I say no, mainly because you have to keep going back in time and figure out who fighter A beat that was so great and in his prime. As an example I'll use Thomas Hearns. I consider Thomas Hearns to be an ATG. But going by this logic, he can't be. His best win is Roberto Duran. Was Roberto Duran prime? No. So we have to use somebody else. How about Wilfred Benitez? Who did he beat that was so great and in his prime? Duran? Not in his third championship weight class he wasn't. How about Cervantes? He wasn't in his prime so that rules Benitez out. Virgil Hill? He hadn't beaten a great prime fighter so that rules him out. Pipino Cuevas? No. And so on and so on. So going by this logic, I voted no.
no i feel for most fighters greatness is thought of towards the end of thier careers when thier opponents can be judged also
If you do then there are verry few greats. To take the heavyweight division for example how many greats actualy beat another great in their prime? Ali, perhaps Bowe.
You can only fight the guys who are there. The important things are: 1) who ever you fight, deal with them the way an ATG might deal with them; 2) fight the best qualified competition. Now, I will say, there are sometimes fights a great fighter would take to make a little pocket money .... then it was like, 'yeah, your over matched; I appreciate you'll fight me so we can both make some jack; don't get cheeky with me and I wont unload on you." I also realize that, when a guy fights 200, 300 times in a career, it's not like each fight is going to be a war.
hearns beat a still great benitez imo but i agree you dont need to beat a great (at/ close to prime) to be a atg. joe louis never. larry holmes never. marciano never. ali is the only hw champ to do so