Where does Mayweather rank realistically on an all time list?

[techliam]

When Leonard was fighting there were 3 belts..there has been more then one title belt for over 40 years

Leonard's claims to fame are his wins over Hagler, Hearns and Duran, then beneath that a win over undefeated Benitez - Floyd has nothing close to that on his resume.

Floyd has many accolades to celebrate, but the 'titles' aren't anything. Him beating top fighters in his division is what counts, and he did that plenty of times

[djtmal]

Floyd was past his prime for alot of his big wins and he himself moved up in weight 4 times so i dont get your point

the point should be you have a ton of past greats who fought their adversaries when both were prime, so there aren't any excuses...

[Madison Boxing]

(In no particular order)

Louis
Ali
Robinson
(Ray) Leonard
Duran
Langford
Dempsey
Johnson
Armstrong
(Benny) Leonard
Liston
Pep
Greb
Jones Jr
Chavez
Tunney
Holyfield
Foreman

With a list like that, I think its criminal (and ******) to have Floyd anywhere near top 10, nevermind 5. The impact a lot of these guys had on the sport is cemented in history. Whilst its not Floyd's fault he is in a watered down era of business-boxing, he did more than his fair share of exploiting it.

Top 30 definitely, with Pacquiao and Hopkins not far behind him

a lot of them fighters fought turkey farmers and part time bar workers. boxing wasnt an international sport back then. its not hard to look amazing if your only fighting people from your own country. Wilder would look like an ATG if he only fought american heavyweights.

[Madison Boxing]

question i will ask, is if mayweather isnt right near the top of the atg rankings, than what can a fighter in the modern era realistically do to get there? Cause mayweather beat pretty much everyone he could.

[Scipio2009]

top 5

Floyd spent 18 years in boxing, 17 of which where he was seen as being the top or one of the top fighters on the planet, at any weight. You add that Floyd left out as the clear-cut #1 fighter on the planet, and folks knocking Floyd have a way to go.

Sugar Ray Robinson, Joe Louis, and Henry Armstrong (with the likely adding of a guy like Archie Moore) likely have a firmer claim to that top spot over Floyd, but that's about it.

[True-Boxing-Fan]

When Leonard was fighting there were 3 belts..there has been more then one title belt for over 40 years

Dude when Leonard fought I agree there were 3 titles but guess what. In those days the WBC was still considered the champ of all champs. In those times the IBF and WBA were what the WBO was when in first came out. They were secondary titles that didn't carry the type of weight the WBC did.

These days all champs are the same and no title is better than the other. You just have four titles holders per division and some have two guy holding the same title in the same weight class. It's ridiculous and waters down being a champion tremendously.

Look being 20th all time is nothing to look down on. That's ***ing high considering the way this era is and considering the type of competition he had to fight.

[techliam]

a lot of them fighters fought turkey farmers and part time bar workers. boxing wasnt an international sport back then. its not hard to look amazing if your only fighting people from your own country. Wilder would look like an ATG if he only fought american heavyweights.

Which is why you don't apply 2017 standards to 1932. You apply 1932 standards to 1932. This isn't meant to be a head to head comparison. That explains your bizarre ranking of Floyd.

If you were a great of a very strong era, most people would make that a major factor.

The modern era is very weak. Promotional problems, abundances of titles, excessive diva behaviour, 'business first', fighting twice a year etc.

I'll happily side with the consensus of people who know the history and heritage of this sport, over a couple of casuals on this forum

[BM dnobagaV]

Somewhere ed between 5-20. Same general area as Pacquiao and Holyfield.

[IronDanHamza]

Top of my head I'd say Top 20 or 25

[True-Boxing-Fan]

question i will ask, is if mayweather isnt right near the top of the atg rankings, than what can a fighter in the modern era realistically do to get there? Cause mayweather beat pretty much everyone he could.

Bro being in the era Floyd was in and beating the guys beat is a tremendous feat. But he never had to deal with a murders row type of competition. And because of that it limits Floyds ceiling on the all time scale.

20th all time is where he belongs and it's a spot not to look down on.

IMO if he wanted to be higher in the scale he needed at least one or two wins over guys he was the clear cut underdog. He never had a win where he did the impossible, because in this era that is what's needed to be considered TBE.

Look at his record and in not one of his fights was he an underdog. And you have to take your hat off to Floyd for that but imo that speaks also to the type of competition he had to deal with. And imo it was rather weak compared to past eras.