Keep in mind that he was pretty badly faded by the time he fought Pac and that he entered the ring at around 150 for Canelo and Oscar whereas Canelo probably was closer to 170 and Oscar was mid 160s.
Battle of the boardroom bullies. I wrote a whole essay on this one, but it's Floyd. The standard 15-0 wheel greasing wins look a lot worse on a guy with 36 wins vs. 50. Floyd has the longevity, the number of quality wins, and they have the same amount of championship stoppages between them which is interesting considering their disparate reputations. Pretty Boy alone was 37-0.
Yes. Floyd deserves huge credit for his professionalism and his longevity. I’ve already acknowledged that. Every fighter ages differently, depending on their circumstances. No, Roy wouldn’t rate higher based on that. But it would be a factor to consider, along with many others.
Yes, Ray wouldn’t have beaten a prime Nunn at that stage. A horrible stylistic match up for him. It wasn’t a huge disappointment though, as everyone knew where Ray was at that point. It was never a demand from the fans. The major difference between them both, is: Ray had already had his legacy fights. He’d already fought prime ATG fighters. He’d already beaten prime ATG fighters. What a huge disappointment it was for Floyd to run from Manny for years, only fighting him in 2015 after Marquez had iced him, before then taking PEDS himself, after years of slandering Manny without a shred of evidence. It’s one of the biggest disappointments in the modern era. Whatever Ray did, Floyd did better? You keep trying to convince yourself of this. However, unfortunately for you, the following statement is a factual one: As great as Floyd was, he never beat an ATG fighter whilst they were prime. So: No, Floyd COULDN’T do what Ray did.
No, I don't, in the sense that I've never bothered to rank them, it seems to hard to determine the order after the first 10, and even there it's hard. I'm gonna list some boxers who are worthy of being top 50 IMO, in no order: SRR, Armstrong, Greb, Mayweather, Duran, Pacquiao, Louis, Pep, Hagler, Charles, Moore, Jofre, SRL, Langford, Dempsey, Tunney, Ali, Johnson, RJJ, Monzon, Tyson, Lewis, Marciano, Canzoneri, Ross, Canelo, Fury, Toney, Whitaker, Hearns, B-Hop, Chavez, Walker, Leonard, Wlad, Arguello, Prior, Holyfield, Holmes, Calzaghe, Ward, Napoles, De La Hoya, Hamed, Spinks, Ketchel, Gavilan, Gans, Benitez, Mosley, Froch, Lomachenko, Vitali, G-Man, Jackson, etc
Another piece of comedy genius from you. So: Ray WASN’T washed up against Norris, yet Marvin DEFINITELY WAS against Ray? You’re about as objective as No Neck. And why do you keep adding your little final line on every post, when me and another poster have already quashed it? It’s the act of a desperate man trying desperately to try and convince himself of something. You were better as Red Rooster. At least there was a tiny bit of comedic value in your posts. Whereas now, you’re just: Zzzzzzzzzz
Amazing. And like I already said, numbers alone aren’t worth anything. Otherwise, Sven Ottke was better than Roy Jones.
Fair enough, I agree ranking a top 50 p4p all time is incredibly difficult. What's your criteria? Broadly speaking, is it p4p H2H (i.e. time machine all fighters into a modern ring & make them all the same size, and these are the 50 you think are the best), or is it best on what they actually achieved within there own era?
It could easily be debated that Ottke was better than RJJ. Numbers are worth alot more than you think or maybe the factual numbers arent worth anything to you because it goes against your narrative.
No knowledgeable boxing fan would consider there's a credible argument that could be made that Ottke was better than RJJ. Who do you rank higher at HW, the 36-0 Joe Messi or the 32-4-1 Joe Frazier?