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

[Taeth]

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.

[Andre]

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.

[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.

[Howlin Mad Missy]

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?

[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?

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 )

[C-Lo]

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.

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?

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 )

EXACTLY!

[OumaFan]

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

[BIG H]

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

[CFH]

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.