Floyd Mayweather Vs Sugar Ray Leonard who wins prime for prime

Who cares that he beat O'Brien, he totally sucks in a H2H fantasy fight.
Do you honestly give him any chance at MW against guys like Hagler, Monzon, SRR, Hopkibs etc ?!?
Or at LHW against Charles, Moore, RJJ, Foster etc ?!

 

Yes, you are. Boxing was already an old sport in the 19th century, just because you're too limited to understand that 19th century people weren't really different than 20th century doesn't mean that you are right.

Again, Fitzsimmons as an old man, way past his prime dominated two of the best LHWs in the world from Langford's era. He proved that he was good enough to compete against later generations.

 

What does it even mean? You know that your "H2H fantasy fight" is completely subjective and unproven way to judge fighters, right?

Fitzsimmons? Yeah, I'd take him over quite a few of the names you mentioned.

 

Cause they would totally suck against boxers from the generations that followed.

 

Really ?! Please do tell against who, they'd obliterate him in 1 round.

 

The criteria for the cutoff is skill level that can be seen on footage.
Bare in mind, this thread is about TBE not GOAT.

So I have no problems about putting an old boxer in the GOAT list, cause the criteria for that is how each boxer did in his own era (achievements).
But I do have a problem putting him in the TBE list, cause that is about H2H and peak form.

My cuttoff is roughly 1920 for TBE

 

Then why should I bother, if you already have established opinion?

Why not 1925? Or 1915?

 

It's a rough estimate date, not an exact one.
Add or take a few years, it's not that relevant.

 

Cause that is my opinion, you are the one who stated otherwise.
Share yours.

 

@White Bomber, here's a list with no bias towards one era over another, and takes no consideration of what a fighter looks like on film. As you can see, Canelo is nowhere to be found and the list could keep going for another hundred places before Canelo would even be considered:

#01. Harry Greb
#02. Sam Langford
#03. Henry Armstrong
#04. Sugar Ray Robinson
#05. Ezzard Charles
#06. Benny Leonard
#07. Muhammad Ali
#08. Roberto Duran
#09. Bob Fitzsimmons
#10. Archie Moore

#11. Joe Louis
#12. Tony Canzoneri
#13. Willie Pep
#14. Barney Ross
#15. Jimmy Wilde
#16. Terry McGovern
#17. Packey McFarland
#18. Ray Leonard
#19. Joe Gans
#20. Jimmy McLarnin
#21. Tommy Loughran
#22. Sandy Saddler
#23. Mickey Walker
#24. Gene Tunney
#25. Jack Britton
#26. Emile Griffith
#27. Manny Pacquiao
#28. Floyd Mayweather Jr.
#29. Carlos Ortiz
#30. Kid Gavilan

#31. Carlos Monzon
#32. Marvin Hagler
#33. Ruben Olivares
#34. Fighting Harada
#35. Ike Williams
#36. Michael Spinks
#37. Eder Jofre
#38. Roy Jones Jr.
#39. Charley Burley
#40. Tommy Hearns
#41. Freddie Welsh
#42. Holman Williams
#43. Lou Ambers
#44. Tommy Gibbons
#45. Jose Napoles
#46. Bernard Hopkins
#47. Julio Cesar Chavez
#48. Miguel Canto
#49. Manuel Ortiz
#50. Evander Holyfield

 

Modern Ness.

 

Longevity and world titles

 

Barely has Ali beaten in longevity, and titles mean nothing since there's way more now.

Try again.

 

It's extremely relevant, because you discredit fighters from before your completely arbitrary cutoff point.

You should realize that plenty of fighters destroy this whole idea of cutoff point. Bob Fitzsimmons started fighting in 1880s and he dominated the best 1900s fighters. Sam Langford's career had beinning in the early 1900s and he dominated ATGs from 1920s. Joe Louis schooled 1950s HWs with brain damage. Archie Moore competed for the best LHW title in the early 1960s and he started his career in 1930s.

You can't create arbitrary moment when boxing started to be relevant, because I'll find a lot of examples of fighters from previous eras dominating more modern ones.