Floyd's ATG Status by Weight Class!

You have no crediblity. You're a ***** who RUNS from simple question and lies about their education. YOu change criteria for your reasons on a post by post basis, and everyone sees you're a ****in fool.

But you can prove me wrong, here it is again. Who do you think won these:

DLH vs. Ike/Tito/Whitaker
Chavez sr. vs. Whitaker

Or what about this, where did you get 5 Masters degrees and in what?

I doubt you'll answer.

 

Floyd fought 3 times at 140. Here's the resume:

1) Demarcus Corley
2) Henry Bruseles
3) Arturo Gatti

One of the greatest ever at 140??? At 130 he has an argument, but 140??? Did you read those three names above? Now did you read them again??? Wow.

 

And how do you define/quantify having better skills?

 

David Reid had better skills then Tito. So did WIlliam Joppy. Who won those fights dumbass? Marco Antonio Barrera has better skills then Manny Pac. Wanna take a guess on that? Kevin Kelly had better skills then Hamed...guess how that fight went. atsch

 

Have you found your balls yet Bigtime? Wanna try this again or do you like to look like a little *****?

 

What about Benitez at 140? Mayweather was very good at 140 but I don't think he rates number #2 based on his 3 or 4 fights there. His skills at 140 were magnificent but he was in the ring against Gatti, Corley and Brussels. He does not deserve to be ranked that highly.

At welterweight he doesn't crack the top 10. Honestly I don't think Trinidad or Whitaker deserve to be in the top 10 there either. Thats a loaded division.

 

You are the biggest idiot on this forum. I guess your online degrees never afforded you the opportunity to learn that ATG means All Time Great, not ¨the best fighters of bigtimes era¨. The fact I have to explain this to you is sad on so many levels.

Asking if Floyd is mediocre is only a way to divert attention from your flawed system. You cant rank fighters without looking at resume you idiot.

You yourself were arguing with Pea about Shane´s resume you dunce.

Just admit it smalltime, you will go with any criteria that makes Floyd look the best. And the worst is, that when all criteria fail you will just take the ***** way out like you have here and say that you dont have to state your criteria.

As I said in the beggining of the thread, your a joke and you have been clowned here by several posters. Have you noticed your nuthugger buddies arent even defending your position.

Must suck to be a *****.

 

That he goes on for 14 pages about how you can't compare old-timers with current guys, then he ranks SRR at 147. This guy cracks me the hell up.

 

At 147, where is Griffith, Walcott, and Napoles?