Floyd Mayweather NEVER DARED TO BE GREAT

[Xi_]

My standards of A-level

A fighter that has a great resume, that doesn't lose on fights that mattered and is clearly above them, clearly having enough B-level names to show that he stood out away from them and having good-great achievements (Unifying the division from in dominating fashion etc.etc.)

Corrales - He did not have a great resume, he did not stood out from other fighters such as Castillo, he did not also have the greatest of achievements other than unfying the division with Castillo only to get KO'ed in his next fight.

Castillo - Same with Corrales, not the greatest of resume's, lost fights were it mattered and especially lost fights to complete unknowns close to his prime.

Casamayor - Same goes to him.

In order to be A-level you must have all 3 to meet the Standards. I don't consider Crawford - Spence - Thurman to be A-level yet despite some were in the P4P since all 3 of them lacked my standards, Thurman is the closest because he is starting to rack up his resume while Spence is the most behind. Also I never claimed Casamayor to be a bum, he was a good fighter, but was never great.

You think tim freaking bradley is A level. Foh.

[Thraxox]

You think tim freaking bradley is A level. Foh.

Oh I do think Bradley is A-level, you know what?

Having Prime names (B-level though.) Like Lamont, Alexander, Witter, Provodnikov, Holt, Vargas, Rios, Abregu and most of the time he dominated them like Lamont getting 12-0'd by Bradley then going to arguably beat DSG.

And Having good to great though past it fighters like Marquez, Pacquiao, Campbell, Casamayor.

He beat everyone not named Pacquiao (I scored first fight a draw) and racked up a great resume.

While all awhile being a long reigning unified champion at a stacked 140 and fought everyone in it and beaten everyone in it, while also being a 147 champion.

That's a mark of an A-level fighter.

[IronDanHamza]

Oh I do think Bradley is A-level, you know what?

Having Prime names (B-level though.) Like Lamont, Alexander, Witter, Provodnikov, Holt, Vargas, Rios, Abregu and most of the time he dominated them like Lamont getting 12-0'd by Bradley then going to arguably beat DSG.

And Having good to great though past it fighters like Marquez, Pacquiao, Campbell, Casamayor.

He beat everyone not named Pacquiao (I scored first fight a draw) and racked up a great resume.

While all awhile being a long reigning unified champion at a stacked 140 and fought everyone in it and beaten everyone in it, while also being a 147 champion.

That's a mark of an A-level fighter.

He didn't dominate Provodnikov or Witter. Provodnikov was "skin of his teeth".

Abregu, Holt, Campbell these are no better than Manfredy, Garcia, Bazan, Diaz or Lazcano and Holt dropped Bradley twice aswell.

Funny you mention a shot to **** Casamayor.

I would argue Stevie Johnston is better than any win Bradley has outside Marquez.

[IronDanHamza]

My standards of A-level

A fighter that has a great resume, that doesn't lose on fights that mattered and is clearly above them, clearly having enough B-level names to show that he stood out away from them and having good-great achievements (Unifying the division from in dominating fashion etc.etc.)

Corrales - He did not have a great resume, he did not stood out from other fighters such as Castillo, he did not also have the greatest of achievements other than unfying the division with Castillo only to get KO'ed in his next fight.

Castillo - Same with Corrales, not the greatest of resume's, lost fights were it mattered and especially lost fights to complete unknowns close to his prime.

Casamayor - Same goes to him.

In order to be A-level you must have all 3 to meet the Standards. I don't consider Crawford - Spence - Thurman to be A-level yet despite some were in the P4P since all 3 of them lacked my standards, Thurman is the closest because he is starting to rack up his resume while Spence is the most behind. Also I never claimed Casamayor to be a bum, he was a good fighter, but was never great.

So you think Crawford, arguably the best fighter in the world P4P who has totally cleaned out two divisions isn't an A level fighter?

[chrisJS]

Castillo 23-25 years old losing to fighters that are 18-4 MATTERS. It is not like Marquez who lost his debut but then doing great things in his primes, like beating Barrera, almost becoming undisputed etc. etc at some weights, Castillo getting beaten repeatedly early in his career and to only go neck and neck with Castillo-Casamayor is just not "great" while also not racking the greatest of resume's.

Our standards of an A-level fighter is just different and this conversation is getting circular. I'd rather end it, it leads to nothing.

It's hard to really use Castillo's 4 early losses against him. Fighters come good at different times. The irony is Mayweather fans think Lomachenko is garbage because he lost an either way SD in his 2nd fight against an opponent that failed to make weight and threw an insane amount of low blows but will ignore Castillo's early losses to much lesser fighters than Salido.

But, me being objective I really don't think those losses are that bad for Castillo who clearly came into his own as a fighter later on. Castillo was very, very good IMO. He didn't have as storied a career as say Cotto for example but he was a better fighter IMO. Not great, but good and elite and along with Marquez KO6 Pacquaio and wins over the smaller Marquez and a washed up Pacquaio, fight II is probably Mayweather's best win.

I felt Casamayor beat Corrales three times (second was a 1 point either way fight imo) and earned a draw with Castillo. I think Casamayor showed to be better but Castillo said **** it and used his size late to win the last two and get a draw IMO. Casamayor also beat Freitas in his prime but got a bit of a raw deal. He was probably the better fighter of those guys IMO. Corrales cheated in fight I with Castillo, but Castillo cheated in fight II (not weighing in) but Castillo has very underrated wins like Johnston twice at a time Johnston was schooling very good fighters and was skilled as hell. Lazcano was streaking and a tough out as was Julio Diaz at that time.

[Thraxox]

So you think Crawford, arguably the best fighter in the world P4P who has totally cleaned out two divisions isn't an A level fighter?

Right now? I think Crawford is indeed an A-level fighter, but not historically. If he gets beaten by has been's in his prime and loses fights that he isn't suppose to lose while not yet cementing his legacy as an A-level fighter (My standard above) he degrades to a B-level fighter in my eyes. If you argue Wlad, he had dominated like what? 11 years and the amount of rounds he lost in that time span were only like 5 rounds, against B-level comp, so clearly he is A-level and met my standard.

Gennady Golovkin is in my Radar of threatened to be degraded (Historically) of course, because he had a draw on Canelo despite of me viewing it as a robbery. He still didn't rack up the resume and he still didn't unify the MW.

[Thraxox]

He didn't dominate Provodnikov or Witter. Provodnikov was "skin of his teeth".

Abregu, Holt, Campbell these are no better than Manfredy, Garcia, Bazan, Diaz or Lazcano and Holt dropped Bradley twice aswell.

Funny you mention a shot to **** Casamayor.

I would argue Stevie Johnston is better than any win Bradley has outside Marquez.

I never said Bradley dominated Provo or Witter, that's why "most" is in the sentence,

There are words "Past" it in Casamayor where Casamayor is categorized, and if you view him as shot so be it, I think he was shot also there. Bradley also won fights where it mattered the most in his prime (Witter, Marquez, Provo, and if you could argue for, Pacquiao) While also dominating good B-level fighters like Vargas and Rios while he was clearly past it.

Campbell unified 135 with 3 belts, that's better than any of Diaz, Lazcano, Manfredy did. Lamont Peterson is clearly better than all the fighters you've mentioned, and yes including Stevie Johnson.

[chrisJS]

I never said Bradley dominated Provo or Witter, that's why "most" is in the sentence,

There are words "Past" it in Casamayor where Casamayor is categorized, and if you view him as shot so be it, I think he was shot also there. Bradley also won fights where it mattered the most in his prime (Witter, Marquez, Provo, and if you could argue for, Pacquiao) While also dominating good B-level fighters like Vargas and Rios while he was clearly past it.

Campbell unified 135 with 3 belts, that's better than any of Diaz, Lazcano, Manfredy did. Lamont Peterson is clearly better than all the fighters you've mentioned, and yes including Stevie Johnson.

Stevie Johnston, at least in his prime was much better than Lamont Peterson. I'm not one to say "well, he was ranked here p4p by such and such so that's a fact", but the very fact he was legitimately considered in pound for pound lists at his best in that era speaks volumes especially when compared to Peterson who never hit that type of peak.

Casamayor actually went on to some excellent accomplishments after the fight with Castillo. He clearly had a lot in the tank. Marquez, even though he scored his career defining win in the fight prior was definitely past his best when he lost to Bradley. Dude was 40 and clearly better suited to being a featherweight and super featherweight (he was a little undersized and past his absolute peak even at 135).

Campbell had a better single night and win than Manfredy, but I consider Manfredy a better fighter. It's not always about resume sometimes it's about how good the guy was when he fought him. Manfredy though was not a good match for Chico at 130 though. He'd already fallen off a little bit and was boiling himself down to make 130 for that fight. Buster Douglas won 3 belts and was undisputed champion in one fight for example but wasn't even one tenth of the fighter Mark Johnson was even though the Too Sharp was never unified.

[Thraxox]

Stevie Johnston, at least in his prime was much better than Lamont Peterson. I'm not one to say "well, he was ranked here p4p by such and such so that's a fact", but the very fact he was legitimately considered in pound for pound lists at his best in that era speaks volumes especially when compared to Peterson who never hit that type of peak.

Casamayor actually went on to some excellent accomplishments after the fight with Castillo. He clearly had a lot in the tank. Marquez, even though he scored his career defining win in the fight prior was definitely past his best when he lost to Bradley. Dude was 40 and clearly better suited to being a featherweight and super featherweight (he was a little undersized and past his absolute peak even at 135).

Campbell had a better single night and win than Manfredy, but I consider Manfredy a better fighter. It's not always about resume sometimes it's about how good the guy was when he fought him. Manfredy though was not a good match for Chico at 130 though. He'd already fallen off a little bit and was boiling himself down to make 130 for that fight. Buster Douglas won 3 belts and was undisputed champion in one fight for example but wasn't even one tenth of the fighter Mark Johnson was even though the Too Sharp was never unified.

Yeah but there are so many guys like Johnson that come and go, strong line of defenses all that, but never really having such a good resume. Unlike Peterson, peterson have some good wins like Amir Khan, Holt, etc. etc. while also being the unified 140 figter and defending it for sometime.

The reason why Stevie Johnson was a candidate for P4P because the P4P where indeed open to so much fighters, because alot of the former P4P fought each other and some where knocked off.

But all of them to me are B-level fighters because they just didn't hit my standard of A-level, that includes chico, castillo, casamayor.

[chrisJS]

Yeah but there are so many guys like Johnson that come and go, strong line of defenses all that, but never really having such a good resume. Unlike Peterson, peterson have some good wins like Amir Khan, Holt, etc. etc. while also being the unified 140 figter and defending it for sometime.

The reason why Stevie Johnson was a candidate for P4P because the P4P where indeed open to so much fighters, because alot of the former P4P fought each other and some where knocked off.

But all of them to me are B-level fighters because they just didn't hit my standard of A-level, that includes chico, castillo, casamayor.

Khan was also a debatable win and Peterson admitted he took the same stuff that he got busted for that prevented the re-match.

Johnston had a good dominant run and the only loss (prior to Castillo) was a garbage decision that was easily avenged. The Manfredy win was really impressive because the way Mandredy handled Robinson and a good Gatti was very impressive. Manfredy was also underdog in both and then favored to beat Johnston.

I think these days there's more watering down of too many belts, too many cherry picks, too much vacating and stripping that it's easier to stack up names on your resume and belts but give me a good impressive run against opponents in their peaks that earned the shots. Example is Danny Garcia has a shinier looking resume than Mark Johnson, but there's no question Too Sharp was vastly superior.

I think Mayweather did this with his resume on a larger scale. Tons of names but not a resume that really stacks up to the absolute greatest ever when you really look at the opposition.