Counter Arguments To Manny Pacquiao Being an "Eight" Division Champion

[THC]

I prefer to look at his overall resume: who he fought, and how well he did against top competition. Trying to quantify his achievements otherwise is meaningless because nowadays there are too many belts and too many divisions.

[GhostofDempsey]

Only casuals and flunkie Floyd fans try to discredit him. You appear to be both.

[aboutfkntime]

A lot of Manny Pacquiao fans say he is the GOAT because he is the only eight division champion, I've come up with a few counter arguments for this.

Counter Argument #1: No he isn't

When you actually take time and research this, you'll realize Pacquiao isn't an eight division champion at all. There are four major world title belts in boxing today (WBA, WBC, IBF & WBO), Pacquaio has only won these belts in six divisions, he never won either of these belts at 140 or 126.

Pacquiao fans will say that he won the lineal title in these divisions, but which boxers actually care about the lineal claim? Here's what Deontay Wilder thinks:


Problems with the lineal title include:

• There is no consistent way to fill the vacancy after the current lineal champion moves up in weight, retires or dies
• A lot of lineal champion fight weak competition. For example, George Foreman fighting Axel Schulz, Crawford Grimsley and Lou Savarese or Tyson Fury fighting Tom Schwarz, Otto Wallin, Francesco Pianeta and Sefer Seferi. If any of those guys beat Foreman or Fury, the lineal title would've been passed around in an eternal loop of bums.
• No one agrees on who is actually the real lineal champion. An example is in the 1990s, Cyber Boxing Zone considered Virgil Hill the lineal champion but Ring ****zine controversially recognized Roy Jones Jr. as the lineal champion

Counter Argument #2: Roy Jones Jr. and James Toney winning belts at middleweight and all the way up to heavyweight is much more impressive

Roy Jones Jr. and James Toney's move from Middleweight all the way up to Heavyweight covers far more weight than Manny Pacquiao's move from Flyweight to Super Welterweight. Middleweight(160)-Heavyweight(200+) covers 40+ pounds, Flyweight(112)-Super Welterweight(154) covers only 42 lbs and stops at just 42 lbs.

Counter Argument #3: Manny Pacquiao had very weak competition moving up in weight.

• Chatchai Sasakul, ended his career 3-3 against champions (Flyweight)

• Lehlo Ledwaba, won a vacant belt against a non-champion. Never beat a champion in his career (Super Bantamweight)

• Paper champion David Diaz who won his title from a washed up Erik Morales, never won a belt again (Lightweight)

• Antonio Margarito WITHOUT the hand wraps. Had six losses and no belt, they were fighting for a vacant one (Super Welterweight)

The only divisions he gets credit for conquering is when he beat Marquez to win his first belt at Super Featherweight and when he beat Miguel Cotto to win his first belt at Welterweight. Manny never won a belt at 140 or 126 so he’s not actually an eight division champion as we've already established, he’s really a six division champion with wins against weak opponents in four of those six divisions.

Counter Arguments #4: Oscar De La Hoya is a six division champion, is he a GOAT too?

If we use the Pacquiao fan logic, then De La Hoya has a real argument for being the GOAT since he and Pacquiao are both six division champions. Yet we rarely see anyone arguing that.

the 3 main points are.....


1) FACT: Pac won " titles " in 6 divisions... not 8

the " 8-division champ " thing... is just a cool-story-bro


2) Diaz and cheato, big deal... plenty of people would have beaten those guys, they were not great achievements


3) the number of divisions a fighter represented is NOT criteria for greatness... MANY great fighters only ever fought in 1 division, and MANY of them are greater than Pacquiao... Willie Pep, for example, and many great heavyweights...

the number of divisions you represented has nothing to with greatness

the only criteria for greatness is...

WHO did you beat, with consideration given to when/how...
with some consideration given to your losses

that is why pacfans have been unable to give names better than...

* taming Pacquiao, at 38yo
* schooling Canelo, at 36yo
* schooling Marquez, at 32yo


#namesnotnamelessachievements

[aboutfkntime]

The thing that's really dumb about the "most divisions" argument is that it unfairly favors the little guys. I've seen people argue that Pacquiao is greater than Muhammad Ali simply because Ali fought only in one weight class. There is no higher division than Heavyweight! WTF was Ali supposed to do? Shrink himself down to 195, then 185, then 175, all the way down until he's a skeleton? Judge a fighter by the quality of his opponents and his victories, not by how many weight divisions he's competed in.

there it is, right there !!

[aboutfkntime]

He also would not be undefeated.

Floyd started his amateur career at age 16. He had 8 losses.

whooooooah

try again

[FredWreck]

A lot of Manny Pacquiao fans say he is the GOAT because he is the only eight division champion, I've come up with a few counter arguments for this.

Counter Argument #1: No he isn't

You already lost the argument you were trying to ignite and all your credibility right there.

TROLL THREAD.
Close please.

[aboutfkntime]

I prefer to look at his overall resume: who he fought, and how well he did against top competition. Trying to quantify his achievements otherwise is meaningless because nowadays there are too many belts and too many divisions.

and there it is again...

just as many smart posters as there are dumb posters in this thread

WHO did you beat, with consideration given to when/how...

[pasawayako]

Pac shouldn't be 8 division champion, he should be 10 Division champion.

[Ca$ual Fan]

Counter Argument #2: Roy Jones Jr. and James Toney winning belts at middleweight and all the way up to heavyweight is much more impressive

Roy Jones Jr. and James Toney's move from Middleweight all the way up to Heavyweight covers far more weight than Manny Pacquiao's move from Flyweight to Super Welterweight. Middleweight(160)-Heavyweight(200+) covers 40+ pounds, Flyweight(112)-Super Welterweight(154) covers only 42 lbs and stops at just 42 lbs.

Question for you, how long did Roy Jones stay in the heavyweight division? Care to know why? If he stayed for a decade, kept winning and continued to stay on top then yes it would be more impressive.

Counter Argument #3: Manny Pacquiao had very weak competition moving up in weight.

• Chatchai Sasakul, ended his career 3-3 against champions (Flyweight)

• Lehlo Ledwaba, won a vacant belt against a non-champion. Never beat a champion in his career (Super Bantamweight)

• Paper champion David Diaz who won his title from a washed up Erik Morales, never won a belt again (Lightweight)

• Antonio Margarito WITHOUT the hand wraps. Had six losses and no belt, they were fighting for a vacant one (Super Welterweight)

Chatchai Sasakul beat the man who conquered in the division in the early 90s - Yuri Arbachakov, a HOFer mind you. Did you just include his loss against Mijares when he was 38 yrs old shot version in his 3-3 record? LMAO. In his other 2 loses, 1 HOFer, 1 ATG HOFer. Make more effort in trying to make him look weak

Ledwaba was a very skilled fighter. He established himself as one of the best in the division with his performances in the ring. Most fighters in this generation are given alot benefit thru the 'eye test'. So Manny would not get the benefit should he pull off against Crawford and Spence?

I give you Diaz and Margarito but make up your mind. First you don't count any titles that aren't ABCs against the real champs in the division now you don't count someone you deemed as weak even though he held an ABC strap? Plus Diaz didn't win the strap against Morales, do more research.

Margarito was a solid 147 pounder, Manny should be given props though for giving him extra 3 pounds not the other way around that people claimed that he was drained from 154. LMAO

The only divisions he gets credit for conquering is when he beat Marquez to win his first belt at Super Featherweight and when he beat Miguel Cotto to win his first belt at Welterweight. Manny never won a belt at 140 or 126 so he’s not actually an eight division champion as we've already established, he’s really a six division champion with wins against weak opponents in four of those six divisions.

Whoaw, come down there. You're trying to discount every possible thing you can. Are you really that much of a hater? You consider Sasakul and Ledwaba weak during their time? Refer to my post above. They're not HOFs but they're solid champs mind you. We can always discount every fighter's achievements not just Manny's if we do it your way. Plus make up your mind, don't create 2 standards. He beat the real champs at 126 and 140 and both had ABC belts which they threw away. Either that or you accept the Diaz was truly a champ and the Margarito fight was a championship bout.

Counter Arguments #4: Oscar De La Hoya is a six division champion, is he a GOAT too?

If we use the Pacquiao fan logic, then De La Hoya has a real argument for being the GOAT since he and Pacquiao are both six division champions. Yet we rarely see anyone arguing that.

There is more to his achievements than his 8 division championship (or 6 by your either standard whichever makes you sleep). Manny didn't lose every notable fight that he had like OScar did. Even without titles, he achieved far more than Oscar. Mind you, Oscar was done at the age of 35 while Manny still continues to achieve at the age of 40+

[techliam]

To cut a long story short, you don’t recognise the lineal championships (or the RING titles, prior to GBP takeover)

Fair enough, but don’t expect others to automatically agree

Somewhere you said there’s no consistent way to fill a vacant lineal championship. That’s incorrect. The process is very black and white - no.1 vs no.2. The rankings themselves are subjective, but that isn’t an issue with the lineal system, more so the structure of the sport

I’ve been critical of the lineal system for a long time, but weak arguments only serve to dampen the criticism that actually gets heard..