Floyd is now in the top 2 best boxers of all time.

He actually LITERLLALY said that in the interviews as well.
That his entire career was carefully planned to optimize his earnings.

 

Be objective. I agree he initially ran from Margarito, but when you look at the big picture, his entire work for 20 years, you have to give credit where it's due.

How did he beat them all ? With ease. He made made it look much easier than any other guy could have dreamed of for themselves.

He's not fan friendly but he's the mozart of boxing.

Truth is, no one will ever be satisfied enough with him because they'll keep hoping someone can just finally beat him.

What he's done, and with the ease it's been done, very few ATGs can boast the same. That's the cold hard truth and what makes him so special !

 

Pbf would beat any version of PAC. Had they fought back in 2010.:deal

 

He deserves a huge amount of credit. A huge amount. But he hasn't beaten all of his opposition with ease, and he's never beaten a fellow ATG while they were prime. He's one of the best boxers who's ever lived, but based on resume, he won't crack many people's top ten. He'll always be behind the likes of SRL etc.

 

And where will you put Manny?

Most wont make him top 100 :hey

 

To me SRL is behind him at this point. As they say...we'll agree to disagree.

 

You can't possibly have Ray behind him, all things considered.

How?

Statistics don't allow for circumstances.

Ray beat a peak version of Benitez.

He psyched out Duran in the rematch.

He out fought and stopped a peak Tommy Hearns who was a freak of nature at WW.

He moved up to MW and out smarted Hagler after a three year lay off.

Nobody could put Floyd above Ray. You're entitled to your opinion of course, but there is no justification for it whatsoever. Floyd doesn't hold ANY win that surpasses Ray's best wins. He's never beaten a fellow ATG while they were prime.

 

I totallly understand the importance you give to beating a future ATG in his prime, but yes it's a matter of opinion, and for me the bulk of his work through 20 years and 5 weight classes surpasses SRL.

Right now that seems unreasonable mainly because nostalgia from the past overtakes the present 100% of the time. Give it 15 years from now and the discussions will start to change.

To me, the importance of Floyd not beating a future ATG during his ultimate peak is a tad exaggerated.

By keeping in mind the big picture of Floyd's entire career, I give him the edge, not by much though I must concede. It's the overall ease with which he's accomplished everything he did, that does it for me.

By the way, I'm absolutely no fan of FMJ. People here that have read me through the years can attest to that...

 

There is no way no how any possible justification for having Mayweather ahead of SRL.

 

no

 

Floyd is Top10 in my opinion:

1. Won universally recognized championships at 130, 135, 147 and 154. Only Pacquiao has accomplished this.
2. Won belts at 130, 135, 140, 147 and 154.
3. Undefeated: 48-0.
4. GOAT at Jr. Lightweight.
5. Retired and then came back for more while past his best.
6. Beat Pacquiao (legend, former P4P king), Mosley (ATG, former P4P), Hatton (former P4P), Castillo twice (HOF, 135 champion), Corrales (P4P), Juan Manuel Marquez (HOF, P4P), Cotto twice (HOF, P4P), Canelo Alvarez (P4P), Oscar de la Hoya (faded HOF).
7. Longevity: He appeared on the P4P ranking in 1998 for the first time. He is still there in 2015. Nobody has done this in the past. Besides, he has been P4P King in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2012, 2013, 2014. Nobody has been P4P king so many years.
7. Mayweather lost few rounds while doing all of the above.


:deal :deal :deal

People will rank other fighters higher because they were more exciting and had more heart than Mayweather. But Mayweather has done a remarkable career that deserves to be among the best.

 

I respect your opinion, but Floyd just doesn't have the resume to topple Ray. Now if you said that in your opinion Floyd was one of the five best fighters ever, and you were looking at things from a head to head perspective, then I'd have no issue.

I'm a huge fan of Roy Jones. Head to head at his peak, I believe he was one of the greatest fighters who's ever lived. But he won't make most people's top 10-20 based on his resume.

Although there's many factors to consider when ranking someone, a fighters resume is always the most important thing to consider. Who has Floyd fought, and at what point? He doesn't have any win on his resume that even comes close to Ray's victory over Hearns. His statistics may look better on paper, but he hasn't got the quality of wins. He may have officially won titles in more weight classes, but he hasn't achieved as much in my opinion. His best win is over a faded version of Oscar, who'd only fought twice in three years leading up to their fight. And it was very competitive, and Floyd didn't have an easy time with him, just like the Corrales fight. So again, he doesn't have a win over another ATG while they were prime, and even his very best wins weren't easy.

So IMHO, you can't rank him above Ray based on his resume. So then you have to do a head to head breakdown and an*lyse each fighters unique skilsets, to see who you'd rate as the better overall fighter, with resumes put to one side. But if I do that, I still can't put Floyd ahead. Although Floyd has aged better, IMHO, Ray was the better overall fighter.

So I can't see any justification whatsoever for ranking Floyd higher.