NSB myth is that all the past ATGs fought everyone and its not the case at all

Lol. Sounds like Harry Greb is more regconize, and had more impact in his era than Floyd Mayweather. The point is this Mayweather didn't fight in Greb's era, and Greb didn't fight in Mayweather's era. If you believe Harry had a bigger impact and greater career in Boxing than FMJ than shots out to Harry. It's not only Greb that surpasses the selfproclaimed TBE by miles and miles not only because they fought more often but also because they fought the better opposítion.

:lol1: One day someone's going to say the same thing when they mention Mayweather & Margarito. Why is Margarito even seen in a favorable light is my question. The guy got suspended for cheating. He was found guilty for Cheating! He is disgraced!

How about a record of 45-0. 10 of those wins against HOF'ers? Sounds like it's a better record than Floyd Mayweather to me. That's Harry Greb for ya. In ONE SINGLE YEAR! Think about it. Harry Greb surpassed Floyd's entire career in one year alone! Lol. Sounds like Harry Greb is more regconize, and had more impact in his era than Floyd Mayweather. The point is this Mayweather didn't fight in Greb's era, and Greb didn't fight in Mayweather's era. If you believe Harry had a bigger impact and greater career in Boxing than FMJ than shots out to Harry.

are there any atg's that didn't beat atleast 1 other highly regarded(atg) boxer in their primes or close to it?

sorry to disappoint you but it's not about floyd or Manny Its about all the great fighters ive watched in my lifetime who people say didnt do this, or that but act like atg in the past fought everyone when its not the case My point is it is not possible to fight every one in your era....they didn't then, they dont now Judge fighters for what they have done, not for what they haven't done If Mayweather/pacquaio bickering is your thing, go to another thread this one aint for ya How about a record of 45-0. 10 of those wins against HOF'ers? Sounds like it's a better record than Floyd Mayweather to me. That's Harry Greb for ya. In ONE SINGLE YEAR! Think about it. Harry Greb surpassed Floyd's entire career in one year alone!

Ray Robinson avoided Charley Burley.when the threat is high,that's normally the case.

Ray Leonard vs McCallum would of been cool. So would have Hagler vs Mccallum

GGG sai he would go down to 154 where Floyd is supposedly a lineal champ and holds a belt and all you heard was crickets. Everyone says they would go to 154 for Floyd.. Hopkins saying he would go to 160... Is Floyd suppose to fight him to. It's not a realistic fight to make..

How in the hell is Floyd ducking ggg... They are even remotely close to each other GGG sai he would go down to 154 where Floyd is supposedly a lineal champ and holds a belt and all you heard was crickets.

Just a friendly reminder that Floyd signed a contract to fight Pac. Pac refused to sign a 50/50 split contract to fight Floyd. Who's the ducker? If Marquez and Pac agreed to go 50/50, yet Marquez decides not to sign the contract over drug testing, who would the fan boys say is ducking? I thought so. Now back to the topic that seemed to me to be not particularly about Floyd and Pac. Thank you for reading. Floyd also brought random drug testing once it was time to fight PAC something he didn't do in the previous 40+ fights so who really ducked who?

You keep focusing on those alphabet titles who the fawk cares! Floyd ducked margarito, Williams, PAC, and now GGG You fight for legacy and make some change at the same time Floyd will go down in history as te biggest duck in the sport The vast majority will remember him for all the fighters he ducked and not the titles he won. How in the hell is Floyd ducking ggg... They are even remotely close to each other

Bro even if you accuse Mayweather of ducking it doesn't change who he fought and the titles he won. Mayweather has defeated more champions than all of them not titlists but lineal champions, and only Manny is tied with him with the most lineal titles at 4.....if he ducked his whole career he wouldn't be where he is, won the titles he won, etc. With your logic you must believe Jones ducked Michaelzewski, Benn, and Eubank or De La Hoya ducked winky wright or Vernon Forrest You keep focusing on those alphabet titles who the fawk cares! Floyd ducked margarito, Williams, PAC, and now GGG You fight for legacy and make some change at the same time Floyd will go down in history as te biggest duck in the sport The vast majority will remember him for all the fighters he ducked and not the titles he won.

:lol1: One day someone's going to say the same thing when they mention Mayweather & Margarito. Dude, it's Floyd, manny, Marquez, cotto, margarito.. The fab five in the future

Fighters if the past at least fought the other top guys as well as some cherrypicks.. Today's fighters especially the champions hardly ever fight the number 1 rival.. Too much "marinating, not enough fighting"

What fighters of the past are you talking about who would fight anybody. I heard SRL stated during a press conference, with Aaron Pryor sitting right beside him. that he would not fight Aaron Pryor. Both were world champions at the time and both were in their primes. Everyone looks at the past through rose-colored glasses and you are no exception. I'm not talking about everyone I am talking about the fighters that people mentioned that have an insane amount of fights from back then and explaining that it is due to a different attitude from today. Then I was explaining why I think that PPV is a big part of the reason a lot of big fighters cant fight whoever they want whenever they want anymore. Not saying that back then it was for sure that everyone fought everyone man, but with a record of 100+ fights it is pretty clear you are up for fighting all comers. I was just thinking of reasons on the big fighters that people where talking about having tons and tons of fights but not all of them seem credible and why a fan from todays landscape may look back and wonder why that is.

Kalambay and Nunn being mentioned in the same breath as the fab four...ok I'm out :lol1: One day someone's going to say the same thing when they mention Mayweather & Margarito.

Kalambay and Nunn being mentioned in the same breath as the fab four...ok I'm out

I think the politics of modern boxing have tainted the opinions of the fighters of the past resumes...For example, back then anyone would fight anyone, because that is the idea. Eventually stars emerge that go on to live forever, like SRR as you mentioned, but the attitude and way things where back then where still just to fight. Yeah his resume may be full of opponents deemed unworthy, but that wasn't the point, the point was to fight anyone on your way up and defend your title against anyone if you managed to get one. Nowadays the big name fighters come out literally twice a year, every fight has to be a money spinner and drag in the numbers and for that to happen the opponent has to be someone with a name to help hype up the event and promotions. That is why there is so much emphasis put on the resumes of the big fighters of today, because if they went on like the old days and fought anybody who was anybody, the PPV system would fall and that is where money lies in big time boxing. I think slowly but surely PPV has played a part in modern boxing at the highest levels in the loss of attitude of Best Vs Best and everyone takes on anyone. Big name fighters need to fight big name fighters these days, and thats why some people may look back at ATG records and wonder if many of the opponents where worthy. What fighters of the past are you talking about who would fight anybody. I heard SRL stated during a press conference, with Aaron Pryor sitting right beside him. that he would not fight Aaron Pryor. Both were world champions at the time and both were in their primes. Everyone looks at the past through rose-colored glasses and you are no exception.

If a fighter has over 100 fights near 90% of their competition is bad to marginal Today is a different era and fighters are being moved a bit faster and fight fewer fights because they get paid better than fighters of the past Sugar Ray Robinson is considered by many to be the greatest fighter of all time and his resume and competition level is not even in the top ten. He also never faced a prime ATG at welterweight.At welterweight, the only great fighters he fought were Gavilan who was pre prime and Armstrong who was past it but still pretty good. Its not his fault, you can only fight who is available in your era and politics often get in the way, just as they do today. He turned pro in 1940 and fought between 147-160 in an era that had the black murderers row like Aaron wade, Cocoa Kid, Holman Williams, Charley Burley, Eddie Booker, Bert Lytell etc.....him not facing those guys should not and does not take away from what he has done Mayweather and Pacquiao has not fought yet but it is not the only big fight that did not happen.....None of the fab 4 fought Aaron Pryor, Michael Nunn, Sumbu Kalambay or Mike McCallum between 147-160 and all are still considered ATG'S....Trust me if they had to face all four, some if not all would come away with a lose We have been lucky to see ATG like Roy Jones, Hopkins, Toney, Mayweather, and Pacquaio in our closing era....lets enjoy them while we have them and judge them for what they have done and not for what they have not done I can't speak for the era of Sugar Ray Robinson, but I grew up watching Sugar Ray Leonard, Hearns, Hagler and Duran and, to some extent, Muhammad Ali. It was rumored that SRL moved up a weight class in the amateurs to avoid facing Aaron Pryor in the Olympic Trials. SRL definitely avoided Pryor in the pros. Neither Duran or Hearns were willing to fight Pryor either. Hagler spent his entire career at 160, so we have no idea how he would have fared against the top fighters at 168 and 175. You cannot use logic and facts when you are talking about Floyd Mayweather on this message board because they mean absolutely nothing to the people who post here. Good post, but it is more or less a waste of your time and energy to write it.

I think the politics of modern boxing have tainted the opinions of the fighters of the past resumes...For example, back then anyone would fight anyone, because that is the idea. Eventually stars emerge that go on to live forever, like SRR as you mentioned, but the attitude and way things where back then where still just to fight. Yeah his resume may be full of opponents deemed unworthy, but that wasn't the point, the point was to fight anyone on your way up and defend your title against anyone if you managed to get one. Nowadays the big name fighters come out literally twice a year, every fight has to be a money spinner and drag in the numbers and for that to happen the opponent has to be someone with a name to help hype up the event and promotions. That is why there is so much emphasis put on the resumes of the big fighters of today, because if they went on like the old days and fought anybody who was anybody, the PPV system would fall and that is where money lies in big time boxing. I think slowly but surely PPV has played a part in modern boxing at the highest levels in the loss of attitude of Best Vs Best and everyone takes on anyone. Big name fighters need to fight big name fighters these days, and thats why some people may look back at ATG records and wonder if many of the opponents where worthy.