go back and read my initial post:rofl you just put your foot in your mouth. not one mention is made of accomplsihments, it is based on who I think demonstrated the most skill and would have been the toughest to beat at that weight. that is my definition of an ATG the baddest mother ****er in his weight class and you work your way down. if you haven't seen them fight how do you knwo they were any good. **** look at marciano he was very limited as a fighter. in the modern era of boxing there are only two fighters I rank ahead of floyd at 135 sweet pea and ruran, the rest is well the rest. how many benny leonard, joe gans, and carlos ortiz fights do you have in your collection, I know you old-timers like to exaggerate **** that's why I ask for specifics:deal
Now, I have to side with bigtime. Shanes resume is complete and udder garbage at lightweight for the caliber of fighter he is. I would damn for sure have to disagree that all the here today gone tomorrow fighters that he fought that didnt even make it fighting past the 90s can hardly compare to Castillo. NO WAY. I remember those days when Shane was p4p material and everybody wondered how good he really was. You had people that thought Shane was invincible. And you have others like me saying who has he beat why is he fighting low B level and C level fighters. Shane was surely a talent but not tested at 135. Floyds 130-135 resume was a lot better.
He said it wasn't about resume. Based soley on looks. And Mosley looked both stronger and faster. Resume is not included. Right?
I mean, you can put Shanes top 135 fights on now and see those guys were limited garbage and could not compare to whooping Chico or beating Castillo twice. These two got over the hump and fought all the best at 135 and won..lol just to prove they are better fighters then anyone Shane fought at lightweight. Its not like they disappeared after Floyd beat them.
Floyd didn't fight Corrales at 135. Again, resume means nothing. This is based on the criteria. If we are basing it on resume, then both Mosley and PBF drop out of the top 10.
anyone with an objective eye can see this. shane never stepped up for whatever reason and fought the top guys in his prime weight class. I love shane but give floyd his due he did great work at 130-135.
Well they both looked just as good against c and b level opposition. Shane had more power and ARM punch speed. But shane throws wide punches like 70% of the time so I dont think he is more effective. And damn for sure not as accurate. I always criticize Shanes wide arm punch hooks.
What does who he fought have to do with anything. You said accomplishments meant nothing. Resume is part of accomplishment. Resumes are paper, not skill. And you are basing this on skill. Shane was better. I am using your criteria. And as you said: So don't argue.
that's why I don't understand why people think he has a chance of beating floyd at 147. shane has poor defense and throughs too many arm punches
KG. I too thought Shane whooped ass. He whooped ODH ass with his speed and physical strength that is second to none for his size. I remember seeing him back ODH up that first fight. But Shane is less skilled to me and no where near as good defensively. Shane is all offense.
You said you are basing it on what you see and arguing with anyone who brings up resume and accomplishments. That is the very definition of criteria. I have seen far more fighters at 135 and 130 than the ones you listed. So it will take me longer than you to rank them. You admit that you have not seen many of the old timers. Meanwhile, you need to remove Sanchez from your 130 list. He never fought there.