Canelo’s Resume vs Pacquiao’s Resume

[ImDominicanLipz]

Don't think there is much of a argument for Canelo over Pacquiao, first ballot for Hall Of Famer for sure. But debatable if he is a shallow end of a All Time Great.

Canelo's resume is a mix of stay busy fights, declining boxing icons with disadvantaged conditions, and wins over good fighters like Kirkland, Trout, Jacobs, Saunders, Smith Brothers, Plant and Etc.

His best wins over Hall Of Famers are likely Cotto, Lara and GGG in the rematch. Though last two are debatable if he won.

Whereas Pacquiao beat champions in their ideal weight divisions, although some few had declined by the time he beat them like Morales in the rematch, Mosley and De La Hoya. He beat Vargas, Broner, Matthysse, Barrera X2, Morales X2, Marquez X2 (debatable), De La Hoya, Hatton, Cotto, Margarito, Mosley, Bradley X2, Matthysse and Thurman.

Also like another poster said, performances also matter, Pacquiao won convincingly while Alvarez rarely displayed dominance over his most difficult opposition that he beat and lost to.

Okay so here’s a question. Do you think aspects of the wins have no impact? Like I said Pacquiaos resume is among the best BUT

Mosley was at the end of his career and just loss to Mayweather
Margarito catchweight and completely damaged goods
De La Hoya was at the end of his career and completely done
Marquez wins were big asterisks then he got KTFO to end the war
Thurman was a good win but it was after a long layoff and a bunch of injuries. Look at his career afterwards
Hatton was just KOd by Mayweather
You also have to add in getting KO’d by Marquez
Losing to Tim Bradley
Losing to Horn
Losing to Ugas


Im not trying to take away from his resume, just asking if that stuff matters?

[icha]

Pacquiao by far. Canelo got at least 3 gift decisions in his career while Manny was arguably robbed at least 3x in his career. He fought trilogies with Morales, Bradley and Marquez 4x. Defeated a young prime Thurman at age 41 and handled Cotto much easier. Won titles in 8 weight classes and even skipped over two that he could have won. Never ducked anyone the way Canelo is shamelessly avoiding Benavidez.

you can also argue that pac has 3 gift decisions vs marquez... i still think pac has the edge, canelo is still on the fight...

[garfios]

pac is the better but both great.... but i still dont give much into the talks of an 8 division champ, we all know that margarito fiasco was a scam

They're not both greats. Only one. Could you show me his greatness?

[anonymous2.0]

Put this way, at age 40+ Hopkins fought 3 HOF's and beat 2 of them
Manny at age 40+ has fought 0 HOFers

[Malvado]

Okay so here’s a question. Do you think aspects of the wins have no impact? Like I said Pacquiaos resume is among the best BUT

Mosley was at the end of his career and just loss to Mayweather
Margarito catchweight and completely damaged goods
De La Hoya was at the end of his career and completely done
Marquez wins were big asterisks then he got KTFO to end the war
Thurman was a good win but it was after a long layoff and a bunch of injuries. Look at his career afterwards
Hatton was just KOd by Mayweather
You also have to add in getting KO’d by Marquez
Losing to Tim Bradley
Losing to Horn
Losing to Ugas


Im not trying to take away from his resume, just asking if that stuff matters?

I agree with some of these points. What I have seen though:

-Margarito wasn't physically damaged goods until he faced Pacquiao, after the handwrap controversy. He underperformed against Mosley who stopped him late in the fight. But the true nail in the coffin was his bout with Pacquiao, Antonio suffered Fractured Orbital Bone like Ugas while Pacquiao despite dominating the bout, ended up with broken ribs and was also hospitalized. Then Cotto took his revenge on Margarito.

-I agree on Shane Mosley, he was already declined even before Mayweather and he wasn't the same after, he got a draw with Sergio Mora before facing Pacquiao and then Canelo.

-De La Hoya was indeed at the end of his career and was a zombie in scale having to drop from middleweight down to welterweight.

-The Marquez bouts were highly competitive and the third bout was controversial despite that Marquez went up two divisions. Still all the bouts were quite noteworthy with Pacquiao displaying his athletic ability in the two bouts he arguably won.

-Thurman didn't live up to his potential, but considering Pacquiao's age and size disadvantage, that's a spectacular win. Thurman was undefeated (29-0) and quite proven having beaten Danny Swift Garcia and Shawn Porter. Pretty good win.

-As for his losses to Bradley, Horn and Ugas, he largely compensates with his other achievements.

Bradley was quite controversial to begin with and later on Pacquiao defeated him twice later on.

Against Horn it was also highly controversial, Pacquiao landed 182 out of 573 punches thrown (32%), whilst Horn landed only 92 of 625 thrown (15%).

Pacquiao by the time he fought Ugas already had physically declined, but nonetheless he was the defending Champion and Ugas was the challenger. Nothing to be questioned about the Cuban's win here.

So I think he should still largely get credit from these fights. Though there a few exceptions.

[HeadShots]

Put this way, at age 40+ Hopkins fought 3 HOF's and beat 2 of them
Manny at age 40+ has fought 0 HOFers

r u really bringing up the corpse of RJJ as a HOF win? LMFAO holy chit.

who was the other HOF win?

[HeadShots]

Er, Pacquaio didn't fight Bradley when he was 40 or over.

These are their wins at 40 and above;

Pacquaio -

Broner
Thurman


Hopkins

Eastman
Tarver
Wright
Pavlik
Ornelas
Roy Jones 2
Pascal
Cloud
Murat
Shumenov


How could you possibly argue that Pacquaio's resume above is better than Hopkins?

that is a lot of bums.

[IronDanHamza]

that is a lot of bums.

As opposed to what? Your imaginary win for Pacquaio over Bradley?

Pacquaio has two fights post 40, one of which wasn't even ranked in Broner. Both of which Pacquaio was favourite to beat.

Hopkins on the other hand beat;

Tarver was ranked #1 and Hopkins was the underdog
Pascal was ranked #1 and Hopkins was the underdog
Howard Eastman was ranked #1
Winky Wright was P4P #3 and Hopkins was the underdog
Kelly Pavlik was ranked #1 (At Middleweight) and Hopkins was the underdog.
Tavouris Cloud was ranked #2 and IBF Champion and Hopkins was the underdog
Shumenov was #5 and WBA Champion

So you're talking nonsense and it's not even remotely comparable.

[elfag]

Pac is better. when pac was at 147 he was only re-hydrating like 3 pounds max.

when canelo is at 168 is re-hydrating quit a bit, he was re-hydrating at 175 but also ducking benevidez and claiming he is too small to face benavidez in the division he is undisputed champion of while cutting like 15 pounds himself. pac would never do a ***** move like that.

[elfag]

Put this way, at age 40+ Hopkins fought 3 HOF's and beat 2 of them
Manny at age 40+ has fought 0 HOFers

hopkins has a better career post 40 that is for sure but pac has the better overall career. hopkins wasted his prime defending his title against the antwon echols and howard eastmans of the world, for multiple times for some unknown reason instead of just moving up. pacquaio could have 20 defenses if he chilled in the same division fighting bums too.