Does Pacquiao or any Champ rate ATG status if they never held 2 belts at same time?

[TIC]

the quality of opponents is what matters, take usyk, his oppponents were very highly considered and he did it on the road, when crawford did it, not so much

[Fenster]

Pac was an all-time great long before he got to Oscar and Floyd and Cotto and Shane and Margarito. All those fights did was cement him as monumental all-time great to sit alongside Robinson and Duran and Injun Chi.

He went 5-1-1 with three ATG's - Morales, Barrera and Marquez. He pulled the shock upset against Ledwaba, long before his breakout upset over Barrera. Sasakul, Hussein, Sanchez, Julio, Lucero.

Pac's career didn't start at welterweight.

[Mark TKO]

I stopped following who held the belts and what version a long time ago. I knew who the near fighters were and that's all that mattered for me.

Pac is an ATG

[SlimTrae]

BUMP.
I was looking for Ring magazine quotes, but saw this...and decided to re-ask the question.

How can a person who NEVER UNIFIED a single division be called great? Has anyone done this other than Pac?

How can we say something like...Well he beat X amount of HOFers- as an argument, but not the status of the HOFer when they met? Were they on the downside? I know Morales never won a major fight after his trilogies with MAB, then Pac, yet we give Pac the nod for that?


No one took on that argument, instead it was deflected with what ifs.

Sometime we say- Why hasn't so & so defended his belt, until it came to the sake of Pac will then say- well belts dont matter.

Why then did we celebrate him winning 1 belt in 8 divisions as a means to rate him?

But when rating him based on how many of those trinkets per weight class...well then it becomes a bunch of trinkets.


Again, who...WHO in YOUR P4P list, Your ATG list, Your GOAT list has only won (1) belt in a division?
Who are they (OUTSIDE) of Pac?

That's the question.

[TitoFan]

That's a good question, Slim... and I'll at least tell you what I think, since ATG is kind of a subjective subject.

Beyond belts, I look at the willingness of the fighter to fight anyone, regardless of the danger, or upset factor. Consolidating a division is great and all that... but it must be looked at in the context of who are the division champions at that time. We all know there have always been weak champions (or more accurately... belt holders) in different divisions at any one time. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to identify who those are. To me, a true ATG looks beyond (or brushes aside) the danger factor of an opponent, whether it's in the process of unifying a division, or whether it's jumping to another division.

You mention Pac. As Pac was going up, he faced the Cottos... the Margaritos... the Mayweathers... the Thurmans. No fear about maybe losing an "0" (it wasn't there to lose anyway). Nothing other than "let's get this fight made." I know you know what I'm getting at in a roundabout way. I don't like waiting on fights till they become easy or convenient for whatever the reason. I don't like "marinating"... I don't like picking up the weak zebras from the herd. When this type of shit happens, I couldn't care less about consolidating divisions, because it's done in a calculated, careful way.

ATG's don't care about "calculated and careful." All they care about is facing the next guy on the list, regardless of how dangerous he is.

People put too much emphasis on secondary factors, such as how many weight divisions a guy travels through... or about consolidating divisions, especially given the weak champion factor I mentioned. I care more about the best fighting the best AT ANY TIME OR PLACE. No diva demands... no catchweights... no rehydration clauses. Someone who just puts it all out there on the line is more deserving of being called an ATG, IMHO... than someone with a carefully crafted record built around marinating and cherry-picking.

To at least partly answer your question, Pac is most definitely in my list of ATGs. What he did in his career is nothing short of amazing.

[generalbulldog]

Sven Ottke is an all time great and better than Pac since he held two alphabet soup titles according by the OP's criteria, the IBF and WBA and defended it 21 times.

Sven Ottke > Pacquiao. As Fenster would say, "fact!"