Fighters Whos Legacy Are Intact Even If They Lose In Their Remaining Fights.

Basically boxers who are already way past their prime will be qualified here. And also those boxers who keep on losing that a few more loses won't hurt anymore.

 

Mayweathers whole legacy is about being undefeated.
Since:
A. He has not been in any real wars
B. Is considered by many as boring
C. He climbed to 140 and up he has not picked the toughest fight but the easier bigger money fights.
D. People will look at his record 20 years from now and the only ATG that will be on there is ODLH (so far) and that is due to Oscars popularity mostly which might put him on the top 100. Jose Luis Castillo and Corrales might be there but doubt it.

So yes if he loses thats his whole legacy. However he has the skills to build a real legacy and the opponents too. WW is loaded with talent.
Greatness is there for them if they want it!! someone take it...

 

Also...
Ali
Joe Louis
James Braddock (Thanks to the movie)
Tommy Hearns

 

Hopkins and Mosley

 

I don't think being updefeated is a bad thing, particularly if it means going through five weight divisions against some bloody good opponents and beating all of them!

I think your referring to Sven Ottke!

 

Yeah, the anger he generates is because he is the champ who is not taking on the responsibility of being a champ. This is like Oscar not wanting to fight Trinidad or Sugar Ray saying Tommy Hearns is good but doesn't bring the money in for a fight or Morales calling himself better than Ali and Robinson without fighting Barrera. Floyd is still the new guy despite what he thinks and if he retires will only be seen as who he should have fought.

 

You're right, the question is such that a boxer's greatness has to be in the past so you can see it clearly. As in Sugar Ray's fight against Camacho, though he looked terrible, takes nothing away from his prime. But the fighters still have to be active. For me its;

Hopkins
ODLH
Trinidad
MAB
Morales
Mosley