Al Bernstein On Boxing: Manny Pacquiao - One For The Ages

http://www.saddoboxing.com/wp-admin/http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...-Bernstein.jpg
While we all wait for the apparently inevitable announcement that Manny Pacquiao will fight Miguel Cotto, I think it’s wise to really sit back and try and put the Pacquiao story in perspective. Our goal here is to come up with some historical perspective that is reasoned.

In doing that you would think that the exploits of Pacquiao would take on less superhuman traits and be viewed through... Full Boxing Article here...

Astonishing career indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saddo

http://www.saddoboxing.com/wp-admin/http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...-Bernstein.jpg
While we all wait for the apparently inevitable announcement that Manny Pacquiao will fight Miguel Cotto, I think it’s wise to really sit back and try and put the Pacquiao story in perspective. Our goal here is to come up with some historical perspective that is reasoned.

In doing that you would think that the exploits of Pacquiao would take on less superhuman traits and be viewed through... Full Boxing Article here...

---

Great article by Al bernstein!! Finally... a credible writer recognizing How Great Pac is!!! While most boxing fans & Writers in the net not brave enough to compare Pac with the Greats like SRL & Duran. Bernstein now clearly seeing how Pac will be Viewed in History.

I myself was Proud of what I have predicted about Pac. You can google anything from the fighter Pac has fought, his assession to the P4P ranks, in the manner Pac will beat his opponents, to the Money he's about to make, and to the All time rankings Pac's about to achieve, and I almost predicted everything right.

Great points Al about Hatton and ODLH you have to be realistic and ask yourself what any other top fighter would have done to ODLH in that state and a seriously poor wide open Hatton. That's not Mannys fault though he did the job.

But yeah if he beats Cotto at 147 it would be unreal. Cotto has fought faster guys before and with Cotto being pretty much bang in his prime I think he takes Pac to a world of pain. If Manny wins I would expect Floyd to price himself out and Mosley to step in maybe.

A thoughtful article, although somewhat reserved, explores a historical perspective of the importance of Manny Pacquiao's exploits in the square ring.

Major kudos to Al Bernstein, a boxing mind, knowledge of solid repute and genuinely, calibrated old school!

Here at Saddo, the same line of thought at present or at least in the not so distant past, have received powerful backlashes. The established trend is intriguing! It also makes it difficult to be a Pac fan. To be a Pac Fan is to own balls of steel if one is to convey any praise towards the relevance of Pacquiao to boxing. Otherwise, the silent mode. The community-friendly preferred mode.

Truth be told, anything about Pacquiao being great runs contrary or contrastingly to that of what we here at Saddo Boxing maintain and hold sacred.

Actually there is truth that we may only begrudgingly hold Pacquiao P4P king, because popular opinion says so, and not that we believe so.

At times, to the wonder and amazement of true Pac fans like myself, this Pacquiao under recognition can be a source of resentment, and a situation difficult to address. My hats off to those who can.

Why such stubborness in the acquiescence of Pacquiao's greatness?
Outside that of personal preferences, personal biases, I am stumped. Your guess is as good as mine.

I am on borrowed time here... so let's just allow the "Bernstein" to hash the hard facts. I myself would certainly not, not even the least bit. I have not entertained the thought of carrying on with such task in the past, am not giong to start now.

I merely stated my observations, and the intent is to offend no one. The effort was purely to express an agreement to those points brought up by Al Bernstein's piece, and to a lesser degree, to shed light to the oddness of being a Manny Pacquiao fan.

Pacquiao's greatness in the boxing world is solid. With still, a potential to attain even more!

Shouldn't we be glad that the phenomenon that is "the PacMan", is happening? Right before our very eyes, in our generation?

I certainly do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KananKrus

A thoughtful article, although somewhat reserved, explores a historical perspective of the importance of Manny Pacquiao's exploits in the square ring.

Major kudos to Al Bernstein, a boxing mind, knowledge of solid repute and genuinely, calibrated old school!

Here at Saddo, the same line of thought at present or at least in the not so distant past, have received powerful backlashes. The established trend is intriguing! It also makes it difficult to be a Pac fan. To be a Pac Fan is to own balls of steel if one is to convey any praise towards the relevance of Pacquiao to boxing. Otherwise, the silent mode. The community-friendly preferred mode.

Truth be told, anything about Pacquiao being great runs contrary or contrastingly to that of what we here at Saddo Boxing maintain and hold sacred.

Actually there is truth that we may only begrudgingly hold Pacquiao P4P king, because popular opinion says so, and not that we believe so.

At times, to the wonder and amazement of true Pac fans like myself, this Pacquiao under recognition can be a source of resentment, and a situation difficult to address. My hats off to those who can.

Why such stubborness in the acquiescence of Pacquiao's greatness?
Outside that of personal preferences, personal biases, I am stumped. Your guess is as good as mine.

I am on borrowed time here... so let's just allow the "Bernstein" to hash the hard facts. I myself would certainly not, not even the least bit. I have not entertained the thought of carrying on with such task in the past, am not giong to start now.

I merely stated my observations, and the intent is to offend no one. The effort was purely to express an agreement to those points brought up by Al Bernstein's piece, and to a lesser degree, to shed light to the oddness of being a Manny Pacquiao fan.

Pacquiao's greatness in the boxing world is solid. With still, a potential to attain even more!

Shouldn't we be glad that the phenomenon that is "the PacMan", is happening? Right before our very eyes, in our generation?

I certainly do.

---

Are you fucking kidding me? Goddamn, what a pretentious post. Gentlemen (and ladies), we have found the Terry Nutkins of Pacfans.

I've yet to see anyone on here seriously deny the greatness of Manny Pacquiao in any credible way. Everyone on here acknowledges that he is an all-time great and that we are privileged to be watching his career unfold before us. Exactly how great he will prove to be is a topic of legitimate discussion and I don't see any problem with people expressing varying views. Nobody dislikes Pacquiao, that's almost impossible, it's some of his fans who create the backlash against him.

Anyways, on to someone relevant, great article Al. Beating Cotto at 147, which I think Pacquiao would be able to do, would be an amazing accomplishment and the best of an already storied career. If he beats Mosley and/or Mayweather in addition to Cotto, I would argue that he is one of the top 5-10 fighters of all time.

Edit: When I said top 5-10 I meant he could arguably be ranked anywhere on a list of the top 5 or 10 fighers ever.

You have the coolest avatar CHF.

As a Pacquiao fan, I am truly grateful to Al for giving his assent on my seemingly presumptuous assertion that Pacquaio belongs to the "historical and all great category". Plagued with ridicule and innumerable personal assaults in this benighted forum for saying my mind and what i truly believe about Pac, Al's article is akin to a redeeming grace for us pacfans.

To Al,

With the crown of snow there cometh wisdom. Thank you from the deepest recess of my heart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brucelee

As a Pacquiao fan, I am truly grateful to Al for giving his assent on my seemingly presumptuous assertion that Pacquaio belongs to the "historical and all great category". Plagued with ridicule and innumerable personal assaults in this benighted forum for saying my mind and what i truly believe about Pac, Al's article is akin to a redeeming grace for us pacfans.

To Al,

With the crown of snow there cometh wisdom. Thank you from the deepest recess of my heart.

---

If we are so woefully ignorant then why are you still here?

I refer you to my response to Kanankrus for my opinion on this matter, I have pretty much the same thing to say to you as I said to him but I don't feel like typing it all out again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brucelee

As a Pacquiao fan, I am truly grateful to Al for giving his assent on my seemingly presumptuous assertion that Pacquaio belongs to the "historical and all great category". Plagued with ridicule and innumerable personal assaults in this benighted forum for saying my mind and what i truly believe about Pac, Al's article is akin to a redeeming grace for us pacfans.

To Al,

With the crown of snow there cometh wisdom. Thank you from the deepest recess of my heart.

---

If we are so woefully ignorant then why are you still here?

I refer you to my response to Kanankrus for my opinion on this matter, I have pretty much the same thing to say to you as I said to him but I don't feel like typing it all out again.

---

please check your definition of benighted. I used that word to mean "unenlightened" not ignorant. The reason I'm still here is impliedly provided. :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brucelee

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brucelee

As a Pacquiao fan, I am truly grateful to Al for giving his assent on my seemingly presumptuous assertion that Pacquaio belongs to the "historical and all great category". Plagued with ridicule and innumerable personal assaults in this benighted forum for saying my mind and what i truly believe about Pac, Al's article is akin to a redeeming grace for us pacfans.

To Al,

With the crown of snow there cometh wisdom. Thank you from the deepest recess of my heart.

---

If we are so woefully ignorant then why are you still here?

I refer you to my response to Kanankrus for my opinion on this matter, I have pretty much the same thing to say to you as I said to him but I don't feel like typing it all out again.

---

please check your definition of benighted. I used that word to mean "unenlightened" not ignorant. The reason I'm still here is impliedly provided. :cool:

---

Semantics. It means essentially the same thing.

Edit: Here's a definition of the word benighted:

–adjective 1. intellectually or morally ignorant; unenlightened: benighted ages of barbarism and superstition. 2. overtaken by darkness or night.

Anyways, I'm done with this. It is/was not my intention to derail the thread about Al's article but when people take shots at the forum and it's members I feel the need to step in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brucelee

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

If we are so woefully ignorant then why are you still here?

I refer you to my response to Kanankrus for my opinion on this matter, I have pretty much the same thing to say to you as I said to him but I don't feel like typing it all out again.

---

please check your definition of benighted. I used that word to mean "unenlightened" not ignorant. The reason I'm still here is impliedly provided. :cool:

---

Semantics. It means essentially the same thing.

---

Sorry bro. I beg to dissent. The two are not the same. I used the word benighted not to degrade the forum but to show appreciation to Al's contribution to this forum. No offense meant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brucelee

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brucelee

please check your definition of benighted. I used that word to mean "unenlightened" not ignorant. The reason I'm still here is impliedly provided. :cool:

---

Semantics. It means essentially the same thing.

---

Sorry bro. I beg to dissent. The two are not the same. I used the word benighted not to degrade the forum but to show appreciation to Al's contribution to this forum. No offense meant.

---

:rolleyes:

I copied a dictionary definition and put it in my previous post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brucelee

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brucelee

please check your definition of benighted. I used that word to mean "unenlightened" not ignorant. The reason I'm still here is impliedly provided. :cool:

---

Semantics. It means essentially the same thing.

---

Sorry bro. I beg to dissent. The two are not the same. I used the word benighted not to degrade the forum but to show appreciation to Al's contribution to this forum. No offense meant.

---

I think it would be BeKnighted, as in made a knight, as in arise Sir Al.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KananKrus

A thoughtful article, although somewhat reserved, explores a historical perspective of the importance of Manny Pacquiao's exploits in the square ring.

Major kudos to Al Bernstein, a boxing mind, knowledge of solid repute and genuinely, calibrated old school!

Here at Saddo, the same line of thought at present or at least in the not so distant past, have received powerful backlashes. The established trend is intriguing! It also makes it difficult to be a Pac fan. To be a Pac Fan is to own balls of steel if one is to convey any praise towards the relevance of Pacquiao to boxing. Otherwise, the silent mode. The community-friendly preferred mode.

Truth be told, anything about Pacquiao being great runs contrary or contrastingly to that of what we here at Saddo Boxing maintain and hold sacred.

Actually there is truth that we may only begrudgingly hold Pacquiao P4P king, because popular opinion says so, and not that we believe so.

At times, to the wonder and amazement of true Pac fans like myself, this Pacquiao under recognition can be a source of resentment, and a situation difficult to address. My hats off to those who can.

Why such stubborness in the acquiescence of Pacquiao's greatness?
Outside that of personal preferences, personal biases, I am stumped. Your guess is as good as mine.

I am on borrowed time here... so let's just allow the "Bernstein" to hash the hard facts. I myself would certainly not, not even the least bit. I have not entertained the thought of carrying on with such task in the past, am not giong to start now.

I merely stated my observations, and the intent is to offend no one. The effort was purely to express an agreement to those points brought up by Al Bernstein's piece, and to a lesser degree, to shed light to the oddness of being a Manny Pacquiao fan.

Pacquiao's greatness in the boxing world is solid. With still, a potential to attain even more!

Shouldn't we be glad that the phenomenon that is "the PacMan", is happening? Right before our very eyes, in our generation?

I certainly do.

---

Speak for yourself there in the first half of your post!
Im happy for Manny and happy for his countrymen they deserve a break at the top,just look at their history.

I think to state what you have and generalize us all at Saddos in order to separate yourselves as "True Manny fans" doesnt help Manny or your cause at all.

Only the real old school here will remember I felt the leaders of the sport will eventually be Asian because they are growing larger every generation with red meat in the diet,better medicne, better genetics being passed along etc. They also have the many martial arts styles of training to pick and chooce from, also they havent got trainers stuck in old ways, they evolve and take in what is useful and cut out what is not where as many western boxing schools will show you the door if you show them anything they dont already use that works. Im glad Mannys style was natural to him and only after setting himself firmly has the western training polished him further and right on time.

Jealousy is strange though and has two ends to it, it makes some guard what they have and further seperate themselves so they feel more privalaged and for some others it makes them attack those who have got the best; but that sure isnt 50/50 its about 5% from either end of both ridiculuos thought patterns.

As for the Mexicans and some others who bet heavily into the Mexican side: they have lost alot of cash privatley to the Phillipino people. That would hurt and you could drag them into a stoush match over anything regarding Marquez and Manny as a few of you do that and mean to do it.

Unfortuantely some of Mannys fans are not as humble as the man himself.

Bernstein is becoming a pacnutlicker like Merchant. Just kiddin. It's a well written article for pac and his fans.

Pac is nice and deserves being the p4p king and cash cow right now. But if Bernstein is going to throw around labels like the greatest ever at 135 and below then we must see more at 135. At 135, he beat David Diaz. End of story.

If we go into counting fights above 135 then Mosley is the best 135 pounder and below ever. I don't want to rile people up and then start getting called names and such but lets keep it factual. Pac is the best active fighter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KananKrus

A thoughtful article, although somewhat reserved, explores a historical perspective of the importance of Manny Pacquiao's exploits in the square ring.

Major kudos to Al Bernstein, a boxing mind, knowledge of solid repute and genuinely, calibrated old school!

Here at Saddo, the same line of thought at present or at least in the not so distant past, have received powerful backlashes. The established trend is intriguing! It also makes it difficult to be a Pac fan. To be a Pac Fan is to own balls of steel if one is to convey any praise towards the relevance of Pacquiao to boxing. Otherwise, the silent mode. The community-friendly preferred mode.

Truth be told, anything about Pacquiao being great runs contrary or contrastingly to that of what we here at Saddo Boxing maintain and hold sacred.

Actually there is truth that we may only begrudgingly hold Pacquiao P4P king, because popular opinion says so, and not that we believe so.

At times, to the wonder and amazement of true Pac fans like myself, this Pacquiao under recognition can be a source of resentment, and a situation difficult to address. My hats off to those who can.

Why such stubborness in the acquiescence of Pacquiao's greatness?
Outside that of personal preferences, personal biases, I am stumped. Your guess is as good as mine.

I am on borrowed time here... so let's just allow the "Bernstein" to hash the hard facts. I myself would certainly not, not even the least bit. I have not entertained the thought of carrying on with such task in the past, am not giong to start now.

I merely stated my observations, and the intent is to offend no one. The effort was purely to express an agreement to those points brought up by Al Bernstein's piece, and to a lesser degree, to shed light to the oddness of being a Manny Pacquiao fan.

Pacquiao's greatness in the boxing world is solid. With still, a potential to attain even more!

Shouldn't we be glad that the phenomenon that is "the PacMan", is happening? Right before our very eyes, in our generation?

I certainly do.

---

Are you fucking kidding me? Goddamn, what a pretentious post. Gentlemen (and ladies), we have found the Terry Nutkins of Pacfans.

I've yet to see anyone on here seriously deny the greatness of Manny Pacquiao in any credible way. Everyone on here acknowledges that he is an all-time great and that we are privileged to be watching his career unfold before us. Exactly how great he will prove to be is a topic of legitimate discussion and I don't see any problem with people expressing varying views. Nobody dislikes Pacquiao, that's almost impossible, it's some of his fans who create the backlash against him.

Anyways, on to someone relevant, great article Al. Beating Cotto at 147, which I think Pacquiao would be able to do, would be an amazing accomplishment and the best of an already storied career. If he beats Mosley and/or Mayweather in addition to Cotto, I would argue that he is one of the top 5-10 fighters of all time.

Edit: When I said top 5-10 I meant he could arguably be ranked anywhere on a list of the top 5 or 10 fighers ever.

---

Fuck that half the people on here think that Pacquiao is overrated simply because some of us actually realize he is a great fighter that has the same type of greatness as the greats of the past (Leonard, Duran, Hagler, Ali, Robinson, etc.) He has done stuff in his career that mirror the things those people have done. Yet people on here are retarded enough to argue that WHitaker schools him, or that he isn't in Mayweather's league(My favorite fighter), but clearly he is. When Pacquiao beats Cotto, it should silence all critics. He is beating the best welterweight in the world, and even if he goes on to lose against Mayweather, his name should be mentioned among the very to ever lace up.

The unfortunate thing is that guys like Mayweather, RJJ, Hopkins, and Whitaker all are on his level, they all are as good as anyone on the p4p list, but they won't get the credit because they didn't climb the ladder as impressively. Boxing isn't about how good you are, its about your record and who you've fought. While some people think that defines who you are, it surely does not. RJJ was far greater than the sum of his opposition. Hopkins IMO could have beaten Monzon and Hagler. Mayweather would have beaten Duran and Chavez at lightweight, and IMO would have foughten highly competitive bouts agianst Leonard, Hearns, Robinson and company(same can be said for Whitaker). However they won't climb much higher than the low 40's simply because of the importance of opposition, and not on skill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taeth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KananKrus

A thoughtful article, although somewhat reserved, explores a historical perspective of the importance of Manny Pacquiao's exploits in the square ring.

Major kudos to Al Bernstein, a boxing mind, knowledge of solid repute and genuinely, calibrated old school!

Here at Saddo, the same line of thought at present or at least in the not so distant past, have received powerful backlashes. The established trend is intriguing! It also makes it difficult to be a Pac fan. To be a Pac Fan is to own balls of steel if one is to convey any praise towards the relevance of Pacquiao to boxing. Otherwise, the silent mode. The community-friendly preferred mode.

Truth be told, anything about Pacquiao being great runs contrary or contrastingly to that of what we here at Saddo Boxing maintain and hold sacred.

Actually there is truth that we may only begrudgingly hold Pacquiao P4P king, because popular opinion says so, and not that we believe so.

At times, to the wonder and amazement of true Pac fans like myself, this Pacquiao under recognition can be a source of resentment, and a situation difficult to address. My hats off to those who can.

Why such stubborness in the acquiescence of Pacquiao's greatness?
Outside that of personal preferences, personal biases, I am stumped. Your guess is as good as mine.

I am on borrowed time here... so let's just allow the "Bernstein" to hash the hard facts. I myself would certainly not, not even the least bit. I have not entertained the thought of carrying on with such task in the past, am not giong to start now.

I merely stated my observations, and the intent is to offend no one. The effort was purely to express an agreement to those points brought up by Al Bernstein's piece, and to a lesser degree, to shed light to the oddness of being a Manny Pacquiao fan.

Pacquiao's greatness in the boxing world is solid. With still, a potential to attain even more!

Shouldn't we be glad that the phenomenon that is "the PacMan", is happening? Right before our very eyes, in our generation?

I certainly do.

---

Are you fucking kidding me? Goddamn, what a pretentious post. Gentlemen (and ladies), we have found the Terry Nutkins of Pacfans.

I've yet to see anyone on here seriously deny the greatness of Manny Pacquiao in any credible way. Everyone on here acknowledges that he is an all-time great and that we are privileged to be watching his career unfold before us. Exactly how great he will prove to be is a topic of legitimate discussion and I don't see any problem with people expressing varying views. Nobody dislikes Pacquiao, that's almost impossible, it's some of his fans who create the backlash against him.

Anyways, on to someone relevant, great article Al. Beating Cotto at 147, which I think Pacquiao would be able to do, would be an amazing accomplishment and the best of an already storied career. If he beats Mosley and/or Mayweather in addition to Cotto, I would argue that he is one of the top 5-10 fighters of all time.

Edit: When I said top 5-10 I meant he could arguably be ranked anywhere on a list of the top 5 or 10 fighers ever.

---

Fuck that half the people on here think that Pacquiao is overrated simply because some of us actually realize he is a great fighter that has the same type of greatness as the greats of the past (Leonard, Duran, Hagler, Ali, Robinson, etc.) He has done stuff in his career that mirror the things those people have done. Yet people on here are retarded enough to argue that WHitaker schools him, or that he isn't in Mayweather's league(My favorite fighter), but clearly he is. When Pacquiao beats Cotto, it should silence all critics. He is beating the best welterweight in the world, and even if he goes on to lose against Mayweather, his name should be mentioned among the very to ever lace up.

The unfortunate thing is that guys like Mayweather, RJJ, Hopkins, and Whitaker all are on his level, they all are as good as anyone on the p4p list, but they won't get the credit because they didn't climb the ladder as impressively. Boxing isn't about how good you are, its about your record and who you've fought. While some people think that defines who you are, it surely does not. RJJ was far greater than the sum of his opposition. Hopkins IMO could have beaten Monzon and Hagler. Mayweather would have beaten Duran and Chavez at lightweight, and IMO would have foughten highly competitive bouts agianst Leonard, Hearns, Robinson and company(same can be said for Whitaker). However they won't climb much higher than the low 40's simply because of the importance of opposition, and not on skill.

---

Well said I agree (except for the 50% against thing,) It still doesnt override what was said in the first post which is what Cfh and myself were replying directly to.

Pacster's improvement is what impresses me most.

To think he was duffing up Barrera and Morales before he'd reached his pomp. Amazing.

If he beats Cotto he must surely rank alongside the greatest ever fighters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Pacster's improvement is what impresses me most.

To think he was duffing up Barrera and Morales before he'd reached his pomp. Amazing.

If he beats Cotto he must surely rank alongside the greatest ever fighters.

---

Is that because you think Cotto is great or because of the weight?:cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Pacster's improvement is what impresses me most.

To think he was duffing up Barrera and Morales before he'd reached his pomp. Amazing.

If he beats Cotto he must surely rank alongside the greatest ever fighters.

---

If he beats Cotto, I will be hugely impressed. 5 or 6 years ago, Cotto was the beast that couldn't make 140 whilst Pac was still weighing at 120. At that point in time NOBODY would've given Pac a prair of ever being able to beat Cotto and now Pac will go into the fight favourite

I think Cotto destroys him, but that's just my opinion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Howlin Mad Missy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Pacster's improvement is what impresses me most.

To think he was duffing up Barrera and Morales before he'd reached his pomp. Amazing.

If he beats Cotto he must surely rank alongside the greatest ever fighters.

---

Is that because you think Cotto is great or because of the weight?:cool:

---

Weight. Cotto is in his pomp so there is no real excuses to be made (of course there will be plenty of excuses made - as always :rolleyes:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taeth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KananKrus

A thoughtful article, although somewhat reserved, explores a historical perspective of the importance of Manny Pacquiao's exploits in the square ring.

Major kudos to Al Bernstein, a boxing mind, knowledge of solid repute and genuinely, calibrated old school!

Here at Saddo, the same line of thought at present or at least in the not so distant past, have received powerful backlashes. The established trend is intriguing! It also makes it difficult to be a Pac fan. To be a Pac Fan is to own balls of steel if one is to convey any praise towards the relevance of Pacquiao to boxing. Otherwise, the silent mode. The community-friendly preferred mode.

Truth be told, anything about Pacquiao being great runs contrary or contrastingly to that of what we here at Saddo Boxing maintain and hold sacred.

Actually there is truth that we may only begrudgingly hold Pacquiao P4P king, because popular opinion says so, and not that we believe so.

At times, to the wonder and amazement of true Pac fans like myself, this Pacquiao under recognition can be a source of resentment, and a situation difficult to address. My hats off to those who can.

Why such stubborness in the acquiescence of Pacquiao's greatness?
Outside that of personal preferences, personal biases, I am stumped. Your guess is as good as mine.

I am on borrowed time here... so let's just allow the "Bernstein" to hash the hard facts. I myself would certainly not, not even the least bit. I have not entertained the thought of carrying on with such task in the past, am not giong to start now.

I merely stated my observations, and the intent is to offend no one. The effort was purely to express an agreement to those points brought up by Al Bernstein's piece, and to a lesser degree, to shed light to the oddness of being a Manny Pacquiao fan.

Pacquiao's greatness in the boxing world is solid. With still, a potential to attain even more!

Shouldn't we be glad that the phenomenon that is "the PacMan", is happening? Right before our very eyes, in our generation?

I certainly do.

---

Are you fucking kidding me? Goddamn, what a pretentious post. Gentlemen (and ladies), we have found the Terry Nutkins of Pacfans.

I've yet to see anyone on here seriously deny the greatness of Manny Pacquiao in any credible way. Everyone on here acknowledges that he is an all-time great and that we are privileged to be watching his career unfold before us. Exactly how great he will prove to be is a topic of legitimate discussion and I don't see any problem with people expressing varying views. Nobody dislikes Pacquiao, that's almost impossible, it's some of his fans who create the backlash against him.

Anyways, on to someone relevant, great article Al. Beating Cotto at 147, which I think Pacquiao would be able to do, would be an amazing accomplishment and the best of an already storied career. If he beats Mosley and/or Mayweather in addition to Cotto, I would argue that he is one of the top 5-10 fighters of all time.

Edit: When I said top 5-10 I meant he could arguably be ranked anywhere on a list of the top 5 or 10 fighers ever.

---

Fuck that half the people on here think that Pacquiao is overrated simply because some of us actually realize he is a great fighter that has the same type of greatness as the greats of the past (Leonard, Duran, Hagler, Ali, Robinson, etc.) He has done stuff in his career that mirror the things those people have done. Yet people on here are retarded enough to argue that WHitaker schools him, or that he isn't in Mayweather's league(My favorite fighter), but clearly he is. When Pacquiao beats Cotto, it should silence all critics. He is beating the best welterweight in the world, and even if he goes on to lose against Mayweather, his name should be mentioned among the very to ever lace up.

The unfortunate thing is that guys like Mayweather, RJJ, Hopkins, and Whitaker all are on his level, they all are as good as anyone on the p4p list, but they won't get the credit because they didn't climb the ladder as impressively. Boxing isn't about how good you are, its about your record and who you've fought. While some people think that defines who you are, it surely does not. RJJ was far greater than the sum of his opposition. Hopkins IMO could have beaten Monzon and Hagler. Mayweather would have beaten Duran and Chavez at lightweight, and IMO would have foughten highly competitive bouts agianst Leonard, Hearns, Robinson and company(same can be said for Whitaker). However they won't climb much higher than the low 40's simply because of the importance of opposition, and not on skill.

---

As sad as it sounds, I really think people would appreciate Manny a lot more if it weren't for some of his fans. But every one on the top of their respective sports have their haters, it's just the way it is.

IF Pacquiao beats Cotto, there will always be something someone can say. People keep hoping Pac goes down so they can finally say "i told you so" or "haha" but as soon as his hands are raised, the excuses begin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Howlin Mad Missy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Pacster's improvement is what impresses me most.

To think he was duffing up Barrera and Morales before he'd reached his pomp. Amazing.

If he beats Cotto he must surely rank alongside the greatest ever fighters.

---

Is that because you think Cotto is great or because of the weight?:cool:

---

Weight. Cotto is in his pomp so there is no real excuses to be made (of course there will be plenty of excuses made - as always :rolleyes:)

---

EXACTLY!

Good article Al. This is a tiny bit more of a contentious subject than your last article, LOL.

Good read, although it feels deja vu.

Great points all around for Al, there is little to dispute in what he said.

If by some crazy chance Manny beat Cotto then went on to beat Mosley and PBF!!!!!!

I would rank him as the best fighter P4P of al time, his resume is already impressive and littered with the remains of ATG's, ATG's that were not considered anything less then that when the fight with Pacquiao started but after seemed to be looking very beat up and ordinary.

No matter how good he gerts or what he does, I still think his KO defeats tarnish his legacy :-\

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

No matter how good he gerts or what he does, I still think his KO defeats tarnish his legacy :-\

---

I wouldn't put it against him. A lot of greats have gotten KO'd early in their careers. Henry Armstrong, Arguelo, and many other greats as well.

Damn right Chris Nagel. That's so narrow minded of you Big H.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quinito

Damn right Chris Nagel. That's so narrow minded of you Big H.

---

Yeah Big H, we're not living in medieval times any more, bring your outdated boxing attitudes into the 21st century you bigoted fool :rolleyes:

If Pac fights and if he beats Cotto at 147, I cannot say anything about the man. And there would be no excuses from me.

But remember this will be the excuse if he beats Cotto and I'm not saying it will be from me but from other people, "Cotto was shot after fighting Margarito and that's why Pacman beats him."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taeth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KananKrus

A thoughtful article, although somewhat reserved, explores a historical perspective of the importance of Manny Pacquiao's exploits in the square ring.

Major kudos to Al Bernstein, a boxing mind, knowledge of solid repute and genuinely, calibrated old school!

Here at Saddo, the same line of thought at present or at least in the not so distant past, have received powerful backlashes. The established trend is intriguing! It also makes it difficult to be a Pac fan. To be a Pac Fan is to own balls of steel if one is to convey any praise towards the relevance of Pacquiao to boxing. Otherwise, the silent mode. The community-friendly preferred mode.

Truth be told, anything about Pacquiao being great runs contrary or contrastingly to that of what we here at Saddo Boxing maintain and hold sacred.

Actually there is truth that we may only begrudgingly hold Pacquiao P4P king, because popular opinion says so, and not that we believe so.

At times, to the wonder and amazement of true Pac fans like myself, this Pacquiao under recognition can be a source of resentment, and a situation difficult to address. My hats off to those who can.

Why such stubborness in the acquiescence of Pacquiao's greatness?
Outside that of personal preferences, personal biases, I am stumped. Your guess is as good as mine.

I am on borrowed time here... so let's just allow the "Bernstein" to hash the hard facts. I myself would certainly not, not even the least bit. I have not entertained the thought of carrying on with such task in the past, am not giong to start now.

I merely stated my observations, and the intent is to offend no one. The effort was purely to express an agreement to those points brought up by Al Bernstein's piece, and to a lesser degree, to shed light to the oddness of being a Manny Pacquiao fan.

Pacquiao's greatness in the boxing world is solid. With still, a potential to attain even more!

Shouldn't we be glad that the phenomenon that is "the PacMan", is happening? Right before our very eyes, in our generation?

I certainly do.

---

Are you fucking kidding me? Goddamn, what a pretentious post. Gentlemen (and ladies), we have found the Terry Nutkins of Pacfans.

I've yet to see anyone on here seriously deny the greatness of Manny Pacquiao in any credible way. Everyone on here acknowledges that he is an all-time great and that we are privileged to be watching his career unfold before us. Exactly how great he will prove to be is a topic of legitimate discussion and I don't see any problem with people expressing varying views. Nobody dislikes Pacquiao, that's almost impossible, it's some of his fans who create the backlash against him.

Anyways, on to someone relevant, great article Al. Beating Cotto at 147, which I think Pacquiao would be able to do, would be an amazing accomplishment and the best of an already storied career. If he beats Mosley and/or Mayweather in addition to Cotto, I would argue that he is one of the top 5-10 fighters of all time.

Edit: When I said top 5-10 I meant he could arguably be ranked anywhere on a list of the top 5 or 10 fighers ever.

---

Fuck that half the people on here think that Pacquiao is overrated simply because some of us actually realize he is a great fighter that has the same type of greatness as the greats of the past (Leonard, Duran, Hagler, Ali, Robinson, etc.) He has done stuff in his career that mirror the things those people have done. Yet people on here are retarded enough to argue that WHitaker schools him, or that he isn't in Mayweather's league(My favorite fighter), but clearly he is. When Pacquiao beats Cotto, it should silence all critics. He is beating the best welterweight in the world, and even if he goes on to lose against Mayweather, his name should be mentioned among the very to ever lace up.

The unfortunate thing is that guys like Mayweather, RJJ, Hopkins, and Whitaker all are on his level, they all are as good as anyone on the p4p list, but they won't get the credit because they didn't climb the ladder as impressively. Boxing isn't about how good you are, its about your record and who you've fought. While some people think that defines who you are, it surely does not. RJJ was far greater than the sum of his opposition. Hopkins IMO could have beaten Monzon and Hagler. Mayweather would have beaten Duran and Chavez at lightweight, and IMO would have foughten highly competitive bouts agianst Leonard, Hearns, Robinson and company(same can be said for Whitaker). However they won't climb much higher than the low 40's simply because of the importance of opposition, and not on skill.

---

Though I do not believe it is the case, you can make a reasonably supported argument that Pacquiao is overrated by some people. Saying he's overrated does not mean that he is not a great fighter. There is a huge logical gulf between those two positions. This is a boxing forum, it would be a pretty boring place if we all agreed on everything.

Of course boxing is about who you've fought. To judge someone by any other means than by their success against a high-level of competition is absurd. There are several fighters who I can think of who I feel have the best boxing skills in the sport, but that doesn't mean they're the best fighters in the sport because they've never competed against elite talents. To draw a comparison to other sports, there are plenty of teams who were incredibly talented as a whole that never won everything, and as such they are rightfully judged inferior to those less talented teams that beat them. Boxing should be no different.

Again, I feel that Pacquiao is poised to become ranked among the very greatest fighters of all time.