Objectively, the two reasons why Pac must rank higher than Floyd in ATG terms...

Don't you think it's plain stupid to put your argument on an ATG perspective on these kind of statements?
Bottom line is HE DIDN'T.
Therefore they are not under his resume.
Therefore they don't count.

I can pretty much do the same for Pac and say that everyone Mayweather beat would be dinner for Pac, should I now go ahead and claim he's now in a better ATG placing?


How stupid are you?

That's how Mayweather shitted on you. Too much talent but too little heart.
He could've rectified that by facing Sergio or Pac but nooooooo, that "0" is more important.

 

2 of which were Fluke catchweights. Floyd doesn't force champions to weigh in under the limit when he fought them. Floyd also took the belts from the lineal champs, whereas Pac beat guys who had picked up vacant, paper titles.

 

Pac gets the edge because he did so. I stated that earlier this wasn't about putting Mayweather above Pac. This is for people acting like it isn't close and its a no brainier as if Mayweather isn't capable of defeating those guys.

I ain't even diss Pac or knock his wins, and you got all emotional and ****. Yet if I asked you the same question I just posted you would say that Mayweather would acquire wins vs those guys.

 

No I stated earlier a page ago that Pac got the edge because he did so. But lets not act like its not close since Mayweather could beat those guys to.

 

If you don't think Tyson would whoop Buster Douglas, well...

That's the point when it comes to "woulda, coulda" situations

 

Buster Douglas was one fight vs one person. People keep talking about Mayweather not having ATGs on his resume.

Okay so if he fought Morales, Barrera, Marquez, and Pac at the lower weights would have have ATGs wins on his resume?

 

I am asking your opinion on it.

 

Yes he does