Quote Originally Posted by GP100
O hell no!!! How can a technically flawed fighter become p4p best? He is exciting and strong as hell but he gets hit alot. I\\\'m a big fan but I won\\\'t rate him higher than Floyd or even Winky.
Perhaps you should ask \\\"How can a technically flawed fighter beat the hell out of Morales and Barrera?\\\" I am m not a boxing fan, but I know those two Mexican Fighters are one of the best boxers in this era. Has Mayweather beaten anyone near the caliber of Barrera and Morales? You think Mayweather could beat Barrera or Morales given they are of the same weight class? Of course you\\\'ll say he can because you\\\'re a PBF fan. Well Guess what? Pacquiao has already done that. And he beat them in a convincing fashion.

Some people are saying P4P should be rated according to boxing skills in the ring. If that is your definition then surely Mayweather is the best. But for me, P4P is different. Imagine that all boxers are of the same weight, who do you think can beat who regardless of boxing skills? And again the answer to this is where PBF and PacMan fans will agree to disagree. PacMan doesn\\\'t necesarrily have the greatest boxing skill but he has shown and proven he can beat those with better boxing skills than him. Also, the PacMan has had more quality competition than PBF. PBF is like a 5th grade punk taking on 2nd or 3rd graders. How can you call that P4P best? This are all just my opinion and am not flaming anybody. Peace fellow forumers :-)

P.S. This is my first post