Canelo Alvarez or Andre Ward: Who rates higher all-time?

Like I said, stop kidding yourself.

 

What do you mean "question marks"? Stop poossy-footing around. Canelo has had some close fight like other fighters but if you thought he lost those fights, your opinion, just go with that and mark those in your books as Canelo losses and rate him accordingly based on that not on what other people thought.

 

You're kidding yourself by thinking he must be taking all kinds of drugs based on him having trace amount of clenbuterol in his system. You're making a giant leap there.

 

You can't have it both ways. If you're going to praise a fighter for having a great resume and taking on top fighters, you can't hold it against them for having several hotly contested decisions. That's what happens when you take on top opposition.

And whether you agree or disagree with some of the decisions, he performed at a very high level in every one of those bouts.

 

I think his results are slightly more complicated than just did he win or lose too though in ranking him, or any fighter for that matter.

I had him lose to Lara & GGG 1, I had him draw GGG2.

Then I don't rate his win over Kovalev highly because I thought Kovalev was cashing out and was finished. He padded his resume with a win over Khan, moving him up to fight, there are Q's around PED use, and he's picked the weak fighter at each division to get the multi champ status.

It's not 'poossy-footing', it's that they are genuine question marks over his careers, because some people would rightly say, he fought great in all those fights, or even that they were close fights against great fighters. Against Kovalev, he beat him up, despite being the smaller guy, that's fact(irrelevant to whether Kov was finished), even if he lost to Lara and GGG, he lost to great fighters, when he was still quite young and looked great in the fights.

So like I said, it's not 'poossy-footing', because I completely understand why he is rated so highly, he is so damn skilful, but as I've said - there are just too many question marks for me over his career to put him in my ATG list.

It all looks good on the surface, 54 wins, only loss to Mayweather, Multi-Division champ, beaten guys much bigger, great names on the resume . . . below the surface it's a little murky.

 

Any fighter's career can bee scrutinized with a microscope and no fighter will ever look good based on your level of criticism.

 

Canelo for sure

 

It's close the thing is Canelo still has like 7 years to go

 

Naw, Canelo will probably be out in 2-3 years.

 

Well with those 3 years he can clean up 168 and 160....

 

Several years ago he said he planned to fight until he was 35.

 

That might be his plan. Then hopefully retire on top.

 

And some fighters will come out the other side of that scrutiny as ATG.

For me, Canelo's accolades are more impressive than the reality. At the moment.

Canelo defending his titles with genuine wins over BJS, Eubank Jr & Charlo would tip me over the edge on him. As would a title win at 175 obviously. He's in his prime to do so too.

 

Canelo is better at baiting shots than Hopkins was by walking forwards with the high guard, B-hop was too negative.

 

Something tells me you'd find a way to demean those wins. Just a hunch.