From: maxboxing.com
Did Pacquiao Deserve Fighter of the Decade?
By Ryan Maquiñana
Last week, the media tour de force surrounding the Yuri Foreman-Miguel Cotto showdown at Yankee Stadium was further aided by the 85th annual Boxing Writers Association of America Awards Dinner at the Roosevelt Hotel. A venerable who’s who of the sport attended the banquet, from ESPN’s Joe Tessitore to former heavyweight champion Joe Frazier. In fact, it was “Smokin’ Joe” who presented the night’s guest of honor, Manny Pacquiao, with not only his record-tying third “Sugar Ray Robinson Fighter of the Year” award, but an even more prestigious honor afterward: “Fighter of the Decade.”
When the BWAA’s initial press release hit the public, its effect on the fans was comparable to Moses parting the Red Sea. For over a year, the topic du jour on everyone’s minds- from the casual bystander to the most hardcore of purists- has been the prospect of a fight between Pacquiao and Floyd “Money” Mayweather Jr., to settle the debate of who unquestionably reigned supreme over the boxing world. As such, it was only natural that such conjecture would spill over into the BWAA’s overwhelming vote in favor of the “Pac-Man,” despite Floyd’s unblemished record, world title belts in multiple weight classes, and seemingly extraterrestrial ability in the ring.
In this article, I hope to accomplish two things. First, I will attempt to define the term “pound-for-pound” in order to have a measurable list of criteria to determine “Fighter of the Decade.” Second, I hope to subsequently contrast the two future Hall of Famers from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2009, to see if I agree with the BWAA voters’ conclusion.
“POUND-FOR-POUND” DEFINED…
Defining "pound-for-pound" is a very subjective matter and there are a variety of ways to do it. One school of thought is purely skill-based, but I feel there are inherent problems with this approach, because, while it is undeniable that a fighter like Zab Judah has more physical tools than Ricky Hatton, would anyone argue with the fact that it was Hatton, not Judah, who was on The Ring magazine’s top ten pound-for-pound list for four consecutive years?
Hatton cemented his spot by beating Kostya Tszyu and defending his junior welterweight crown for nearly four years. Conversely, the mercurial Judah was knocked out by a Tszyu right hand in two rounds, and had a tenuous grasp on the welterweight crown until decisive losses to Carlos Baldomir and Miguel Cotto banished him from consensus pound-for-pound discussions a second time. In that specific case, one fighter’s results in the ring trumped another fighter’s superior abilities.
Second, there exists another belief that in defining pound-for-pound, one must compare two fighters, and the one who would win a pure head-to-head battle, under the hypothetical that they shared the same weight class, should be the higher ranked fighter. However, while this theory would make absolute sense if the today’s generation fought the best available opposition more often, this thought process is flawed on some level. I will offer this hypothetical:
Fighter X is extremely talented and rules the welterweight division with an iron fist, earning him a spot somewhere on the pound-for-pound list. For the next seven years, a parade of five fellow pound-for-pound fighters ranging from 140 to 154 pounds call him out through the media or to his face, and their promoters offer Fighter X’s handlers reasonable terms to make a few mega-bouts happen. These are legitimate challenges that the fans and media have clamored for Fighter X to accept, since he has taken the path of least resistance his entire career and we all want him to silence any doubts by proving his greatness in the ring.
Unfortunately, Fighter X deliberately chooses not to fight any of these viable opponents. He is rather content to dominate lesser fighters for the rest of his prime, which he does so with ease. Under this scenario, can even his most ardent of fans continue to rate him pound-for-pound superior to the other five fighters when he thumbs his nose at them by refusing to take these readily available challenges? Is one’s individual certainty that Fighter X would beat all five of them relevant at all for pound-for-pound dialogue, since his opponents are inviting him to the ring, and yet, he makes little to no effort to fight them?
It is arguable that the pound-for-pound moniker was created for Sugar Ray Robinson, not only because the public thought he could move up from welterweight to middleweight and beat Jake LaMotta (a man who reportedly outweighed Robinson by 15 pounds in the ring), but also because he actually did it. After securing the middleweight crown in 1951 and continuing to defeat all comers, Sugar Ray had an offer on the table to move up fifteen more pounds and fight Joey Maxim for his light heavyweight title one year later.
But Robinson didn’t bask in the admiration, rest on his accolades, and go about his regular business at 160 pounds. To me, the pound-for-pound greatness in Robinson lies in the fact that, while many predicted he could emerge victorious in a fight against Maxim, he actually confronted him to confirm it in the ring. Robinson stood toe-to-toe with Maxim for 13 rounds and would have pulled off the upset, if not for heat exhaustion. In sum, there were no pit stops in jumping weight classes; he cleaned out his divisions and turned the talk of hypothetical dream fights into action. Robinson may have lost the battle to Maxim, but won the war against doubt, because he left nothing to the imagination of the fans and media. Aside from Charley Burley, there are very few “what ifs” on his final tally of 173-19-6 (108) with two no-contests, which is a big reason why Muhammad Ali himself conceded that Robinson was the greatest to put on a pair of boxing trunks.
My underlying point in debunking the latter school of thought is that believing Fighter X can beat Fighter Y and seeing him actually prove it are two different things. In other words, one cannot give a fighter credit for something he never actually accomplished.
A third group of people point to an undefeated record as a means for defining pound-for-pound, but look at Joe Calzaghe. For years, he was undefeated, but he was punished by the boxing world for padding his record and avoiding elite fighters who were available at 160, 168, and 175 pounds. In essence, the “0” on his record did not define him as a pound-for-pound great; the competition he accepted and conversely avoided were the deciding factors. It wasn’t until he actually took some risks later in his career (albeit calculated ones against aging greats) that finally earned him entry into the upper echelon of the pound-for-pound lists.
Finally, there is a fourth party of pound-for-pound experts who see quality of competition faced and beaten alone as a benchmark. However, if one solely takes that view into account, quasi-active fighters like Roy Jones and Marco Antonio Barrera have longer resumes than most of the current consensus top ten. The truth, however, is that these first-ballot Hall of Famers haven’t defeated any elite fighters lately. While a master of the game like Bernard Hopkins managed to stay atop the upper half of the list the last few years, his lackluster showing against an old Jones- who was well past his prime- subsequently resulted in his gradual descent down the list. Facing an elite boxer is just as important as the circumstances surrounding the fight.
With those four ingredients considered, while too spicy or bland to stand out on their own, combining them together would make for a soup irresistible to the boxing fans’ taste buds. In other words, I think one must weigh all of these four factors together to define the term pound-for-pound: skills, theoretical ability head-to-head, propensity for taking available risks, and last but not least, quality of competition. Let’s apply this definition to Manny and Floyd over the past decade.
SO WHO’S NUMBER ONE?...
Based on weighing the criteria above, I agree with the BWAA’s decision to award “Fighter of the Decade” to Pacquiao ahead of Mayweather, but by the slightest of margins.
First, regarding skills, while there are things Manny has not done well during the early part of this decade, he owns other attributes that are arguably unparalleled. For one, no other active fighter in the sport, Mayweather included, possesses the specific quartet of above-average hand speed, stamina, power, and work rate. While Manny still gets tagged from time to time, he has improved slight nuances in his defense as well, especially on the inside. His chin is underrated; he has not been officially floored since coming to America aside from an actual slip in his first fight with Barrera in 2003, and that was almost seven years and four weight classes ago. More importantly, Freddie Roach has developed Pacquiao’s offensive repertoire into a more complete arsenal. Starting with the Hector Velazquez fight in 2003, he unleashed the quickest right hook in the business, which he utilized to stun numerous opponents before going to his vaunted left cross to stop them. No longer has Pacquiao been dismissed as a basic one-two slugger. It also goes without saying that he’s one of the most vicious finishers in the sport, as evidenced by his 77% knockout rate during the decade.
On the other hand, what Mayweather may lack in work rate or accumulated stoppages is more than compensated for by his immaculate defense. Once Floyd gets into the shoulder roll, it’s astounding how impossible he becomes to hit, even on the ropes. While he hasn’t exhibited the same power he had from 130 through 140 pounds, his pinpoint accuracy, footwork, and ring generalship have overwhelmed his competition at welterweight. Like Pacquiao, he was officially knocked down only once during the decade, a dubious knee after injuring himself against Carlos Hernandez in 2001.
SKILLS: Mayweather
Second, in assessing how he would fare in a head-to-head matchup with Mayweather, people on both sides of this issue have offered valid points in backing their man. While this is just one writer’s opinion, I give a slight edge to Manny, if they ever fought. I feel that, stylistically, this is the worst possible matchup for Floyd. Pacquiao’s a southpaw with blinding speed, and he’s become very accurate, to boot. In a nutshell, the difference between Manny and fighters who enjoyed early success against Mayweather like Zab Judah, Oscar De La Hoya, and Shane Mosley, lies in his superior stamina and work rate. Sustained, accurate pressure over 12 rounds is something Floyd has never dealt with. While Floyd has the best defense and counter-punching skills in the sport, and Pacquiao struggled against a masterful counter-puncher like Juan Manuel Marquez in 2004, the “Pac-Man” of 2009 was on a whole different level in all facets of his individual game. Therefore, I think Pacquiao could outland Mayweather on his way to a split or majority decision victory.
HEAD-TO-HEAD: Pacquiao by a nose
While the first two criteria were close, the last two made my final decision a lot easier. When discussing the inclination to take risks and fighting quality competition this decade, Manny Pacquiao took on almost every available challenge as he moved up in weight, with each circumstance as disadvantageous as possible.
After six consecutive stoppage wins in his native Philippines to open from late 1999-to-mid-2001, he flew to America for the first time on only two weeks’ notice to knock out Lehlohonolo Ledwaba, a top-15 pound-for-pound fighter at the time, for the IBF 122-pound title. After two more wins at junior featherweight, following a foulfest against the late Agapito Sanchez in 2001, which resulted in a controversial technical draw, Pacquiao decided to move up in weight. In his first 126-pound fight in the States in 2003, he knocked out Barrera, then the number one featherweight and consensus number three pound-for-pound fighter, in his de facto backyard of San Antonio, in front of 10,000 Mexican fans. For his first fight at junior lightweight in 2005, he didn’t take a breather. He chose a 47-2 Erik Morales and even conceded the choice of gloves to “El Terrible” (a negotiating gaffe, which I feel is partially responsible for his unwillingness today to give in to Mayweather’s extra testing demands). Keep in mind that in all three instances, he was moving up in weight for the first time under unfavorable situations. After losing the first fight to Morales in a clear but close decision, he stayed true to my pound-for-pound definition by knocking his rival out twice over the following year (admittedly, Morales was a shell of his former self by the third fight). Then, he cleaned out the division by beating Barrera again and Marquez at 130, the two best fighters left at the weight.
Then throw in the 2008 world title win over David Diaz in his first and only fight at 135 pounds, for a lightweight belt, which I would analogize to Floyd’s win over Arturo Gatti as a similar pit stop against a paper champion. Add another challenge in moving up 12 more pounds in his first fight at welterweight against De La Hoya, where again he was the underdog, who won via devastating ninth-round stoppage. In his first fight at junior welterweight, he brutally leveled Ricky Hatton, who was undefeated at the 140-pound limit. However, in true pound-for-pound fashion, Pacquiao wasn’t done. He put an exclamation on the decade by moving north seven pounds back to welterweight and wresting the WBO crown from Miguel Cotto in a one-sided affair (albeit at a catchweight of 145 pounds).
In all, Pacquiao finished the decade with a record of 23-1-2, with 20 knockouts. He accumulated six world titles in as many divisions, with three of them coming against the clear number one fighter or true champion in the division (that does not include his 1998 upset win in Thailand over WBC champ Chatchai Sasakul to become THE RING’s number one flyweight in the world). The prospect of Manny Pacquiao taking on dream fights in the decade hasn’t solely been a topic of conversation or speculation by the media and fans; he’s actually been living them and coming away victorious, repeatedly. That to me is the true definition of someone worthy of “Fighter of the Decade.”
That’s not to discredit Floyd Mayweather’s achievements. He was deservedly pound-for-pound best and well on his way to winning “Fighter of the Decade” by a landslide when Hopkins lost to Jermain Taylor in 2005. At the time, the Grand Rapids native had wiped the 130-division clean by stopping the late Diego Corrales in 2001, and after struggling against Jose Luis Castillo in his initial fight at lightweight a year later, decisioned him easily in an immediate rematch and dominated the best available there. What he did at those two weight classes was emblematic of my pound-for-pound definition, and had he continued a similar pattern the last six years, he would have been the clear cut number one in my book, by the end of the decade.
But the truth is that he did not do that. His quality of competition and desire to take risks inexplicably stalled, once he took the pound-for-pound title, starting with his first pay-per-view fight, which coincided with his junior welterweight debut against Gatti. Granted, Floyd beat him in his adopted hometown of Atlantic City, but he departed 140 pounds when Tszyu, the true champ, was available. People might argue that Tszyu lost to Hatton, and Floyd beat the Englishman, but that is not exactly tying up a loose end when he forced Hatton to move up seven pounds to welterweight. Hatton was the champ at 140 pounds, not 147. That’s fighting with an advantage. While he beat Baldomir for the lineal title, can anyone say with a straight face that he was elite? Floyd was supposed to cruise in that bout, and he met expectations.
Now I will say Mayweather deserved full credit for moving up and beating then-titlist De La Hoya for his first and only fight at junior middleweight. That was a true challenge. But instead of building on that momentous victory, he “retired” after the Hatton fight, leaving his recent accomplishments at 140 and 147 much to be desired. Cotto, who was undefeated, and Margarito pre-“Plastergate” were big money fights against legitimate welterweight beltholders, but he never made any genuine effort to make those fights to clean out the division, regardless if people thought he would theoretically beat them. Those were high-risk challenges, and he never proved it in the ring.
After returning from his retirement, Floyd took on a fellow top pound-for-pound talent in Marquez to conclude the decade in 2009, but with strings attached. While some have criticized Pacquiao for having Cotto fight at 145 pounds, it was Floyd who reportedly agreed to the same catchweight agreement against Marquez at 144, then reneged on it by weighing in three pounds heavier. This was also a huge advantage, since Marquez, the current lightweight champion, had already ascended two weight classes and now faced a severe handicap of fighting the heavier man (Contrast this mismatch to Marquez’s two fights with Pacquiao, which took place at the Mexican’s fighting weight). Using those facts, Las Vegas oddsmakers pegged Floyd a 3-to-1 favorite as the man known as “Money” coasted to another decision where the outcome was never in doubt. Again, I ask the readers: Was that really a risky bout against an elite fighter under the fairest of circumstances?
For his count, Floyd was 18-0 with eight knockouts during the decade. He acquired or defended titles in five weight classes. He defeated the number one fighter at junior lightweight (Genaro Hernandez in 1998) and lightweight (Castillo), but in reality, did he clean out 140, 147, or 154? The answer is a resounding no, especially at welterweight, when you consider that the fighter ahead of him in the current consensus pound-for-pound list is fighting in that division as we speak. Counting Corrales, Castillo, and De La Hoya, Floyd Mayweather took on three true challenges in ten years. That is not enough to crown someone “Fighter of the Decade.”
RISK-TAKING: Pacquiao
QUALITY OF COMPETITION: Pacquiao
Manny Pacquiao and Floyd Mayweather will forever be linked in boxing annals, based on their memorable feats over the past ten years. However, considering what the Filipino has added to his overall resume during the period of the American’s retirement, combined with what I perceive to be a superior level of competition faced overall, Floyd’s body of work has been eclipsed by a man who justified the BWAA’s choice of “Fighter of the Decade.” If Floyd wants to plant the seeds of doubt into the voters’ minds, he just has to do one thing—beat Manny Pacquiao in the ring. Plain and simple.
Did Pacquiao Deserve Fighter of the Decade?
By Ryan Maquiñana
Last week, the media tour de force surrounding the Yuri Foreman-Miguel Cotto showdown at Yankee Stadium was further aided by the 85th annual Boxing Writers Association of America Awards Dinner at the Roosevelt Hotel. A venerable who’s who of the sport attended the banquet, from ESPN’s Joe Tessitore to former heavyweight champion Joe Frazier. In fact, it was “Smokin’ Joe” who presented the night’s guest of honor, Manny Pacquiao, with not only his record-tying third “Sugar Ray Robinson Fighter of the Year” award, but an even more prestigious honor afterward: “Fighter of the Decade.”
When the BWAA’s initial press release hit the public, its effect on the fans was comparable to Moses parting the Red Sea. For over a year, the topic du jour on everyone’s minds- from the casual bystander to the most hardcore of purists- has been the prospect of a fight between Pacquiao and Floyd “Money” Mayweather Jr., to settle the debate of who unquestionably reigned supreme over the boxing world. As such, it was only natural that such conjecture would spill over into the BWAA’s overwhelming vote in favor of the “Pac-Man,” despite Floyd’s unblemished record, world title belts in multiple weight classes, and seemingly extraterrestrial ability in the ring.
In this article, I hope to accomplish two things. First, I will attempt to define the term “pound-for-pound” in order to have a measurable list of criteria to determine “Fighter of the Decade.” Second, I hope to subsequently contrast the two future Hall of Famers from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2009, to see if I agree with the BWAA voters’ conclusion.
“POUND-FOR-POUND” DEFINED…
Defining "pound-for-pound" is a very subjective matter and there are a variety of ways to do it. One school of thought is purely skill-based, but I feel there are inherent problems with this approach, because, while it is undeniable that a fighter like Zab Judah has more physical tools than Ricky Hatton, would anyone argue with the fact that it was Hatton, not Judah, who was on The Ring magazine’s top ten pound-for-pound list for four consecutive years?
Hatton cemented his spot by beating Kostya Tszyu and defending his junior welterweight crown for nearly four years. Conversely, the mercurial Judah was knocked out by a Tszyu right hand in two rounds, and had a tenuous grasp on the welterweight crown until decisive losses to Carlos Baldomir and Miguel Cotto banished him from consensus pound-for-pound discussions a second time. In that specific case, one fighter’s results in the ring trumped another fighter’s superior abilities.
Second, there exists another belief that in defining pound-for-pound, one must compare two fighters, and the one who would win a pure head-to-head battle, under the hypothetical that they shared the same weight class, should be the higher ranked fighter. However, while this theory would make absolute sense if the today’s generation fought the best available opposition more often, this thought process is flawed on some level. I will offer this hypothetical:
Fighter X is extremely talented and rules the welterweight division with an iron fist, earning him a spot somewhere on the pound-for-pound list. For the next seven years, a parade of five fellow pound-for-pound fighters ranging from 140 to 154 pounds call him out through the media or to his face, and their promoters offer Fighter X’s handlers reasonable terms to make a few mega-bouts happen. These are legitimate challenges that the fans and media have clamored for Fighter X to accept, since he has taken the path of least resistance his entire career and we all want him to silence any doubts by proving his greatness in the ring.
Unfortunately, Fighter X deliberately chooses not to fight any of these viable opponents. He is rather content to dominate lesser fighters for the rest of his prime, which he does so with ease. Under this scenario, can even his most ardent of fans continue to rate him pound-for-pound superior to the other five fighters when he thumbs his nose at them by refusing to take these readily available challenges? Is one’s individual certainty that Fighter X would beat all five of them relevant at all for pound-for-pound dialogue, since his opponents are inviting him to the ring, and yet, he makes little to no effort to fight them?
It is arguable that the pound-for-pound moniker was created for Sugar Ray Robinson, not only because the public thought he could move up from welterweight to middleweight and beat Jake LaMotta (a man who reportedly outweighed Robinson by 15 pounds in the ring), but also because he actually did it. After securing the middleweight crown in 1951 and continuing to defeat all comers, Sugar Ray had an offer on the table to move up fifteen more pounds and fight Joey Maxim for his light heavyweight title one year later.
But Robinson didn’t bask in the admiration, rest on his accolades, and go about his regular business at 160 pounds. To me, the pound-for-pound greatness in Robinson lies in the fact that, while many predicted he could emerge victorious in a fight against Maxim, he actually confronted him to confirm it in the ring. Robinson stood toe-to-toe with Maxim for 13 rounds and would have pulled off the upset, if not for heat exhaustion. In sum, there were no pit stops in jumping weight classes; he cleaned out his divisions and turned the talk of hypothetical dream fights into action. Robinson may have lost the battle to Maxim, but won the war against doubt, because he left nothing to the imagination of the fans and media. Aside from Charley Burley, there are very few “what ifs” on his final tally of 173-19-6 (108) with two no-contests, which is a big reason why Muhammad Ali himself conceded that Robinson was the greatest to put on a pair of boxing trunks.
My underlying point in debunking the latter school of thought is that believing Fighter X can beat Fighter Y and seeing him actually prove it are two different things. In other words, one cannot give a fighter credit for something he never actually accomplished.
A third group of people point to an undefeated record as a means for defining pound-for-pound, but look at Joe Calzaghe. For years, he was undefeated, but he was punished by the boxing world for padding his record and avoiding elite fighters who were available at 160, 168, and 175 pounds. In essence, the “0” on his record did not define him as a pound-for-pound great; the competition he accepted and conversely avoided were the deciding factors. It wasn’t until he actually took some risks later in his career (albeit calculated ones against aging greats) that finally earned him entry into the upper echelon of the pound-for-pound lists.
Finally, there is a fourth party of pound-for-pound experts who see quality of competition faced and beaten alone as a benchmark. However, if one solely takes that view into account, quasi-active fighters like Roy Jones and Marco Antonio Barrera have longer resumes than most of the current consensus top ten. The truth, however, is that these first-ballot Hall of Famers haven’t defeated any elite fighters lately. While a master of the game like Bernard Hopkins managed to stay atop the upper half of the list the last few years, his lackluster showing against an old Jones- who was well past his prime- subsequently resulted in his gradual descent down the list. Facing an elite boxer is just as important as the circumstances surrounding the fight.
With those four ingredients considered, while too spicy or bland to stand out on their own, combining them together would make for a soup irresistible to the boxing fans’ taste buds. In other words, I think one must weigh all of these four factors together to define the term pound-for-pound: skills, theoretical ability head-to-head, propensity for taking available risks, and last but not least, quality of competition. Let’s apply this definition to Manny and Floyd over the past decade.
SO WHO’S NUMBER ONE?...
Based on weighing the criteria above, I agree with the BWAA’s decision to award “Fighter of the Decade” to Pacquiao ahead of Mayweather, but by the slightest of margins.
First, regarding skills, while there are things Manny has not done well during the early part of this decade, he owns other attributes that are arguably unparalleled. For one, no other active fighter in the sport, Mayweather included, possesses the specific quartet of above-average hand speed, stamina, power, and work rate. While Manny still gets tagged from time to time, he has improved slight nuances in his defense as well, especially on the inside. His chin is underrated; he has not been officially floored since coming to America aside from an actual slip in his first fight with Barrera in 2003, and that was almost seven years and four weight classes ago. More importantly, Freddie Roach has developed Pacquiao’s offensive repertoire into a more complete arsenal. Starting with the Hector Velazquez fight in 2003, he unleashed the quickest right hook in the business, which he utilized to stun numerous opponents before going to his vaunted left cross to stop them. No longer has Pacquiao been dismissed as a basic one-two slugger. It also goes without saying that he’s one of the most vicious finishers in the sport, as evidenced by his 77% knockout rate during the decade.
On the other hand, what Mayweather may lack in work rate or accumulated stoppages is more than compensated for by his immaculate defense. Once Floyd gets into the shoulder roll, it’s astounding how impossible he becomes to hit, even on the ropes. While he hasn’t exhibited the same power he had from 130 through 140 pounds, his pinpoint accuracy, footwork, and ring generalship have overwhelmed his competition at welterweight. Like Pacquiao, he was officially knocked down only once during the decade, a dubious knee after injuring himself against Carlos Hernandez in 2001.
SKILLS: Mayweather
Second, in assessing how he would fare in a head-to-head matchup with Mayweather, people on both sides of this issue have offered valid points in backing their man. While this is just one writer’s opinion, I give a slight edge to Manny, if they ever fought. I feel that, stylistically, this is the worst possible matchup for Floyd. Pacquiao’s a southpaw with blinding speed, and he’s become very accurate, to boot. In a nutshell, the difference between Manny and fighters who enjoyed early success against Mayweather like Zab Judah, Oscar De La Hoya, and Shane Mosley, lies in his superior stamina and work rate. Sustained, accurate pressure over 12 rounds is something Floyd has never dealt with. While Floyd has the best defense and counter-punching skills in the sport, and Pacquiao struggled against a masterful counter-puncher like Juan Manuel Marquez in 2004, the “Pac-Man” of 2009 was on a whole different level in all facets of his individual game. Therefore, I think Pacquiao could outland Mayweather on his way to a split or majority decision victory.
HEAD-TO-HEAD: Pacquiao by a nose
While the first two criteria were close, the last two made my final decision a lot easier. When discussing the inclination to take risks and fighting quality competition this decade, Manny Pacquiao took on almost every available challenge as he moved up in weight, with each circumstance as disadvantageous as possible.
After six consecutive stoppage wins in his native Philippines to open from late 1999-to-mid-2001, he flew to America for the first time on only two weeks’ notice to knock out Lehlohonolo Ledwaba, a top-15 pound-for-pound fighter at the time, for the IBF 122-pound title. After two more wins at junior featherweight, following a foulfest against the late Agapito Sanchez in 2001, which resulted in a controversial technical draw, Pacquiao decided to move up in weight. In his first 126-pound fight in the States in 2003, he knocked out Barrera, then the number one featherweight and consensus number three pound-for-pound fighter, in his de facto backyard of San Antonio, in front of 10,000 Mexican fans. For his first fight at junior lightweight in 2005, he didn’t take a breather. He chose a 47-2 Erik Morales and even conceded the choice of gloves to “El Terrible” (a negotiating gaffe, which I feel is partially responsible for his unwillingness today to give in to Mayweather’s extra testing demands). Keep in mind that in all three instances, he was moving up in weight for the first time under unfavorable situations. After losing the first fight to Morales in a clear but close decision, he stayed true to my pound-for-pound definition by knocking his rival out twice over the following year (admittedly, Morales was a shell of his former self by the third fight). Then, he cleaned out the division by beating Barrera again and Marquez at 130, the two best fighters left at the weight.
Then throw in the 2008 world title win over David Diaz in his first and only fight at 135 pounds, for a lightweight belt, which I would analogize to Floyd’s win over Arturo Gatti as a similar pit stop against a paper champion. Add another challenge in moving up 12 more pounds in his first fight at welterweight against De La Hoya, where again he was the underdog, who won via devastating ninth-round stoppage. In his first fight at junior welterweight, he brutally leveled Ricky Hatton, who was undefeated at the 140-pound limit. However, in true pound-for-pound fashion, Pacquiao wasn’t done. He put an exclamation on the decade by moving north seven pounds back to welterweight and wresting the WBO crown from Miguel Cotto in a one-sided affair (albeit at a catchweight of 145 pounds).
In all, Pacquiao finished the decade with a record of 23-1-2, with 20 knockouts. He accumulated six world titles in as many divisions, with three of them coming against the clear number one fighter or true champion in the division (that does not include his 1998 upset win in Thailand over WBC champ Chatchai Sasakul to become THE RING’s number one flyweight in the world). The prospect of Manny Pacquiao taking on dream fights in the decade hasn’t solely been a topic of conversation or speculation by the media and fans; he’s actually been living them and coming away victorious, repeatedly. That to me is the true definition of someone worthy of “Fighter of the Decade.”
That’s not to discredit Floyd Mayweather’s achievements. He was deservedly pound-for-pound best and well on his way to winning “Fighter of the Decade” by a landslide when Hopkins lost to Jermain Taylor in 2005. At the time, the Grand Rapids native had wiped the 130-division clean by stopping the late Diego Corrales in 2001, and after struggling against Jose Luis Castillo in his initial fight at lightweight a year later, decisioned him easily in an immediate rematch and dominated the best available there. What he did at those two weight classes was emblematic of my pound-for-pound definition, and had he continued a similar pattern the last six years, he would have been the clear cut number one in my book, by the end of the decade.
But the truth is that he did not do that. His quality of competition and desire to take risks inexplicably stalled, once he took the pound-for-pound title, starting with his first pay-per-view fight, which coincided with his junior welterweight debut against Gatti. Granted, Floyd beat him in his adopted hometown of Atlantic City, but he departed 140 pounds when Tszyu, the true champ, was available. People might argue that Tszyu lost to Hatton, and Floyd beat the Englishman, but that is not exactly tying up a loose end when he forced Hatton to move up seven pounds to welterweight. Hatton was the champ at 140 pounds, not 147. That’s fighting with an advantage. While he beat Baldomir for the lineal title, can anyone say with a straight face that he was elite? Floyd was supposed to cruise in that bout, and he met expectations.
Now I will say Mayweather deserved full credit for moving up and beating then-titlist De La Hoya for his first and only fight at junior middleweight. That was a true challenge. But instead of building on that momentous victory, he “retired” after the Hatton fight, leaving his recent accomplishments at 140 and 147 much to be desired. Cotto, who was undefeated, and Margarito pre-“Plastergate” were big money fights against legitimate welterweight beltholders, but he never made any genuine effort to make those fights to clean out the division, regardless if people thought he would theoretically beat them. Those were high-risk challenges, and he never proved it in the ring.
After returning from his retirement, Floyd took on a fellow top pound-for-pound talent in Marquez to conclude the decade in 2009, but with strings attached. While some have criticized Pacquiao for having Cotto fight at 145 pounds, it was Floyd who reportedly agreed to the same catchweight agreement against Marquez at 144, then reneged on it by weighing in three pounds heavier. This was also a huge advantage, since Marquez, the current lightweight champion, had already ascended two weight classes and now faced a severe handicap of fighting the heavier man (Contrast this mismatch to Marquez’s two fights with Pacquiao, which took place at the Mexican’s fighting weight). Using those facts, Las Vegas oddsmakers pegged Floyd a 3-to-1 favorite as the man known as “Money” coasted to another decision where the outcome was never in doubt. Again, I ask the readers: Was that really a risky bout against an elite fighter under the fairest of circumstances?
For his count, Floyd was 18-0 with eight knockouts during the decade. He acquired or defended titles in five weight classes. He defeated the number one fighter at junior lightweight (Genaro Hernandez in 1998) and lightweight (Castillo), but in reality, did he clean out 140, 147, or 154? The answer is a resounding no, especially at welterweight, when you consider that the fighter ahead of him in the current consensus pound-for-pound list is fighting in that division as we speak. Counting Corrales, Castillo, and De La Hoya, Floyd Mayweather took on three true challenges in ten years. That is not enough to crown someone “Fighter of the Decade.”
RISK-TAKING: Pacquiao
QUALITY OF COMPETITION: Pacquiao
Manny Pacquiao and Floyd Mayweather will forever be linked in boxing annals, based on their memorable feats over the past ten years. However, considering what the Filipino has added to his overall resume during the period of the American’s retirement, combined with what I perceive to be a superior level of competition faced overall, Floyd’s body of work has been eclipsed by a man who justified the BWAA’s choice of “Fighter of the Decade.” If Floyd wants to plant the seeds of doubt into the voters’ minds, he just has to do one thing—beat Manny Pacquiao in the ring. Plain and simple.
