Floyd is P4P #2 ever after SRR?

[GOD-FR33]

I disagree with this.

"I don't think you can ever match up boxers/ sports stars/teams from one era against one from another. its all people's opinions, which are generally biased for or against a fighter."

I disagree with this. Fighters have behavior in the ring and habits that allow one to kind of know what would happen if they'd fought. It's actually not that hard to do. Try it some times. Why would Ali beat Tyson? And how? Why would Holyfield give Ali fits? Why would Leonard have beaten Robinson? Floyd? Oscar? Trinidad? Toney? Jones? Jackson? etc. Because he was just that good. That's why. What did he do every time the lights went on and the world was watching? He was too smart, too fast, too strong, too much stamina, etc. See what I mean? That's how I almost know

[Cardinal Buck]

^you can't be serious

[JAB5239]

people just assume he could not beat those fighters i dont buy it not all of em anyway

I'm not saying all those fighters beat him, I'm saying all those fighters rank higher than him because they have far better resumes.

[Anthony342]

Based on the fact that he was universally P4P #3 and a fighter that everyone was claiming he was avoiding for his life.

Mosley was considered to be as big a threat as Pacquaio at that time. Some were even considering it a bigger threat than Pacquaio.

It's funny how revisionist history comes in. But it is what it is.

Margarito being "passed his prime" is silly. He was coming off far and beyond the best performance of his career at that time and was favoured to kill Shane.

And, why would Mayweather fight Margarito when he returned? That fight was worthless at that point.

Not when he returned. He was asked about Margarito right after the Hatton fight as a possible opponent and even before then, after Antonio beat Cotto. Possible opponents mentioned around that time were Cotto, Margarito, Williams, possibly Mosley. And I don't doubt Mosley was ranked #3 because that can easily be verified, but my question is why? He had only beaten Margarito and Mayorga at the time. While Margarito is a good win, how good was the Mayorga one? Marg may not have been past his prime, but he was caught cheating and possibly did the same thing in the win with Cotto. It just all boils down to the fact that Mayweather has all time great skills, but a very good, but not all time great resume. Nobody is saying the guy never beat any good or even great opponents, just that at some point in his career he became more protected and didn't test himself that often anymore. And I'm not the only one saying that here.

[Anthony342]

To answer the question directly, Mayweather is not close to Ray Robinson in terms of his place on the ATG list.

He's not close to a lot of guys. His resume isn't strong enough, mainly down to his era not being as stacked as others.

Skillwise, he's one of the best I've ever seen. I've been watching Boxing since the 60's and there are very few, if any, I consider to be more skilled than Mayweather.

And despite not having a Top 10 level resume he still has an exceptional resume.

How many other fighters have been a professional fighter for 17 years and 16 of those 17 years been on the Top 10 P4P list, a large portion of them at or near the top of it and beat all comers? Not many.

If you look at the Top 5 ranked fighters Mayweather has fought in the divison he was fighting in, there are not many in the history of the sport who have fought more than he has. It's short company.

His resume is clearly ATG calibur despite not being amongst the Top 20+ greatest.

Okay, I can agree with that.

[almost]

"I don't think you can ever match up boxers/ sports stars/teams from one era against one from another. its all people's opinions, which are generally biased for or against a fighter."

I disagree with this. Fighters have behavior in the ring and habits that allow one to kind of know what would happen if they'd fought. It's actually not that hard to do. Try it some times. Why would Ali beat Tyson? And how? Why would Holyfield give Ali fits? Why would Leonard have beaten Robinson? Floyd? Oscar? Trinidad? Toney? Jones? Jackson? etc. Because he was just that good. That's why. What did he do every time the lights went on and the world was watching? He was too smart, too fast, too strong, too much stamina, etc. See what I mean? That's how I almost know

if i fought a thousand 10 year olds under the bright lights and was undefeated with all first round knockouts, i must be your god.

[#1Assassin]

Top 20 for sure, top 10 isnt out of the question at all either. #2 is a stretch though.

[fight_professor]

After the schooling of Canelo - which many haters said he'd never fight - he has reinforced his legend. Maybe #2 was a bit of fanboyism, but top 10 for sure.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

After the schooling of Canelo - which many haters said he'd never fight - he has reinforced his legend. Maybe #2 was a bit of fanboyism, but top 10 for sure.

schooling canelo doesnt mean anything,,, canelo was a hypejob,,,, canelo could blow out hatton, rhodes, old shane, etc,,,, He never looked dominant unless it was vs a jr welter in lopez or shopworn guys like baldomir or cintron,,
Have fernado vargas from 98-99 fight those same guys and vargas would destroy them... That is how i knew canelo was nothing more than a popular fighter but not a great one,,, 10 years from now, people will look back and say that yes canelo really was as good as the hype suggested....

When it comes to floyd, he is a great fighter,, very skilled no doubt,, but everytime he has fought another good to great fighter he has not dazzled or looked to be the greatest,, grant it, its hard to look great vs top level guys, but people think he is some top 20 ATG yet he really has never challenged himself in the ring,
To me, he is great and the most skilled fighter of his generation, but i think he is just as good as sweet pea whittaker, pernell could have gone right thru floyd's resume with ease,,, so would oscar,,,, I think floyd is a top 30 guy but his lack of big fights vs other prime great fighters hurt his resume,, and their were plenty of opportunities for him to have such fights,, especially since 07 when he became the biggest payday for any opponent,, when your the cash cow like oscar, srl, ali,,, you can make any fight you want to make or at least 99% of them,,, Ali, oscar, srl all fought everyone on the block and that is something that floyd didnt do

[soul_survivor]

Ma***a, you crazy or just high?

Read up negro!!! You ***in high or crazy, how you gon say that Floyd the best after Robinson? You had a ***in lobotomy or some ****? sheeeeeeet, this where the dumb money be flowing!!

But let us look at this objectively, what would it take for Floyd Mayweather to be considered the second greatest fighter of all time.

In the eyes of many, the list often goes something like this:

SRR
Ali
Armstrong/Pep
Duran
Greb/Leonard/Louis

So for Floyd to be ranked above a combination of a minimum of 7 men, he must have achieved more than them, have more convincing title reigns, more legitimate wins over legitimate challengers/contenders/champions and above all else have performed well against fellow greats and HOFers.

So let's look at resumes, I'm not even going to go in depth on this one, there is noway in hell that Floyd has a resume better than any of the 7 names I've listed below SRR. Argument 1 = over!

So how about overall skill level? As a technically gifted boxer, over the last 15 years, there are few boxers who even come close, let alone surpass Floyd. Having said that, looking at those name, who is Floyd better than technically?

I personally believe Pep was a far greater defensive wizard than Floyd can ever dream of. Ali, Leonard and Greb were all better all round boxers. Duran, Armstrong and Louis all hit harder, not to mention their defenses, not quite as good as a primed Floyd but couple their attacking prowess..it leaves Floyd inhaling their dust.

So how else do we rate Floyd? How good has he been in all the division's he has been in? I reckon he'd be a top 10 super featherweight, as for lightweight, he might just sc**** in from 10-15, at light-welterweight he might crack the top 10 but it's not been a glamour division. At welterweight he wouldn't even crack the top 15 for me, Leonard, Hearns, Duran, Robinson, Armstrong, they'd all beat him and in all honesty, I'm not sure how Floyd would stand up to the punishment these guys would inflict on him.

154, 3 wins, 2 against future HOFers but don't let that fool you. One was a great on his way down and Floyd just sc****d by, the other was a once elite fighter who had twice been brutally thrashed in the preceding years and he gave Floyd all the trouble he wanted. The 3rd fight was against a very good prospect who was made to look like a champion and it was a unification...a unification in which there was a catchweight.

This brings us up to the final point, how well did he do against fellow greats or HOFers? Struggled against Oscar and Castillo....Castillo is barely an ATG. Looked very good against Corrales who will probably be a HOFer but then again so is Gatti lol

He looked decent against Cotto but nothing spectacular and looked good against a middle aged Mosley who almost stopped him in the 2nd. To make matters worse, both the Cotto and Mosley fights had been ducked prior for almost years. He looked very good against Hernandez but again, not quite an ATG and basically a modern HOFer.

So there we have it, no ***in way does junior be ranked no. 2 on any list.