I understand it didn't take place when it was supposed to, but keep in mind that pac was still very close to prime at the time they fought. Not to mention Mayweather was older as well. At 42 Pac is still fighting at the top level. I don't necessarily think Floyd is the GOAT, in fact overall i actually place Pac as a greater fighter overall. One thing that i'm not is bias. The one thing that bugs me about the boxing culture is how Nationally, Culturally, and RACIALLY bias people are in this sport. Its sad. How come Pep doesn't get the same criticism for his lack of power and not having a rockem sockem type style. Maybe he'll get his just due in another 10yrs from now.
I'm curious what is your criteria for the GOAT and what qualifies someone to be considered a LEGEND in your book. Give me yours and I can give you mine.
I get it.. But you responded to me that I was diminishing Mayweather, I was not. He was a great fighter. A rare and special talent. But he did not take on a lot of risks. He had the opportunity to fight better guys when they were at their best, but he passed on it . I am saying that he was such a great fighter, that it is almost impossible to place him because of the reasons I mentioned ... Again, how great was he?? We will never know ...
Are we including active fighters? Tyson Fury Ike Ibeabuchi deserves a shout I honestly think Foreman falls into this category a little
I really don't think a lackluster resume or weak resume would include one of the greatest most famous most awe inspiring KO's in history (Frazier) as well as a dominant rematch win and a brutal KO over Ken Norton who had been giving Ali all sorts of problems. No resume could be weak with that ensemble. Peralta was top 10 when he beat him as was Chuvalo as was Roman, Lyle was top 5. There may have been a couple on the fringe as well. Then we have the comeback/age success. Those top end wins were huge.
Let me be clear that in no way do I think Foreman has a weak resume, it's just a bit top heavy for me and lacks a bit of depth. Similar to how I would have liked to see Bowe face more punchers, I would have liked to see young George against a bigger variety of fighters. If people can include guys like Hopkins and RJJ, I can include Foreman.
Ok so you don't think he has a weak resume per the thread ask. That's an entirely different take then. Yeah guys like Hopkins being mentioned is a joke. The RJJ mention did specify 168.
Joke is a bit far. There's no way B-Hop had a good resume at 160, considering his amount of time there as champ and that most are saying he's one of the best H2H at MW.
It's far from "weak" or "lacklustre" regardless of how he is perceived H2H. Given his win vs losses there it's good if not great. Hopkins has more on his resume than just 160. Holmes is considered one of the best H2H and his resume is hardly strong besides length and even then he didn't fight the best in his last few years. I'd still call it good tho based on multiple factors. Jones is considered one of the best H2H at 160 and he is wafer thin in that particular division. There are a lot of fighters that didn't have the opportunity to fight many top tier guys. Maybe a header more along the lines of greatest H2H fighters comparative to their resumes may have been better wording, or something similar. It would have welcomed the inclusion of such guys and opened things up a lot further in both directions. A guy like Pendleton does have a "weak" resume on paper and tho not great was certainly a reasonable H2H force at his best. Inconsistent guys like Buster and Page could also fit the bill.
Sorry to intrude but his fight with Roger Mayweather is worth a look George. Competitive fight finishing with a great KO.
