Higher On A ATG List, Floyd Mayweather Jr or Lennox Lewis?

Floyd with slight edge.. Should have been Floyd easily, if he fought the best "possible" fights during the last 4 years.. But in the end it is still going to be Floyd by a mile.. he can still add up his current resume.

I dislike Lewis but this is easy pick.

So was the version of Oscar and Mosley. I've addressed that response in my previous posts.

Do I sound like I am kidding? Why are people asking me that? I'm being serious. Do you agree that the versions of Tyson and Holyfield that Lennox beat were well past their best days? So was the version of Oscar and Mosley.

LL takes this.... you can nitpick each others resume and bash both their opponents if they're prime or not, but one thing differs, lewis fought them all, floyd cherrypicked late in his career.

Eh... there is really no controversy in that fight. Thats fine, I'm not saying he wasn't a deserved winner.

Lennox gets my vote. But if Mayweather beats Pac then it's pretty much even. Wait up, if he beats Pacquiao, its pretty much even?! That is just ridiculous.

Lennox gets my vote. But if Mayweather beats Pac then it's pretty much even.

I will grant you that the Marquez win stands for very little but I think Shane and Oscar were in better shape than the versions of Tyson and Holy that Lennox beat. After you get past those two you have a controversial win over Vitali and then Tua and a string of other contenders. I will take the rest of Floyd's body of work over that. Enjoy your slumber. Eh... there is really no controversy in that fight.

They're the best names on his resume then... Should not be about best names if the names are not that good at the time when they fought. To steal a line from Dazed, is not who but more importantly when.

Yeah, but so were Mosley, JMM, Oscar and Gatti. It works both ways. If we're going off the prime argument Lennox wins that too. How do you mean?

You can't really bring Tyson and Holyfield being out of prime into it when Floyd's best wins are 38 year old Mosley, blown up LW JMM and shot to sh*t Oscar. Not trying to discredit Floyd but his resume isn't on Lennox's level imo. It's 2:30 am here so I need to get to bed. I will grant you that the Marquez win stands for very little but I think Shane and Oscar were in better shape than the versions of Tyson and Holy that Lennox beat. After you get past those two you have a controversial win over Vitali and then Tua and a string of other contenders. I will take the rest of Floyd's body of work over that. Enjoy your slumber.

I don't think neither of those are in his top 3 best wins. Maybe Mosley, maybe. JMM is not even in his top 10 best wins. And, Oscar might be in the very low top 10 best wins if he makes the top 10. They're the best names on his resume then...

Do I sound like I am kidding? Why are people asking me that? I'm being serious. Do you agree that the versions of Tyson and Holyfield that Lennox beat were well past their best days? Yeah, but so were Mosley, JMM, Oscar and Gatti. It works both ways. If we're going off the prime argument Lennox wins that too.

You can't really bring Tyson and Holyfield being out of prime into it when Floyd's best wins are 38 year old Mosley, blown up LW JMM and shot to sh*t Oscar. Not trying to discredit Floyd but his resume isn't on Lennox's level imo. It's 2:30 am here so I need to get to bed. I don't think neither of those are in his top 3 best wins. Maybe Mosley, maybe. JMM is not even in his top 10 best wins. And, Oscar might be in the very low top 10 best wins if he makes the top 10.

No I am not joking at all. When the first name you mention is a shot-to-**** Tyson, the second is a Holy well and truly on the downer, the third is a short-notice Vitali (who could have won that fight bar the cuts) and the fourth is David Tua it should be obvious. I'll take Mayweather's resume over that every time. Don't get me wrong I'm not hating on Lennox, great heavy and I enjoyed watching him fight, but his resume is not great. No fault of his own, he beat everyone there was to beat, there just wasn't that many good fighters around at the time. You can't really bring Tyson and Holyfield being out of prime into it when Floyd's best wins are 38 year old Mosley, blown up LW JMM and shot to sh*t Oscar. Not trying to discredit Floyd but his resume isn't on Lennox's level imo. It's 2:30 am here so I need to get to bed.

Do I sound like I am kidding? Why are people asking me that? I'm being serious. Do you agree that the versions of Tyson and Holyfield that Lennox beat were well past their best days? :lol1: :lol1:

You are kidding right There werent many good fighters at the time? WOW :rofl: Do I sound like I am kidding? Why are people asking me that? I'm being serious. Do you agree that the versions of Tyson and Holyfield that Lennox beat were well past their best days?

Is this a joke thread.? Don't put Lennox on the same sentence with the Cowards. This is like comparing Pacquiao to Chavez Jr.

No I am not joking at all. When the first name you mention is a shot-to-**** Tyson, the second is a Holy well and truly on the downer, the third is a short-notice Vitali (who could have won that fight bar the cuts) and the fourth is David Tua it should be obvious. I'll take Mayweather's resume over that every time. Don't get me wrong I'm not hating on Lennox, great heavy and I enjoyed watching him fight, but his resume is not great. No fault of his own, he beat everyone there was to beat, there just wasn't that many good fighters around at the time. I agree with everything you saying, except for the whole Vitaly thing. And, Lennox was the best in what for me was the 2nd best HW era of all time. But, everything else :fing02: Damn good post.