“I don’t fight for legacy. I don’t fight for none of that, I fight for that check. I’m in the check cashing business.” — Floyd Mayweather, Jr. Money took a crap on HIS OWN legacy. Why shouldn't I? As a defensive fighter he is the greatest DUCKER of all time. He did it for dollars, That's what she said... ATG = LOL
An argument can be made, but I definitely don't think he was the best ever. But history might be kinder to Floyd than his contemporaries realize. Especially in a day and age where every loss a fighter has is harshly targeted. I think he has a strong case maybe for top 10-15, though. I might have him lower than that.
Fair enough. I'd probably estimate having him around #25 myself. Just curious, where would you have him, and who would you have 100% ahead of him.
I think #25 is too high for me but not outrageous. I would probably have him somewhere between Top #40-#60
ATG, sure but not the greatest of all time. I think you'd be hard pushed to find any non-bias source who thinks that
His career was astonishing. Wins over Corrales, Hernandez, Castillo, Gatti, De La Hoya, Maidana, Hatton, Pacman, Marquez, Cotto among many others is hall of fame stuff leading to all time great status. He beat almost everyone from his era. That aside, Sugar Ray Robinson, Ray Leonard, Duran etc would have defeated the above mentioned as well I reckon. They guys had it much tougher than Floyd and defeated even greater fighters. Floyd is not my number one, however I have no qualms with anyone that disagrees.
Sorry, I know this is not answering the original question of the thread. But would it be to fair to rate Mayweather as surely the greatest since 2003 (extreme end of Jones' peak)? Or, if you prefer to rate him above Jones, then surely the greatest since 1993 (extreme end of Chavez' peak)? That's how I see it. And that's still a hell of an achievement.
Great fighter, ATG? Possibly....but...p I s s on him! The last few years he's fighting just to win, not opening up with his talent, merely boxing defensively to get another win. Let him fight 6-8 fights a years over his career and then let's look at his record.
I think it's complicated when subbing in a different fighter for Floyd. Leonard was spent at an age where Floyd was still elite so he wouldn't pull off Floyd's record if everything were the same chronologically. Similarly, Duran became inconsistent in his thirties and likely wouldn't roll through Floyd's opposition for that reason. On the other hand, if Floyd kept Robinson's schedule, he might end up a shell of himself due to hand and shoulder problems and be more of a flash in the pan type.
Yeah you are right, hard subbing them in. I'm just assuming they are all at there best. Times are different so again hard to compare eras