Manny Pacquiao or Henry Armstrong: Who Is the Better Pound-for-Pound Fighter?

A while ago I wrote an article about how Manny Pacquiao could be matched up with 20 of the best fighters from different eras.  Henry Armstrong was one of the people on this list.

When one takes a step back to see what kind of fighter Armstrong, its easy to see why.

Armstrong is considered one of the best fighters to ever live.  He was seen as a hurricane in the ring and left most of his opponents battered.  He is also the only man to ever hold three championships at the same time.

Keep in mind this was a time when there was only one lineal title so that means that Armstrong was not only a champion at these weight classes, he was the champ.

Pacquiao has won more titles in more weight classes, but this has been in an era where their are not only more belts, but more divisions.

Comparisons have been made between the two fighters and it has lead to what all comparison lead to.

The question of who was better.

In practice it is a ridiculous question to ask because neither fighter will ever get a chance to step in the ring with each other and, at the end of the day, that would be the only way to find out who is superior.

Still, boxing fans love to ask questions and comparing fighters of different eras is chief among them.

Some would argue that it would be a mismatch, but that argument doesn't hold weight.

Both have had their best years from featherweight to welterweight and Armstrong stands at only 5' 5" which means that he wouldn't tower over Pacquiao.  So, physically, they would match up.

Armstrong was known for throwing countless numbers of punches in a fight and could duck and weave in ways that made his opponent miss.  So is Pacquiao.  

Both men have records dotted with some of the best boxers not only in their weight class, but in the world.

And yet, at the end of the day, Armstrong would win.

The reason isn't so trite as because he came from a harder era or because he had basics that most young boxers today have forgotten—or never even learned in the first place.

Its because he fought almost 200 hundred times in his career.  Pacquiao has other things on his plate.

He is a politician.

He likes to play basketball.

He has a singing career.

He has even appeared in moves and helps endorse products.

Armstrong fought at a time when the only way to really make money as a boxer was to step into the ring.  He fought all the time and it kept him sharp.  It kept him aware and it made him one of the best of his generation.

Unlike the fighters today he didn't have the luxury of casino site fees or pay-per-view revenue.  He had whatever he could draw at a gate.

It made him lean and hungry.  It also made sure that his fighter's edge never grew dull.

And so fans could spend time reviewing which opponents they faced and trying to compare different opponents so they can compare different fighters from different times, but it all boils down to one thing.

Armstrong fought constantly.

Pacquiao doesn't.

A writer has to practice everyday to get better.

A musician has to play their instrument the same way.

A boxer is no different.

And so if Pacquiao and Armstrong ever did step in the ring, Pacquiao would find that his game-plans would fall apart and that he would lose the biggest fight of his career.

As for Armstrong, it would be just another day in the ring.  Just like the other 180 plus.