed this up well. 1. I don't favor fighters who are multiple division "champions" over a fighter who dominates a division, especially one of the traditional 8 divisions for as long as Hagler did. In our current era, there are more divisions and more titles than ever and, to me, takes the some of the shine off of being a multiple title holder. 2. Too much is made of Pacquaio's run post 130. It is impressive that a lower weight fighter (who very well could be on some sort of PEDs) could be undefeated at those weights, but like cdogg said, his opposition hasn't been anything special. The two biggest names on the hit list Mosely & DLH were way past their best. 3. Anyone who thinks Pac is a significantly better fighter than Hagler probably needs to watch more Hagler fights. Hagler was a master boxer, with a ridiculous chin, underrated power and the ability to end a fight early (even though he preferred to box). His competition is sometimes underrated by those who don't really know the fighters involved outside of seeing the names on his resume, but as someone who followed Hagler's career as it happened, there is nothing to complain about regarding his resume.
Pac's best win post 135 is Hatton IMO. What he did to Hatton, at a weight where Hatton had ruled decisively for about four years, was remarkable in it's sheer savagery. Like Hut, for a few seconds I honestly thought he had killed Ricky. MTF
The criticisms of Pacquiao's opponents beyond 135 imo are understable. But I like how moreso than, say, Floyd Mayweather Jr., he's far exceeded our collective expectations. And he's mostly done so in an electrifying fashion. I picked Oscar De La Hoya, Hatton and Cotto to beat Manny Pacquiao. Should they ever fight, I would also pick Floyd over him. I think this is the reality Manny Pac and his fans realize and must grudgingly accept. Because he's not as good as Mayweather (who I think has done less), he must do considerably much more to make knowlegeable---albeit prudently conservative---critics overcome their prejudices and be comfortable in saying that he belongs at a certain plateau. That seems harsh and unfair. But the way I see it, that's just the way things are. In some perverse way, you can even say Floyd Mayweather Jr. has been smarter (and more prudent) in his choice of opposition. If I was fighter blessed with incredible talent desiring the kind of lofty status that could be gained after i'd paid a measure of my dues (which Floyd has done at the lower weights) but no more than that, i'd probably go the route he's taken. It's the sensible thing to do.
bingo I'm far more impressed by Pacquiao's wins at 122-130 than by this crew of stiffs... he's a great fighter because of that, not because of this stuff After the Hoya fight, I stopped seeing any of the fights as mismatches... The hoya fight illustrated that Oscar was shot, but it also illustrated that pac was still fast and fit at the weight... did anyone seriously pick cotto, margarito, clottey, mosley to win those fights??
Perhaps not, but that doesn't diminish Pac's achievement. Would you pick any other guy that had recently fought at featherweight to defeat these stiffs?
His demolition of Hatton is no joke, and neither is walking Cotto down and giving him a beating. Cotto is no stiff, he's always been a very solid fighter at world level. Hagler is my second favourite middleweight of all time behind Monzon, but P4P I think Pacquiao is the more accomplished fighter of the two. I do place importance on multi weights, one of the reasons I rate Duran as highly as I do is hmi performing as well as he did at 147+, being a 5'7 lightweight. It's amazing. Same as Pacquiao. In retrospect Oscar is weight drained and washed up and the win is meaingless, but we knew that before the fight, and it was still seen as a joke of a fight with Oscar just being too big. Pacquiao has gone from overrated to underrated. Hut and cdogg are two of my favourite posters but they are acting like Pac's destruction of even average welterweights doesn't mean much. I've said this before, but if it's that easy, why isn't anyone else doing it? I don't see many other fighters destroying guys however many divisions above their natural weight, even if those fighters are Clottey and Plasterito level fighters. People are starting to take what Pacquiao has done for granted, but to be honest it's the destroying bigger men with his featherweight frame that impresses me more than anything he did at flyweight/featherweight. In a head to head match, P4P, I pick Pacquiao against Marvin, I think he'd win a close decision, mainly due to speed and activity.
Exactly. Let's see Gamboa fight every one of these fighters and see how he does. He'd probably lose every single one.
if the featherweight was on a regimen of PEDs? sure, why not? JMM looked like a little old pudgy guy in there with Mayweather A few years later, he hires a "fitness guru" and magically he's chiseled and sturdy all of the sudden
I personally think JMM is the only guy Pacquaio has fought who has comparable skills to Marvin Hagler... only, Marvin is better than JMM
Difficult to believe Pac was the lone guy on PEDs out there. I don't believe any athlete is 'above' it, they don't take tests, most coaches have all the connections and knowledge needed to do it etc. Also, Pac has never given a positive test, so I can't see how you can single him out here
because the suppliers are way ahead of the tests, ugo, you know that Barry Bonds never tested positive either in baseball, but he also gained about 50 pounds, his SKULL increased significantly in circumference in his 30s and he magically developed bigger feet...
hagler had better handspeed and a better chin than marquez, but i wouldnt say his skills were better.
He was the underdog in the Oscar fight, and likewise, would have been the underdog in every single one of them, if it had come straight after the Diaz fight. Reason being - guys that fought at 130 the same year aren't supposed to beat up welterweights, it's basically unheard of.
Well, Hagler had a better jab than JMM. And like JMM, he was extremely accurate. Also, prime Hagler had better footwork than Marquez. Marquez is the better combination puncher though. That part can't be argued. I don't know why this thread has gone on so long though. Hagler would have sent Manny back in a box.
If we're staying on topic yeah, Pacquiao would get whupped in 6 rounds or so by Hagler at 160 :: In regards to skill, I do think Marquez is slightly more skilled than Hagler, better counter puncher, better combination puncher, excellent gauge of distance, brilliant timing, great thinker in the ring, awesome at picking up opponent's patterns. Hagler was a skilled operator, his boxing skill is underrated, but IMO he's not quite the technician that Marquez is. Like others have said he has a better jab than Marquez, better movement, and a fucking rock solid chin.
