Ok I know we all love Pac but...

I have seen multiple threads were we rip on guys who have not tried to clean out divisions. I would like to take this time to rip on my favorite fighter of all time. Has Pac ever stayed at a division long enough to clean it out? Also why do we excuse that? Is it because he really is going after what would be the best fight and he is trying to make the best fight or are we just too big of fans? BTW only person I can remember on this board say something like this before is Ali (got to give you props).

Well lets go through his opponents.

126 - Barrera, Marquez, Morales - Seem like to the best to me

130 - Morales, Barrera, Marquez, Larios, Solis - Not too bad

135 - Diaz - The weakest of the 130 champs - can't argue with that

140 - Hatton - The lineal champ

147 - Oscar, Clottey, Cotto - Blame who you would like for the Floyd fight not happening

154 - Margarito - Pac himself said he wouldn't be able to handle the weight. After the fight.

I guess there is a difference between cleaning out a division and proving yourself.

Hey, Ive said forever Pac is not a seven time world champ.

Norm1023 wrote:Well lets go through his opponents.

126 - Barrera, Marquez, Morales - Seem like to the best to me

130 - Morales, Barrera, Marquez, Larios, Solis - Not too bad

135 - Diaz - The weakest of the 130 champs - can't argue with that

140 - Hatton - The lineal champ

147 - Oscar, Clottey, Cotto - Blame who you would like for the Floyd fight not happening

154 - Margarito - Pac himself said he wouldn't be able to handle the weight. After the fight.

I guess there is a difference between cleaning out a division and proving yourself.

4x lineal champ

Norm1023 wrote:Well lets go through his opponents.

126 - Barrera, Marquez, Morales - Seem like to the best to me

130 - Morales, Barrera, Marquez, Larios, Solis - Not too bad

135 - Diaz - The weakest of the 130 champs - can't argue with that

140 - Hatton - The lineal champ

147 - Oscar, Clottey, Cotto - Blame who you would like for the Floyd fight not happening

154 - Margarito - Pac himself said he wouldn't be able to handle the weight. After the fight.

I guess there is a difference between cleaning out a division and proving yourself.

Thats 100% correct. That is the perfect statement.

GrantZilla wrote:Hey, Ive said forever Pac is not a seven time world champ.

..your right grant. hes a eight time champ in 8 different divisions and 4 lineal titles.anyway you look at it its one magnificent achievement.in pacs case sooner sorry there should be no knocking.at 126 130 he beat the top guys.lets just say instead of cleaning out a division pac cleaned out several top fighters in several divisions.yes hes done what no one has ever done ..so in boxing why cant we have both schools of thought.the heavys wlad has done that the flys the guy from thiland has done that at 168 we are seeing guys trying to do that or fight the very best.fronch is a good example so is kessler.pac has fought with great success in what i feel myself are 6 legit divisions.112 118 126 135 140 147...no real fan should complain about that and im not saying you sooner..he moved up in class.where should he have stayed at 126.surely not 112 or 118 where he was a starving kid..if a guy can do that then why not.lets have it both ways not just one.carpienter fought in all 8 weight classes chalenged dempsey at HW won the LH title.where should of he stayed at.or willie pastrano started as a welter was a top ten contender at heavy won the light heavy title.ditto the great jimmy mclarlyn started as a flyweight won the welter title..pac now is settled at welter.oscar cotto margo clottey now mosley.and who knows whos next if he wins..thats at least semi cleaning out and hes not done..

See Dmar thats exactly what I was thinking. So really when we look at a fighter what is better to do clean out a division or do what Pac has done move up and fight the best in the division and move on?

I personally think once a guy is a top 10 pound for pound its awesome to see him challenge himself by fighting the best but to be in the top 10 P4P you should have already cleaned out one division right? So in order to be that star and have that luxury of moving up like Pac did or picking and choosing your fights you should earn that right by doing something great like cleaning out a division.

yep i like both.hagler monzon armstrong have cleaned out divisions by fighting real good fighters in there era..pac is trying to do that at 147 and did enough like we agreeded on at 126 130 and he moved on.by doing that hes brought attention and its all good to boxing..

harry greb cleaned out 3 divisions...

dmar5143 wrote:harry greb cleaned out 3 divisions...

Thats just crazy.

Good thread, Sooner.

I'll take the role of "Devils Advocate" and suggest that, though I've watched fighters clean out divisions, I've also watched some of the best fighters I've ever seen go from division to division and excite the fans with incredible performances. Leonard, Hearns and De La Hoya are examples of these. I've found it more exciting to watch the division jumpers than witnessing "Marvin Hagler" try to break "Carlos Monzon's" record fighting guys named "Tony Sibson" and "Caveman Lee." (Hagler was a great champion and nobody's doubting that.) Honestly, who would watch a replay of Holmes domination of the 80s HW division if they had a chance of looking at the highlights of, let's say, Tommy Hearns? (I'll make Michael Spinks an exception here. It was exciting to watch him dominate his division because of the excellent competition he had. Remember, all his competition came from great Light Heavys who were also natural Light Heavys.)

With boxing in the dark ages, and considering the bleak future of the HW division along with Floyd Mayweather's strange and boring behavior, I welcome Pac's incredible performances whomever they're against. He's the main force behind boxing's struggle to survive.

Also, I'll suggest that with all the paper champs in each division, it's nearly impossible to clear out a division these days. Besides that, believe it or not, there are a good number of fighters who are flat out scared of Manny Pacquiao. If I've noticed that he easily could've killed Oscar D., Miguel Cotto, Ricky Hatton and Antonio Margarito, I think plenty of other people have noticed that too. It doesn't take any detective work to figure out some of them are boxers.

frank good post and some solid points.i agree with what you said.going back to my post im a fan of both and i cant see why we cant praise and enjoy it either way.your points on paper titilists is excellent ..

Hey Frank you just made me think. Another reason why I think we excuse Pac is that cleaning out a division does not mean as much today because of the 17 divisions we have.

Soonermark890 wrote:Hey Frank you just made me think. Another reason why I think we excuse Pac is that cleaning out a division does not mean as much today because of the 17 divisions we have.

Exactly. We used to have one champ per division, then two.... then 5. lol.

I give Pac a break because he has cleaned out divisions. I'm just saying he is not an 8 division champ. If you are going to claim he is, well so is Héctor Camacho

pac has 4 lineal titles.hes recognized by the boxing community tv and major boxing commisions and some fans as wining titles that designate a world champion in 8 different divisions.even ring magazine has reported that.his bio when done will say 8 world championships in differnt weight classes.none of us here recognize all 8 as being the real or lineal champion but we do agree that he has 4 lineal titles which no one in boxing has ever done..camacho was a great fighter but did not win 8 belts from major boxing commisions..he did win though 7 if you call the IBC belts..

ill also add that the boxing folks dont give recognition to hector for 7 belts .when pac won his 7th it was proclaimed as never done before.now its 8.the boxing folks perhaps dont recognize the IBC as a commision or a major type player in the game i guess.

What you talking about? Every credible source in boxing has says he's got eight titles, but not an eight division champ. Threes been a lot of write ups disputing him being an eight division champ.

You're full of it if you think The Ring refers to him as an eight division champ. They do not recognize trinket holders as champions. Neither does Doghouse boxing and Bad Left Hook

GrantZilla wrote:What you talking about? Every credible source in boxing has says he's got eight titles, but not an eight division champ. Threes been a lot of write ups disputing him being an eight division champ.

You're full of it if you think The Ring refers to him as an eight division champ. They do not recognize trinket holders as champions. Neither does Doghouse boxing and Bad Left Hook

Because they are LAZY

im not here to argue with you grant but you can never seem to get your facts straight..ring magazine in articles in almost every magazine do cover fights and state for example its for the wbc world title belt.
ring yes doesnt recognize a belt unless its lineral or theres but they do recognize that a fight for the wbc world championship belt is just that.they recognize that commision and that belt is for a world title as recognized by that commision not by ring magazine.now you complain almost daily about tv should not announce title fights for this or that belt on this forum.why dont you also complain that ring magazine does exactly what tv does by reporting this fight is for or was for the abc belt..i suggest you write ring daily voicing your complaints about them reporting in print that the fight was for some type of world title.tell them to completely ignore commisions in there writings just like you want tv to do...first you say pac won 7 belts and camacho 8in differnt divisions when both in fact are incorrect.thats not getting simple facts straight..mr negative has complained again.again you dont seem to understand that ALL of us here understand pac has won titles in eight divisions and 4 are them are real championships.lets see 112 122 126 130 135 140 147 154 thats 8 divisions where he was awarded a belt.instead of praising a fighter for doing that you complain.ring yes has reported pac has won titles in 8 different divisions but recognizes only 4 as genuine.so do we..by the way again ill remind you the great ring magazine said for a decade there were nooo lineal champs.not one division had a boxing champ.ring said in reality for a decade that theres no such thing as a boxing champ by doing that..that hollifield bowe real lineal champs are phoney title holders.the HW division title vacant.now when ring has a title vacant its stating that in reality...so write them and complain about that also..my facts are correct yours keeps changing..

Calling someone a titalists is not the same as recognizing them as a world champion. I can't believe this has to be explained to you

Like when Joe Tessitore called Vernon Forrest a titalist for winning a vacant trinket against Baldi, and Forrest got mad about it, saying he wasn't a titalists but a champ

no need to explain for the .world championship means just that.tessitore is now a commision huh..when a boxing commision states this fight is for the world championship its just that in there eyes. when buffer announces its for the wba welter championship of the world.its just that..no where does it say just wba titelist.its says world championship..i cant believe i have to explain that to you..ohh by the way there was a time when ring mag did recognize more then one beltholder per division..or implied that.but lets not talk about that..
when are you going to start complaining to ring magazine about them covering and reporting a abc fight as that abcs version of a world title..you complain on here about hbo showtime etc etc and even wrote them.lets see a letter go out to ring also and there reply.i still dont here complaints that ring said for a decade boxing had no world champs.why are you avoiding that issue.thats far more important then pacs 8 division titles is it not.one of the most influential establishments in boxing said for a decade boxing has no real champs all titles vacant.that was rings incorreect poilcy..why no complaints on that grant.hmmm interesting.

Dmar, you are as dense as a person can get. But you keep being ignorant and thinking these joke ABC belts have any kind of legal authority. They don't. Promoters use them when it benefits them and when they don't, have no problem having their fighter dump it. Lots of fighters do now when the belt gets in their way for TV payday

Already gone over The Ring policy. Before 2001 The Ring belt was not the same. It was nothing but a reward to the best or unified fighters.

After Lennox Lewis got stripped by the WBA for fighting for another belt, The Ring re-introduced the belt with it's current policy.

If you got beef with that, fine. I honesly don't care. You just keep recognizing the jole ABC belts. So is Alverez a Jr Middle champ in you eyes since the WBC says he is

i love it how you avoid things when your totaly wrong mr .negative.learn how to read and understand.where did i say that i recognize or anyone here recognizes a abc belt as a real champ unless that commision champ is a lineal champ..you mean it took ring 10 years to make a policy which in reality they followed for years.and mr dense lol mr negative ive seen real ring belts in person ive had the marciano and louis ring belts also that ring made identical ones given to that fighter..on the belt it says world champion and when and who they won the title from.thus a lineal tradtion not the best fighter in that division.again mr negative runs away from a debate everytime hes wrong which is often.ive never said that i recognize a abc belt as the real champ but do understand that that commision recognizes a fighter as a champ..theres a differnce which you either cant comprehend or refuse to understand..who are all of thses fighters now dumping there belts.name them.3 or 4 or so maybe.you make it sound like its in droves.if 10 percent did what you claim then you can easily name at least 100 fighters that dumpted there belts which is a huge minority..ok mr negatiuve name me 100..
thats another example of you running away from a debate when you dont know what your talking about which again is often.
there were muti-belt holders before lewis and muti belt holders before ring said boxing has no champs..yes there were fewer but still ring said so and so was champ.how did they arrive at that determination.lineal not best for example is the reason...to give you an example of how you are wrong is when robinson was striped of his title and the winner of fullmer basilio would be the new champ.ring still recognized robinson.when pender beat ray ring recognized pender not fullmer who was the better fighter.in fact there were 4 or 5 middles at that time better then pender..ring did not say xyz champ because hes the best.there poilicy written or unwritten was lineal champ..period.not best..now tell who is dense and ignorant.look in the mirror for your anser..outside of the two belts i mentioned i did see in person basilios 3 ring belts.

The Ring policy started in 2001.

Before that it was given to the best in the division, first being Dempsey. It was than awarded to the NBA Champ, and then when the WBC came along it was rewarded to the unified champ. That was back when they allowed unifications

The policy that started in 2001 is the current one where it does not credit the ABC bodies. That is because it is impossible to unify all the joke belts, and them preventing unifications.

As said, policy started when the WBA stripped Lewis for taking a unification fight