Mayweather is incredible.

Lomas reputation also outpaces his resume. Hes a ridiculously talented fighter, but his best win is GRJ.

Hes absurdly talented and good at boxing. But let's let it marinate a little. See what else hes able to accomplish before we start making outlandish claims.

 

LOL! You could always sign up for the free 7 day trial... different email addresses.

 

How many times in history have two ATGs actually fought in their prime though? It's a totally nonsensical point that seems to only be used when trying to discredit people.

There's also a ridiculous attempt to make out that just because a fighter is not as good as he was 12, 24, 36 months prior, the achievement is still not great.

Take the guys you mentioned, Leonard and Duran. The first fight, they were both prime, at their peak, mentally and physically. The second fight, Leonard was and Duran wasn't. That doesn't mean to say Duran turned into some tomato can though, he's still one of the best fighters on the planet even not at his best.

Go back to the one mentioned on this thread. Shane Mosley was the lineal champ at welterweight when Mayweather boxed his ears off. Was he Shane Mosley of 2000? No. Does that mean it isn't an impressive win against an elite fighter? No.

What bothers most is the complete lack of nuance. "Oh, he was at his best in 2003, they fought in 2005, he was actually a total bum who didn't even know a jab from a hook by that point".

With Mayweather in particular, there's also the fact that gets overlooked that he was probably the most avoided fighter in world boxing prior to Gatti (when he himself was actually in his prime) because you weren't getting a massive payday for the whooping of your life.

 

Fighting an ATG in their prime matters when you call yourself the TBE and your fans keep saying it.

If Mayweather and his fans wouldn't constantly boast about his greatness there would be no reason to bring it up. But since they think hes greater than Duran I'll continue to point out that FMJ did not beat Leonard. That was Duran who beat SRL.

 

They don't take a pint of blood when they're doing a blood test, mate.

 

He was faded, yes...But it was still a good win; because Mosley, even at that point, was still a very good fighter. Can't think of too many other fighters who could have taken the play away from him so comprehensively after he got off to the start he did against FMJ.

Where would you place in your all time rankings?

 

I dont keep too much track of guys before the TV era. But I'd say hes in the 2nd tier of TV era ATGs. With guys like Hearns, Whitaker, Chavez, Foreman, Arguello, etc.

Without a doubt an ATG. But not a first tier modern ATG.

 

Virtually every fighter talks absolute nonsense about how they're the greatest fighter in the world. Nobody calls out Amir Khan when he does it because we all collectively know he's a bit of a joke. I think it's daft to let that have any impact on anything.

Is there a single fighter you class as an ATG he could have fought at their supposed peak? If so, who? And when, specifically?

I don't subscribe to the notion you need to have beaten someone like SRL to be classed as an ATG. Boxing just doesn't work like that. There are not enough SRLs to fight, let alone beat.

And, to go back to the earlier point about ATG in their prime; if you have to beat an ATG in their prime to be an ATG, please trace back the ATG track of the fighter(s) in question and where they themselves fought prime ATGs to establish themselves as ATGs. (You see how silly that game becomes?)

 

You dont have to beat an ATG in their prime to be an ATG. FMJ is an ATG.

But if you're going to be on the level of Ali or Duran like FMJ and his fans say he is you need to beat a great fighter.

 

Creating tiers within the category of ATG is oxymoronic...

 

Okay, fair enough. I disagree, personally, but hey ho.

I don't really have a black and white template to put guys in like that, I just judge what I'm watching. I don't really need to know what Shane Mosley with less grey pubes looks like when Mayweather clobbers him with his lead right hand to know how Mayweather fares in the pantheon of great fighters.

It's total fantasy when comparing fighters of the past, because not all roads to greatness can possibly be the same, you just have to know greatness when you see it.

There's a difference between an ATG win and an ATG and it's not always possible to have both, so it's daft to make it a prerequisite for admission to an elite club, they obviously help get you there but it can be overcome by having the sort of ability and dominance Mayweather has. There's more than one way to skin a cat.

I also think if the situations were reversed, there would be a host of people on here who are making points about prime Mosley and whatnot who would suddenly be making the point that "Mayweather lost to Kirkland Laing, how can he be as good as the unblemished Roberto Duran?".

 

Regardless, athletes are the most superstitious creatures on the planet. If they believe something, you're not gonna change it. Just watch baseball --- pitchers fall and trip all over themselves so as to not step on the baseline going back to the dug out.

 

I agree with this post completely. It's entirely accurate.

This has been my line of thinking when it comes to discussions of FMJ and Pacquiao for the longest time. People often claim that FMJ is a p4p better fighter H2H. I cant really disprove it because we're not talking about greatness there. Thus, I dont get fired up when people make that claim. Like you said H2H supremacy is harder to quantify.

Now when it comes to greatness I've always been in Mannys corner. Even though I'm partial to Manny style wise I believe its extremely difficult to call FMJ greater than Manny even if you're partial to FMJ.

For one, we have never seen a former Flyweight champion dominate a strong WW champion like Cotto. Second, Pac was fortunate and courageous enough to try his luck against very highly rated JMM, MAB and Morales. And more often than not Pac came out on top in those fights. The controversial nature of the JMM fights acknowledged by the way.

Which makes it a very uphill battle for anybody to construct a solid argument for FMJ being greater than Pac. Even hardcore FMJ fans like PIMP C have conceded when pressed that FMJ resume simply cannot compare to Pacs.

The same applies to FMJ and past greats. Yet perhaps in my time here I've misconstrued what they have been saying. And interpreted their adulation of FMJ skills as a declaration of his greatness historically. Most of Floyd's most ardent supporters have focused on his H2H supremacy rather than his greatness. With some exceptions like MVC of course who are in la la land.

 

He is greater and better than PAC , that's just a fact. Most people see it that way. I'll admit that PACs success is slightly more improbable in the sense of where he came from.and what he was able to achieve, but that doesn't make his accomplishments better than money's.