Comments Thread For: Mark Johnson Rips Pacquiao, Talks Khan-Peterson, More

[jrosales13]

Nobody said it was, or even attempted to insinuate that.

Comprehension fail.

Raheem, Campbell, Guzman, Soto, are just SOME of the MANY fighters that Pacquiao "conveniently" missed. It is funny that you insist that.....
1.) Pac is great
2.) beating the guys above is not great
3.) and yet I doubt that Pac could have beaten Guzman at 130

Styles make fights, and Trampler/Roach are much smarter than you or I when it comes to boxing.

What makes say he couldn't?

[jrosales13]

oh gosh what a disgusting wall of text. And if you learned to read I didnt even mention DLH or Morales. Barrera from the first fight was near prime and an outstanding win. Even in the rematch Barrera was one of the best fighters at 130lbs, and arguably beat Marquez in the match right beforehand. While Cotto was not quite prime, he still obviously was one the best fighters at 147lbs, and has still gone on to be one of the best at 154lbs: Its a damn good win. Im not a fan of Clottey, but he was one of the best fighters at 147lbs, and while its not a legendary win, its legitimate and worth mentioning. Same with David Diaz, who isnt that great but did legitimately beat Jose Santa Cruz, who definitely was badly robbed agaisnt Casamayor.

and wake up: Mosley was not much worse agaisnt Mayweather. Mosley showed how old he was against Mora, and that wasnt long after the Mayweather fight at all. not to mention he was coming off a very long layoff. It wasnt really a stand out win for either of them: just one they took to assert their high ranking at Welterweight.

Pacquiao's wins over Barrera, Sasakul, Ledwaba, Cotto, and Hatton made him the best fighter in those divsions. and thats without counting his secondary wins, and assuming he lost all the Marquez fights, which is highly up for debate. hes already p4p with just those wins right there. especially considering how shallow boxing is today anyway.

and Cotto was considered #2 in the division when Pacquiao beat him, numbskull. Diaz was also in the top ten, but it wasnt that good of a win really.

All he's going to do is copy and paste and post the same damn thing...That is what he does when he can't debate...His knowledge of the sport is very limited. He hates very well though.

[LeadUppercut]

oh gosh what a disgusting wall of text. And if you learned to read I didnt even mention DLH or Morales. Barrera from the first fight was near prime and an outstanding win. Even in the rematch Barrera was one of the best fighters at 130lbs, and arguably beat Marquez in the match right beforehand. While Cotto was not quite prime, he still obviously was one the best fighters at 147lbs, and has still gone on to be one of the best at 154lbs: Its a damn good win. Im not a fan of Clottey, but he was one of the best fighters at 147lbs, and while its not a legendary win, its legitimate and worth mentioning. Same with David Diaz, who isnt that great but did legitimately beat Jose Santa Cruz, who definitely was badly robbed agaisnt Casamayor.

and wake up: Mosley was not much worse agaisnt Mayweather. Mosley showed how old he was against Mora, and that wasnt long after the Mayweather fight at all. not to mention he was coming off a very long layoff. It wasnt really a stand out win for either of them: just one they took to assert their high ranking at Welterweight.

Pacquiao's wins over Barrera, Sasakul, Ledwaba, Cotto, and Hatton made him the best fighter in those divsions. and thats without counting his secondary wins, and assuming he lost all the Marquez fights, which is highly up for debate. hes already p4p with just those wins right there. especially considering how shallow boxing is today anyway.

and Cotto was considered #2 in the division when Pacquiao beat him, numbskull. Diaz was also in the top ten, but it wasnt that good of a win really.

You are an idiot kid. I will list why.....

1.) for stating that Barrera arguably beat Marquez
2.) for denying that Pac ducked Mosley TWICE when Shane was #1
3.) for thinking that beating a faded, damaged, drained, Cotto, could make him the best welterweight in the world
4.) for stating that Cotto should have been ranked higher than Mayweather, Pacquiao, Mosley, Margarito

Go away.

This is the question, answer or leave.....

Define P4P criteria, and then tell me how that applies to Pacquiao.

You are a fkn moron for telling me that Pacquiao is great for beating Diaz.

Pacquiao's best win was Barrera.

[LeadUppercut]

P4P is a mythical based opinion...It's make believe...What are you talking about? It's all your opinion. If you have Pac #1 or Pac not at all...Then that's fine...You not either right or wrong. Because, it's your opinion. You can have your own set of criteria and the next guy can have his own.

If I say that P4P is that you have to be an elite fighter in 3 or more weight-classes...Then how can Pac not be in my P4P? But, if you have a different criteria where you come up with something then that's fine. Because, again there is no "True P4P" list. There's no such thing.

Rubbish, traditional P4P criteria is based on the latin phrase ceteris paribus.

Roughly translated " if all things were equal ".

The equal in boxing, is weight.

Thus, traditional P4P criteria is-as such......
" if both fighters were naturally the same size, who would win ? "

Quite simple really, your non-committal explanation of P4P was just silly.

Jro.....

WHY WOULD A SUPPOSED P4P FIGHTER NEED A CATCH-WEIGHT ?

You dont know **** about boxing, you have read a couple of books, and you have watched a couple of films..... but you have no feel for the game whatsoever..... you are all " theory ".

[Steak]

You are an idiot kid. I will list why.....

1.) for stating that Barrera arguably beat Marquez
2.) for denying that Pac ducked Mosley TWICE when Shane was #1
3.) for thinking that beating a faded, damaged, drained, Cotto, could make him the best welterweight in the world
4.) for stating that Cotto should have been ranked higher than Mayweather, Pacquiao, Mosley, Margarito

Go away.

This is the question, answer or leave.....

Define P4P criteria, and then tell me how that applies to Pacquiao.

You are a fkn moron for telling me that Pacquiao is great for beating Diaz.

Pacquiao's best win was Barrera.

1. Barrera dropped Marquez, busted up his face badly, and won a lot of rounds. Its not inconceivable that Barrera won that fight, and either way it was very close, which makes Barrera a very legitimate win.
2. I never said anything regarding Pacquiao fighting Mosley you delusional ****er
3. Margarito had just been banned from boxing earlier in the year, Mayweather had only beaten Marquez, a lightweight, since his retirement 2 years previous, Mosley had gone up to and Cotto, who beat Mosley...well, Pacquiao beat him dominantly, didnt he?

and you lunatic, I said Pacquiao was great for beating multiple very highly regarded fighters over multiple weight classes, not because he beat Diaz Youre one of the more hilarious, delusional nutcases Ive met on here.

and prime Barrera is one outstanding win, especially considering how dominant the performance was. Do you know anything at all about Sasakul or Ledwaba, you havent mentioned them at all, have you?

[jrosales13]

Rubbish, traditional P4P criteria is based on the latin phrase ceteris paribus.

Roughly translated " if all things were equal ".

The equal in boxing, is weight.

Thus, traditional P4P criteria is-as such......
" if both fighters were naturally the same size, who would win ? "

Quite simple really, your non-committal explanation of P4P was just silly.

Jro.....

WHY WOULD A SUPPOSED P4P FIGHTER NEED A CATCH-WEIGHT ?

You dont know **** about boxing, you have read a couple of books, and you have watched a couple of films..... but you have no feel for the game whatsoever..... you are all " theory ".

Well to make things equal in a traditional P4P sense no?

[jrosales13]

1. Barrera dropped Marquez, busted up his face badly, and won a lot of rounds. Its not inconceivable that Barrera won that fight, and either way it was very close, which makes Barrera a very legitimate win.
2. I never said anything regarding Pacquiao fighting Mosley you delusional ****er
3. Margarito had just been banned from boxing earlier in the year, Mayweather had only beaten Marquez, a lightweight, since his retirement 2 years previous, Mosley had gone up to and Cotto, who beat Mosley...well, Pacquiao beat him dominantly, didnt he?

and you lunatic, I said Pacquiao was great for beating multiple very highly regarded fighters over multiple weight classes, not because he beat Diaz Youre one of the more hilarious, delusional nutcases Ive met on here.

and prime Barrera is one outstanding win, especially considering how dominant the performance was. Do you know anything at all about Sasakul or Ledwaba, you havent mentioned them at all, have you?

On 3 weeks notice.

[PlayerKiller]

Mofo give me your top ten P4P list.

You can type all that long ****, complain Pac isn't P4P so give me your list.

I am going to disect you, cut you up real smooth, you won't even see your blood come out straight away, and I am gonna lik your cut with salt and limne in my mouth.

It's gonna sting like a mofo, but sometimes you got to get beat up to b e stronger.

[bose]

I partially remember Too Sharp, he was good beating all that fought him. But he would have his hands full with Danny Romero and Johnny Tapia, i'd have to see more of him to give him a chance against either. Too Sharp failed in that he went to jail stopping him from ever entering Showtime or Hbo. Had he keep under control, he would have eventually gotten his name out there but didn't. He beat Montiel when Montiel was still a prospect. Rafael beat him twice, the first was a draw, the second was won by ko. Sharp has only himself to blame, but he'll take shot at other guys.

[jrosales13]

I partially remember Too Sharp, he was good beating all that fought him. But he would have his hands full with Danny Romero and Johnny Tapia, i'd have to see more of him to give him a chance against either. Too Sharp failed in that he went to jail stopping him from ever entering Showtime or Hbo. Had he keep under control, he would have eventually gotten his name out there but didn't. He beat Montiel when Montiel was still a prospect. Rafael beat him twice, the first was a draw, the second was won by ko. Sharp has only himself to blame, but he'll take shot at other guys.

They avoided the hell out of him...Especially Mi Vida Loca, his people didn't want him anywhere near Too Sharp.

Montiel was 24 and already had 28 fights and was a 2 division title holder...He was already pass the prospect level.

It's funny how you want to make excuses on why Too Sharp beat Montiel. But, won't acknowledged that he was past his best when not only he fought Montiel butt when he also fought Rafa.

He still was pretty solid when he fought Rafa, he wasn't shot...His damn good win after the Rafa fights over, who at the time was the champion and 2 division title holder in, Montiel proves that.