Better resume Ali vs Mayweather

So you think Tony Pep fits the criteria for a quality win ? But top 2 ranked contender Zora Folley doesn't qualify as a quality win ? What a baffling comment.

Be honest you tried to pad Mayweather's resume as much as possible and left out some very notable names from Ali's resume like Zora Folley, Cleveland Williams, Jimmy Young, etc.

Who are considerably better names than the likes of Tony Pep and Emanuel Augustus.

 

LMAO. This is a joke thread right?

 

Man, you really need to go outside if you take Boxing discussions that seriously. Floyd doesn't know you exist, my friend.

Prime Canelo > prime Foreman. The Foreman who faced Ali had just flattened both Frazier and Norton though and was at his peak, while the version of Canelo who fought Floyd had just scraped by Trout, his only prime world class opponent by that point. Why do you still pretend that saying the Foreman win is better than the Canelo one is sacrilege ?

Marquez is an ATG, but his greatness almost solely rests upon his fights with Pacquiao and Barrera. Fights he had at 130 and 135, with the exception of the Pacquiao KO, after already having a few fights at WW and roiding himself up. He had just moved up to 135 and only had 2 fights at the poundage before Floyd made him move up all the way to Welterweight, and Floyd still didn't bother adhering to the agreed upon 144 limit. Marquez didn't even stay at WW, he jumped down to 135 again for another 2 fights before deciding to chase Pacquiao.

You tried to talk HoF stats. Ali's are better, so you attack the Foster, Norton and Moore wins. Is Gatti more worthy of being in the HoF than Norton, a guy who actually beat an ATG even if he never became champ ? Is the Marquez fight any different than the Foster fight, except that Foster is the greater ATG fighter ? The Moore win wasn't even bad, Moore had just beaten the #4 ranked HW Alejadro Lavorante and drawn with Willie Pastrano, who would become the LHW champion a year later.

 

Zora Folley I didn't include because of the reason I said, Cleveland Williams I didn't include because he got shot in the leg and was never the same after that don't think that's a good opponent, Jimmy Young I didn't include because I don't think Ali won that fight but I would if he did. I would say Tony Pepe and Emanuel Augustus are better then Zora Folley and Cleveland Williams tbh especially the ones that Ali fought but that's just my opinion we can agree to disagree

 

Floyd doesn't make excuses for being past his prime, he makes excuses for his opponents being past theirs.

Less ranked opponents, less impressive wins, less big punchers, less wins over prime all-time greats, less wins over top 10 all-time in his weight class, less fighters whose styles are bad for him, less difficult fights in general.

But yeah, Floyd his missed more opponents, that's for sure.

This is resume, losses don't matter.

First of all, comparing Holmes and Canelo is crazy work. One was a top five heavyweight of all time, as champion, in his prime, after Ali took two years off, and the other was a 23 year old on the same level as Trout and Lara, who Floyd fought while still active.

Not to mention, how was Canelo Floyd's heir apparent? The equivalent of Ali fighting Holmes would be Floyd fighting Crawford.

Mayweather has A) never beaten a top 20 P4Per (which technically Ali has, in Moore), and B) fought Pacquiao when he was ancient, injured and had been brutally KOed.

Tell me, NoNeck, why did Floyd not fight a single all-time great in their prime? Why did his best four wins (Pacquiao, De La Hoya, Mosley and Canelo) happen when his opponents were obviously not at their best? Do you take this into account at all?

And how do you reconcile Floyd having a better resume than a guy who beat more ranked fighters, and a third of the top 10 fighters in his division's history outside of himself?

 

I'm sorry but there's no logical way you can tell me Tony Pep who's never been ranked in the top 10 who was an unremarkable fighter for the most part and journeyman Emanuel Augustus with an almost 50-50 record. Fits the criteria better for quality wins rather than top rated contenders who were amongst the most notable Heavyweights of that decade.

Thats not agreeing to disagree you're just plain wrong end of and are showing some clear bias here to pad Mayweather's resume.

 

There's nothing to suggest Williams was a top 10 fighter when he faced Ali

 

Says you but you also have some baffling takes like apparently Brewster was a deserving top 10 Heavyweight prior to facing Wladimir according to you despite having 0 notable wins and 2 one sided losses to C class Heavyweights like Eitenne, Shufford.

 

There is no right and wrong in these kinds of discussion its all subjective end of the day. My rankings are based on eye test mostly both showed more skills then what I've seen from either the two you listed and honestly I'd accuse you of the same considering you're putting shot fighters (one of which was fighting with one good leg) over decently skilled contenders in their prime just because of "rankings" instead of actually considering how good they were when they fought. But to each their own

 

My guy Tony Pep was an unremarkable fighter and was never ranked, Emanuel Augustus was a journeyman with an almost 50/50 record listing those as "quality wins" is absolutely laughable.

I don't care what mental gymnastics you're trying to conjure up regarding the "eye test" no one in their right mind would think Tony Pep, Emanuel Augustus, are more noteworthy in regards to "quality wins". Compared to the likes of Zora Folley who was undefeated in 4 years a top 2 rated Heavyweight and one of the most notable Heavyweights of that decade.

The problem is with you don't like to admit when you're wrong and I've said before this is a fault of yours hence this is why you get involved in so many long winded conversations that go nowhere.

 

Folley is fine I can see the argument for it even though I still would say he was past his best and his best wins were 2 years before he fought Ali and afterwards he lost ever major fight, Williams though is a bit questionable. But sure I can agree to remove them from my list I don't think it changes much overall.

 

Remove Pep and Augustus add Williams, Folley, and then that's a balanced list for both fighters.

Whether or not you want to add the likes of Bob Foster, Karl Mildenberger, Mac Foster, is up to you but I have no real issues with you if you don't but Zora Folley is 100 percent needed on the list.

 

I'm fine adding Folley I think you made a good argument for him, but I'm not gonna add Williams if this was before he was shot I would but he was never the same after that and basically has no good wins after 1964. So that ends up being 23 wins for Floyd and 20 for Ali by my count, pretty close and in the end depends on how you rank their wins.

 

Why do you think that version of Williams was still a capable opponent?

Brewster didn't receive any opportunities to fight notable opponents pre Wlad so obviously that would preclude notable wins

 

Are we dragging Muhammad Ali for losses when he was in the throes of Parkinson's Syndrome?