Is Manny Pacquiao Really THAT Good?

I've always been a boxing fan. As a kid, I remember dropping everything whenever channel 9 would telecast reruns of Sugar Ray Leonard versus Roberto Duran or Tommy Hearns or Marvin Hagler or whoever. Sugar Ray had the charisma and the talent that reminded me of Bruce Lee, another one of my fave guys. He was young and graceful, methodical and calculating when he fought. He trash talked and danced around the ring like Ali but when it came to crunchtime, he was one of the best finishers in the sport. The image of Tommy Hearns about to go down the canvas with a smile still painted on his face will forever be etched in my memory.


Now, as a true boxing fan, I'd like to pose a question to all of you out there. Manny Pacquiao, boxing's newest pound for pound king and a hero to many Filipinos - Is he really as good as he is made out to be? Could he really be possibly one of the greatest boxers of our time? Or is he just a good boxer who happens to be at the right place and at the right time and with a very, very smart management team behind him?

Lest I incur the wrath of a whole nation, I would like to categorically state first that I like the man and am slooowly beginning to be a fan. Yes I do and am. What's there to hate about the guy? He's generous (or so they say), respectful and proud of his roots. He can easily choose to relocate to some other first world country instead of staying here but no - he genuinely wants to continue living in this part of the world. No doubt he is truly one of the finest boxers our nation has produced.

But in order to answer this nagging subject question truthfully and objectively, I'd like to invite you to put all prejudices, patriotism and biases aside and study the facts rationally.

Supporters of the Anti-Pacquiao movement will state the following:

1. He catapulted to superstardom by defeating a bunch of aging and battle-weary fighters.
2. Erik Morales was a washed-up fighter when Manny beat him in 2006.
3. Marco Antonio Barrera was an old fighter way past his prime when Manny fought him
4. David Diaz is a second-rate fighter despite being naturally heavier than Manny. A mismatch from the beginning.
5. He lost both fights to Juan Manuel Marquez (the judges just put too much weight on the knockdowns)
6. Oscar dela Hoya? The guy is ancient. Before the Manny fight, he won a disputed decision over Steve Forbes (who?), lost to Floyd, Shane and Bernard Hopkins. He was unimpressive in his win against Felix Sturm, a match he should have lost. The only respectable win he had in the past 6 years was his KO win over the brash Ricardo Mayorga.

Pacmaniacs however would beg to disagree. Their contentions are:

1. El Terrible and the Baby-Faced Assasin were in the prime of their fighting careers when Manny knocked them out. Before his first loss to Manny, Barrera was in an 8-fight win streak. That streak included wins over Naseem Hamed, Morales, Johnny Tapia and Kevin Kelley - certainly no pushovers. Erik Morales was as sharp as ever when he lost to Pacquiao.
2. Oscar dela Hoya just couldn't match Manny's speed that's why he lost. But he wasn't as old as the media made him appear. Manny just made him look old.
3. David Diaz was an olympian and a many time Golden Gloves Champion. What could be more legit than that? Manny was just too good for the guy and TKO'd him in the 9th.

Experts can go on and on with this debate and never reach an agreement. In the end, it will be Manny himself who can prove/disprove if he deserves his lofty status in the boxing world.

But personally, here is my take on the issue.

Bob Arum says it, Freddie Roach always mentions it, Larry Merchant and all those boxing analysts repeat this fact over and over again - it is Manny Pacquiao's YOUTH and SPEED that makes him a great and exciting fighter and what separates him from the others.

Now, there are two things I would like Manny to do in order to silence all his critics. If he can manage to do this, no boxing expert in his right mind will ever question Pacman's ability ever again. So here then is my unsolicited advice to Manny Pacquiao.

Manny Pacquiao's TO-DO list:

1. Fight someone younger

Manny's rise to stardom began when he defeated Erik Morales for the second time. For purposes of this treatise, let's use that match as a starting point in assessing Manny's performance. Since that first win over Erik Morales, Manny has never fought a guy younger than him. Well, except for one - Jorge Solis who is a year younger but not really an outstanding boxer. Manny was 27 when he fought 30-year old Hector Velasquez, 2 years younger than Oscar Larios, 4 years younger than Barrera, 5 years than Marquez, 2 years younger than David Diaz, 5 years from Oscar and about 2 months younger than Ricky Hatton. Given this fact, I would love to see him fight Miguel Cotto who is 2 years younger than Manny. If he can beat Cotto, and I think he will handily - age will not be a question anymore.

2. Fight an African-American

If you look at Manny's record, you will notice that he's fought Filipinos, Thais, Koreans, Japanese, Australians, a South African, a Kazakh, a boxer from the Dominican Republic, Latin-Americans and of course, Mexicans. What's missing from the list? Surprisingly, in 54 fights, Manny has never fought an African-American. Now if speed is his number one attribute, it would be interesting to see how he would fare against a boxer from this group. Will Manny be faster than those guys? Are NBA players faster than PBA dudes? You be the judge. In that case, a match-up between Manny and either Shane Mosley or Floyd Mayweather will be very interesting indeed.


My thoughts on those fights? Shane is pushing 38 so age might play a factor. But if he can continue where he left off in the Margarito fight, we will definitely have a fight in our hands.


I have to admit that I haven't seen that many Mayweather fights. But if the Floyd who made a punching bag out of Arturo Gatti shows up on fight night, Manny may have finally met his match.

Interesting ain't it? Your thoughts in the comments section please.