Do you consider Floyd Mayweather to be The Best Ever?

Usually those that are not call themselves so. He definitely isn't and is not even close.

 

No, he lacks risk taking.

 

He's IMO top 20-30. I can definitely name 20 guys I think are "greater" than him. It's funny because this question was on instagram last week and I said this, and I was trashed as a boxing novice and Floyd hater (despite the fact that I'm a huge Floyd fan)

 

Mayweather is confident in himself, but the TBE line was more of a promoting gimmick. I have seen interviews where he can be humble and compliments many boxers throughout history. I don’t think he cares if he is considered the best ever. The list of great fighters are arbitrary and there is no prize money for “winning” such a contest. The man cares more about money than greatness.

 

No, he isn't.

 

Not even close.

 

Not TBE, but very very close. I consider him closer to TBE than most of the people in this forum. I have never watched anybody to do what he does, that's the main reason. His IQ is off the charts, it's like watching jones vs toney once and again and again.

I cant think of many fighters in history that would make me bet against floyd in a 12 rounds fight. And the reason why those fighters come to my mind is because they are stylistic nightmares for floyd, like Hearns. You have to go to top notch atg material to think about someone having real chances vs floyd. I mean, top 5 or top 10 (at most) in his weight range. He's for sure the best figther I've watched fighting live.

 

Only SRR

 

no 2.0

 

He’s made it look very easy, and has displayed unbelievable boxing skills along the way. He gets alot of hate but he is definitely right up there with the greats.

 

Best fighter of his era and one of the best ever but not the very best.

 

No, and it's not even close. Mayweather was good but he managed his career in a very Fury-esque way, playing on the ignorance of the casuals who confuse "officially unbeaten" with "unbeatable". For a long time in his career, Mayweather was very selective about who and when to fight, and spoonfed casuals with his false triangle theories. "See, I told you fighter x is no good, he just go beat by fighter y whom I beat. And you people wanted me to fight fighter x, what a joke."

The two most important truths in boxing are: styles make fights and that it's a numbers game. When you take risks and fight everybody, sooner or later you will meet a guy who has your number and beats you. It doesn't even have to be a big name necessarily. Ali arguably lost all three fights against Norton who was a very solid fighter but not an ATG one. Fury clearly lost to McDermott and Wallin - again, good fighters, not nearly great ones. That's why amateur records tell a clearer picture. You can't pick and choose your amateur opponents. You show up at the tournaments and you fight whoever is there to fight. No ducking, and no cherry-picking are possible. That's why everybody has losses as an amateur - there's no such thing as an unbeatable fighter. Never was, never will be. Fury has a 20% loss record as an amateur (5 losses in 25 fights). Mayweather lost 6 fights out of 44 as an amateur. Bivol lost 11 times as an amateur, Beterbiev 10 times, and Usyk 15 times.

 

No That's Fury.

 

Lmfao at the idiots dismissing Floyd completely. I can completely dissect and destroy your favorite boxer's resumes that you rank above Floyd. I saw someone rank Marciano over Floyd. LOL.