Ali, Leonard, Whitaker, Jones, and Mayweather: Who you got???

[-DSG-]

mayweather couldnt hold leonards jock strap

[SirTomJones]

mayweather couldnt hold leonards jock strap

Yep

[JayDee2700]

I went with RJJ, Roy probably had the best skills outta all of them but thats not saying he is the best fighter ever, but skill wise there is no ive seen that was as gifted as Roy, Floyd is gifted but not as close as Roy or i think even SRL, I like all the fighters you named but Roy stands out the most to me as far as skill wise.

[Elf]

Ali 67' was a Freak

[Alx.]

either ali or jones, i m not sure why are you putting floyd in with the greats.

[slick23]

dont let the nostalgia fool you..just because they fought in the 70s/80s doesnt make them more skilled..this isnt based off resume..just SKILL..how you can say one shouldnt find a Floyd Mayweather or RJJ more skilled than a SRL or Ali is ridiculous. imo Ali just wasnt as skilled as them..however great he may have been..

I think your quick to assume that I have referred to nostalgia for some reason. You say just because they fought in the 60's and 70's doesn't mean their more skilled. Maybe not, but they sure faced faced better opposition on the way up, NO? That includes both amateur and pro. Maybe I should have included the time period in which they fought amongst the criteria simply for that reason. Its no fault to the more recent gang of fighters that they don't have to fight as often or against the best opposition to get recognized or paid handsomely, that's the business of it.

Can you imagine no Ali v Frazier taking place because they couldn't agree on how to split the money? Or no Leonard v Hagler, or Leonard v Duran, or Leonard v Hearns? I mean it just gets to the point where its hard to ignore.

Anyhow I picked the guys in this order. Leonard, Ali, Floyd, Pernell, then Roy. I thought Leonard was by far the most complete fighter of them all. You cannot point to one thing that he doesn't possess as a fighter, and he fought legends and won. Ali, great athletic attributes, didn't do things technically right all the time but was able to overcome it. Later after he came back and lost some of the natural quickness he had previously he he was able to overcome some monsters(Foreman, Frazier, Lyle etc) with a toughness and a boxing I.Q. that was unbelievable. Floyd is very good. I think his best days were at lightweight where his skills were really on display, the guy was dominant. I just think his resume in recent years lacks in comparison to the others. Technically great. One of the best defensive fighters I have ever seen, an underrated toughness and discipline for the sport. Pernell was maybe the most elusive fighter, again a great amateur, hell all of them were. Lacked some power which made me put him here, fantastic boxer though, he and Floyd would have been interesting. I think you can virtually flip flop Pernell and Floyd depending on how you perceive each of their styles.
Roy comes in at the end. Great physical talent no doubt. Fun to watch that's for sure. His level of opposition wasn't the best, some of that was his fault some not. Not in the class of the other guys on the list in terms of technical prowess, then again I don't know if any of them were as gifted athletically as Roy. I always thought if Roy had a better jab he could have saved himself from those embarrassing moments at the end of his career. That said those moments happened and you can't erase them from memory, that's why he's last on my list.

As far as the Leonard v Floyd or Pernell goes i think Sugar Ray beats both of them. He beats Floyd maybe easier that Pernell because of the styles.

[DLT]

In their primes, only talking about skill and attributes.

Put each guy at their absolute peak and throw them in with all the greats of each guys weight class or classes, which of these 5 do you think was the best????

Not resume, purely based on skills and attributes, and how they would have done in all era's with their weight class or classes.

all of these are completely different questions to me

[Ringlife]

Mayweather has fought some pretty good fighters I would say him.

[Capaedia]

Sugar Ray Leonard

Pernell Whitaker

Floyd Mayweather Jr.

Muhammad Ali

Roy Jones Jr.

Note that I've pretty much ranked it in order of who was more versatile.

Sugar Ray Leonard could fight any type of fight, and had no notable weakness or cryptonite, that is why I put him at first. The only person I would have over him at 147 is Ray Robinson.

Whitaker and Mayweather are both masters of fighting at their own pace, frustrating and tiring the other fighter, and beating them by decision (although Floyd could bring the fire at lower weights). Neither of them really have any exploitable weakness, but I believe Whitaker edges Mayweather simply because he had a higher work-rate.

Muhammad Ali was great, no doubt, but he had his flaws. I believe certain fighters could shed some light on them (and some in fact did) This article is also worth a read

Roy Jones Jr. while spectacular to watch, was never tested as much as he could've been. There should be an asterisk next to his name when discussing him like this.

[4Corners]

either ali or jones, i m not sure why are you putting floyd in with the greats.

How des Floyd not deserve to be in with the ATG's??? Yes, based on resume, era, skills, all together, I only have Floyd around Top 30 All-Time. But, based on skills and attributes, Mayweather is probably one of the greatest.