Thursday is Sack day around these parts. And, this week, we celebrate my gloriously bulging sack with a look back at heroes of yesteryear and how their feats apply to modern day boxing. We have questions about Manny Pacquiao, Bernard Hopkins (and his middleweight defense record, which is about to be tied by Gennady Golovkin), and how Anthony Joshua and Tyson Fury are rated based on their separate experiences with Wladimir Klitschko.
The Legacy of Manny Pacquiao
Hi Paul,
Manny Pacquiao’s career is pretty much over, hopefully after the Matthysse fight, and I was wanting to know what your thoughts on his career were? Does he deserve to be mentioned alongside the greats of the past and was he exciting to watch in his prime in your opinion?
-- Scotty
Hi Scotty.
There was a time when I was named “Manny Hater #1” by the Pacquiao Pacland forum, back when Pac-mania was at its height. That dubious award was bestowed on me because I refused to buy into much of the hype that was being sprayed all over boxing at the time about him being this humble super hero who only existed to kick ass and bring nobility to the sport. I held him to the same standard as any other fighter and pointed out that his matchmaking, especially in the welterweight stage of his career, was just as cynically calculated as any other fighter’s. I lashed out at the hype machine and, of course, his fanatically loyal fans lashed out at me.
But, while I pointed out that he was as cutthroat and as calculated as any other star, I never stopped giving him his proper level of credit as a fighter. Even if his career ended with the Ricky Hatton bout, he would still easily be a first ballot HALL of Famer. Manny’s welterweight run has been uneven and, with the exception of the Cotto fight (which I said would be a stylistic mismatch in his favor) and the loss to Mayweather, exceedingly cautious. Post-welterweight debut, Manny stopped being a fighter and started being an attraction—and his matchmaking showed that change as he wasted a lot of time on check-cashing fights that were ONLY about getting an easy payday.
He’s a legend of this era, though. No doubt. And he’s a proper hero for his Filipino people. He will be remembered as one of the most entertaining legends of this generation and the regard he gets with fans will probably grow as he moves further away from these last five years of his career, which were spent just hanging on and collecting paychecks.
GGG and Hopkins’ Record
Magno,
I’m only writing to you because I know you keep things 100% real and I don’t want no fanboy bs when I get to this question. My question is about Gennady Golovkin and whether he will go down on the same level as or even better than Bernard Hopkins. GGG’s about to tie B-Hop’s middleweight defense record of 20 defenses and will probably break the record. But his resume ain’t what Hopkins’ was and we all know it. There’s a lot of bs defenses thrown in there on Golovkin’s record. Lots. So, will Golovin get the asterisk he deserves on his record or will he get full credit and Hopkins be disrespected by having to be taken down in the record books for Golovkin’s name?
-- TR Jones
Man, TR…Don’t get me started.
If Golovkin breaks Hopkins’ record, he deserves about 8 asterisks, several footnotes, and maybe even a different font or smaller text size. The two careers could not have been more different, despite similar numbers on paper.
If I’m being mega-generous with Golovkin, at least half of his defenses came against opponents who had no business challenging for a middleweight title. And don’t give me this bullshit about nobody wanting to fight Golovkin, so he was forced to fight junior middleweights, second tier gatekeepers, and Foot Locker employees. With the way HBO was pushing him and the investment they made into building his brand, Golovkin was hardly some powerless sad sack at the mercy of the titans of the division. If he fought tailor made opposition, it was by Team Golovkin design. They sought out the best guys HE COULD BEAT when it came time to finding “legit” and world ranked opposition. In the first two “real” fights he’s had (18 and 19 fights into a world title reign), against opposition who could do more than walk into his fists (Jacobs and Alvarez), he just barely was able to tread water. And, most likely (and if Team Golovkin has its way), if Golovkin ties Hopkins’ record, it will be against a junior middleweight.
Hopkins’, on the other hand, actually met and beat most of the best of his middleweight generation. He performed better as his level of opposition got stronger. In any title reign, there will be fluff and a few gimmes, but those should be the exceptions and not the norm.
The middleweight reigns of Hopkins and Golovkin just can’t be compared.
Fury, Joshua, and Klitschko
Paul.
Tyson Fury beat Wladimir Klitschko fairly easily. Anthony Joshua beat Klitschko, too, but had to go to war. Given the shared opponent, does this make Fury deserving of higher regard than AJ?
-- Simon Pagglio
It’s all about styles. Fury boxed a little and took advantage of Klitschko’s general reluctance to put himself at risk by pursuing a taller, rangier opponent. Joshua forced a fight on Klitschko and Klitschko, to his credit, fought back valiantly. I don’t think you can say who’s better based on their fights with a shared opponent. Personally, I think Fury is very overrated in many circles of boxing fandom. IMO, Joshua beats Fury decisively, maybe via late KO.
Got a question (or hate mail) for Magno’s Bulging Mail Sack? The best of the best gets included in the weekly mailbag segment right here at FightHype. Send your stuff here: paulmagno@theboxingtribune.com.