I am confused.... There have been 14 people so far that have voted no...yet not one has really come out and say how or why (unless McGrain was...not sure, seems like your making an arguement for both answers...LOL)? I think he definately is, but Id like to see why people who say no feel that way.
I'm not sure. His biggest wins were against Oscar. If beating one elite is sufficient enough to be an ATG then does that make Forrest, Mayorga, Vargas, Rahman, and several others ATG.
**** no all those guys u listed aside from Vargas beat just 1 elite fighter while Mosley sure beat one ATG in Oscar twice the rest of his resume is full of tough legitmate contenders and Champions like Vargas,Collazo,John John Molina,Phillip Holliday,Antonio Diaz,Jesse James Leija.
Based on accomplishments no, skillwise especialy at 135 right up there with the best that ever did it.
He beat Oscar by SD the first time, by 2 rounds imo, and he beat Oscar in a HIGHLY contreversial fight the second time where most think to date that Oscar should have won. What we can't ignore that he was JUICED up for the rematch so that even takes even more away from the alreadt contrevesial fight. So yeah, he beat Oscar once and got the GIFT of his life the second time. Vargas was not even half of what he was, Collazo, solid B guy, Molina, eh, Diaz? Julio Diaz is much better but it's not going to gurantee Juan Pollo Valenzuela a spot on the ATG list, Leija, nice win sure why not. Mayorga beat Piccirilo who IMO is better than Diaz, Holliday and Collazo, and Mayorga was robbed against Spinks, not to mention he beat Forrest twice in his prime (who beat SSM twice in his prime) and also beat Vargas. Vargas beat Winky who owns Mosley, beat Marquez, Campas, Quartey and many top contenders from Castillejo to Flores. You have a weak case in saying Vargas and Mayorga are not ATG but Mosley is.
The dude is easily an ATG, even some of his losses are impressive. . . after getting smacked around by Winky he fought a pretty close one in the rematch with the much bigger fighter. He lost a VERY close decision to a prime Cotto. . . as an old man. You dont just look at wins when evaluating IMO, losses can tell you alot as well.
He was a better fighter at 147. Stronger and even faster in his early days at the weight. He didn't look as good because of the vast difference in competition level. He was dominant at LW, but against B and C level competition.
You know what I definitely agree with.... I look at Tito the same way, especially with the Wright/Forrest analogy, I've said thing about Hopkins/Wright with Tito... Also you could insert Tito's 147 with Shane's 135, realistically I look at Shane as "really " having 3 losses as he's really smaller than Winky Wright.
Then Oscar dominated Sturm because he's smaller. Not to mention he's smaller than Vargas, Trinidad, Hopkins and looked smaller against a juiced up Mosley. Wow, Oscar only has two losses!
:roll: :roll: Get out of Oscar's ass, you just HAD to get him in there:hey didn't ya.. I'm just alluding to Shane's daring to be great and even fighting people MUCH larger than himself..