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

What U're Talking about is ALL TIME Lb for Lb Ranking...This Thread is about CURRENT Lb for Lb Ranking...ARGUABLY, Pac Could Maintain a Higher ALL TIME Lb for Lb Ranking, even if he LOSES to Floyd...

But there's NO CHANCE of him Maintaining his CURRENT Lb for Lb Ranking Over Floyd, if he Loses....



REED:hammert:

 

Um....when he retired, REED!!! And even more relevantly when Pac came along and beat his best two opponents far more impressively than he did THEN beat TWO legitimate, prime top 5 welterweights by total domination.

 

It's a great question, isn't it. We can all see arguments being made, that's why we want the fight to happen so much. To me both are P4P #1 until they fight.

If they fight by the end of the year I'll be as joyful as a cheerleader.

 

But he's BACK...

By TAKING his "Title" Due to Retirement, the ASSumption is that he's LESS of a Fighter, Upon Return...But That HASN'T Proven to B the Case...If/When they Fight & Floyd BEATS Pac, Most of Ya'll will BEGRUDGINGLY Give Floyd his Rightful Perch Back...

REED's AHEAD of the Curve...It's a Case of DELAYING the INEVITABLE, Basically...



REED:hammert:

 

The Thing is, REED Can't Name Even ONE Boxing Fan that GENUINELY Believed Floyd would Remain "Retired"...



REED:hammert:

 

REED - who has proven more in his last 3 or 4 fights? Pac or Floyd? It isn't even close. Pac is Number 1 until Floyd does something to match his achievements.

 

I've read that argument a lot and seriously can't get it. If Floyd beats Manny clearly there's no fucking way to still rank Manny ahead. Why? Because Floyd would have a prime, on a roll, coming of his best wins ever Pacquiao on his resume. Manny wouldn't have anything close to that to match. Same thing if Manny wins. That's why the fight needs to happen. The winner gets his legacy bumped big fucking time.

 

w/Out Question, Pac has Achieved More...The PROBLEM is, Pac was Only Given the Lb for Lb Slot on a TECHNICALITY...

Floyd Can't REGAIN the "Title" w/Out Actually BEATING Someone for it, yet he Can LOSE it w/Out LOSING a Fight???...

REED:mj:

 

So what? What does that have to do with anything? Call it 2 years of inactivity then. Regardless of his motivations or anything else, it was 2 years of him doing fuck all. In which time Pac came along TORE through his best wins then twice did what we've spent 5 years waiting for Floyd to do - beat some real, top 5 prime welterweights. And he did so by domination.

Pac has proven more, so Pac ranks higher. That's all there is to this thing.

 

This is one of the problems with the whole 'pound for pound' thing. Everyone has a different, subjective way of measuring it.

For me, you judge a fighter in terms of what they have done IMMEDIATELY in terms of their ranking rather than doing so at the end of their career for historical purposes.

An argument can easily be made for Pacquiao being better, P4P, even if he loses to Mayweather Jr based on his rise through the weights, common opponents, each man's natural, preferred weight, resume etc. All of these are factors in P4P consideration.

Personally, I would rank Floyd higher than Pacquiao if they fight and Mayweather Jr wins but it is not as clear cut as you are making it seem IMHO Mister REED.

MTF

 

Difficult to see what's wrong with this logic.

 

He can win it by going & proving more than the guy above him. Just like the guy below him could & did overtake him by proving more than he did. That's all there is to this thing, there's no linearity in p4p, that's absurd - most the time you're comparing guys who can't fight each other anyway. Just so happens that the accomplishments of guys the same size are uniquely easy to compare.

 

Because they are not naturally the same weight.

MTF

 

Nah, if they're fighting at the same weight they're the same weight. Reminds me of when I would see Chris Byrd on p4p lists after watching him bounced around the ring like a rubber ball by a guy in his own division. Absurd reasoning....guys can take advantage of their size by moving down, they don't get credit for it once they choose to fight in a higher weight.

 

If I may answer.....

Floyd.

he dominated Marquez, an undisputed P4Pder and potential all time great, who pac struggled with twice. Yeah..Marquez was smaller and started out at Featherweight. Well Floyd started out at Superfeatherweight...and didn't win that fight based on size, it was based on skill.

Dominating Sugar Shane Mosley is no easy thing do do...regardless of Shane being 38. Shane's dominated the feared Margarito in his previous fight.

Being the first man to beat hatton, the Hatton who stopped Castillo and Tszyu, the Hatton that didn't know what it was like to be stopped or even badly hurt...is no easy feat. Floyd beat him up with room to spare and did it after compromising his training with a stint on dancing with the stars>>>> :hammert::mj:


Going up to 154lbs to fight the rejuvenated De la Hoya in his 5th weight class, the same Oscar who had WIPED THE FLOOR with Mayorga in his previous fight and who was comfortable at 154lb and not the weight drained IV-dependent one that Pacman fought..proved alot.

Floyd has proven himself to be the best, and Pacquiao has to beat Floyd to prove that he's the best.

 

agREED

win or lose Pac goes down as a greater fighter than Floyd...unless Floyd beats a top champ at 160...then all bets are off. It's a legit discussion at that point.

 

Sly he's beaten a featherweight at welterweight and a 38 year old coming off a 16 month lay off. Those are his only two fights in the last 2 1/2 years. He hasn't PROVEN shit. If you have different criteria, fine, but by mine there isn't even a conversation to have here. Floyd has 2 wins in 2 1/2 years & neither were against proven or known commodities at the time & weight he fought them.

 

Indeed.

 

Fair enough. I shall say no more.

Other than to say GET SOME PRIDE. He's a boxer, not a chick you have a chance at nailing.

 

Yep, Floyd beat Marquez. And Marquez, who was small as a lightweight, only had to jump up two more weightclasses to fight Floyd. That's a fair comparison. NOT.

Rejuvenated DLH? Really, you mean the old one who struggled badly with Sturm and tapped out to Hopkins? The one who lost to Mosley before that? The one who had 2 fights in 3 years prior to facing Floyd? We have different definitions of rejuvenated, REED.

Yep, Mayweather beat Hatton in 10 rounds. He outboxed him and finally wore him down with help from the ringpost. Pacquiao iced him cold in two rounds, and there was no weardown to it.

Mayweather has one legit but old welterweight, one old, part-time Junior Middleweight/boxing promoter, a Junior Welterweight, and a lightweight in his last four fights.

Pac has the same part-time boxer/boxing promoter (beat him faster and much worse while moving up from lightweight), the same Junior Welterweight (annihilated him), and two legitimate top 5 welterweights (both in the last 6 months).

Mayweather is the better boxer and the odds-on favorite to win against Pac in my opinion, but if we base it on the last 4 fights (common opponents and quality of opposition), Pac edges it.

Floyd will hammer and probably stop Pac when they fight though.

 

Fraud may outpoint Pacman, but Pac can destroy him within two rounds (see Mosley's near upset in round two). Pacman will never let him recover.

 

just curious, but if mayweather jr completely outclasses pacquaio, beats the shit out of him and stops him in impressive fashion and promptly retires to never fight again do you think any historians will claim pacquaio was the better fighter?

 

Doubtful. However, they may still argue Pacquiao deserves more from history, on achievement.

 

I don't know if anyone has addressed this, but ESPN Divisional rankings have Floyd #1 and Manny #2.

I believe before the Shane fight, it was #1: Manny #2: Floyd and #3: Shane (I could be wrong though, going on memory here).

Now post Shane fight, the DIVISIONAL rankings for Welter is #1 Floyd #2 Manny and #3 Berto, with Shane at #6.

Yet the P4P rankings have #1: Manny and #2: Floyd.

How does that work? In the division, Floyd is ranked higher than Manny, and yet in the P4P rankings, Manny is ranked higher than Floyd.

Maybe I'm not understanding this, but it doesn't sound like that makes sense.

 

They're obviously implying that Mayweather is the better fighter by such a small margin, the relatively small size margin between them eclipses that fact, meaning they'd pick Pacquiao over Mayweather if each were truly the same size. As stated, that would indicate they figure Mayweather is better, but only by way of a very small gulf.

 

Pretty much.

I do think that In a who beats who sense, P4P it's very close.

Head to head right now, the main reason that I'd favour PBF over Pac is because of the size strength advantage that he'd have over Manny.

If Manny had the same size strength advantage over PBF, I'd favour Manny to win.

If the size strength differential was a total non-issue, I'd lean towards Manny because he would out-work PBF.

HOWEVER, I also think that PBF can defeat a wider range of opponents than Manny, even though as far as victories over common opponents, Pac's would generally be more devastating.

 

Yeah I guess. I just think it's weird how Manny isn't better than Floyd in the same division, but overall, he's better. :dunno:

 

It only leaves room for a microscopic gap in ability, they have to admit. I remember seeing a Writers' Association Of America polling back in the very early-80's, where they ranked Ali the best Heavyweight, but Louis collectively placed above him in the all-time pound-for-pound rankings.

 

Another thread that shows that there is no p4p. Nobody can explain clearly what it means, nobody agrees about its criteria. It is a mantra created by promoters and as useful as WBC fedecentro silver belt: created to fool ignorant people

 

It's SRR's fault actually.