TBE? Was it ever possible?

No he wouldn't. He'd just be adding Mayweather's name to his resume, but that's about it.

Mayweather has been declining since he beat Hatton.

If Pacquiao or Mayweather had beaten each other in 2009 it would have been huge.

 

A 2010 win for either would have possibly put the winner in a different stratosphere but right now in 2015 Mayweather is really the Undisputed WW Champ and Lineal JMW Champ. taking his 0 would be a top 10/20 win in history unless it was by a controversial decision.

If you think people wouldn't have Pacquiao in the top 10 if he won your crazy.

 

I don't care. They would be wrong.

Pacquiao is a great fighter, but he's not top 10 of all time. And wouldn't have been if he beat old Mayweather. I don't give a **** what anybody says.

 

It was definitely possible to be in the conversation of GOAT. Even something as simple as fighting 3x a year over the past 6 years instead of once or twice. That would have done wonders for his resume. Say he fought Williams at 147 in 09, Pacquiao at 147 in 2010, Martinez at 154 in 2011, Kirkland at 154 in 2012, Tim Bradley at 147 in 2013, and GGG at 154 in 2014. IF he could get through that schedule undefeated then I'd have no argument with him being in the mix as TBE. Instead he faced Marquez, Mosley, Ortiz, and Guerrero. He took himself out of the discussion.

 

Sure the opponents and opportunities exist for those who have the ambition. To start with he could have fought a series with Pacquiao instead of leaving that to Marquez.

He could have fought Thurman, Khan, and Brook instead of Guerrero, Ortiz, and Berto. He could have defended his light middleweight belt against Lara and Andrade instead of fighting Maidana twice. His early career was pretty ambitious in spite of missing better versions of Cotto, and Mosley than he later fought. But he could have also fought Margarito, Williams, and Kostya Tzyu if he'd fought a little more often or wasn't already playing the risk reward game. Those names would look better on his CV than Baldomir or Gatti do now.

Then of course he could fight bigger guys like Sergio Martinez who offered. That sort of thing would put him on a level with Ray Leonard. But to be on a Duran or Walker's level he'd have to fight Ward or Froch too, but he's never been willing to give up height and reach advantages like Duran and Walker would. I'm not sure he could fight on the inside like they could or that he hit as hard.

He'd also need to fight like he did in the first half of his career, since I don't think you could call what he does boxing. Ray Robinson and Henry Armstrong didn't foul fifty or sixty times a fight, which is what a clinch technically is. It's not good defense. It's an illegal move. He used to be able to make people miss with his feet, head, and upper body movement.

 

Its all opinion but me I couldn't be mad at it and a top ATG spot is very possible in this era Floyd & Manny are 2 that a few things switched around could easily have been argued as such


Personally as a fan I'm ready for Mayweather and Pac to go, all these guys between 3/4 divisions it seems are ducking around each other hoping to get a payday. When both leave these guys will have to fight each other to build there own name instead of trying to piggy back off two legends.

 

Many of those same men in the BWAA voting were asked a couple months ago to list their top 20 fighters of all time.

Mayweather was in the top 10.

Pacquiao? Nowhere to be found.

So there goes the whole "FOTD therefore he's better!" argument...

 

Yeah, I have them both at 40 where they were before they fought. I don't think their fight did anything for either man's legacy. If it had been better I could see moving either man up to top 30 depending how things shake out. As it is though, ****ty performances shouldn't erode past victories, but they shouldn't move you up. They'll have to fight again and do it right this time for me to give them credit for fighting each other. But let's not pretend that either man is near prime and what they were six years ago.

 

So, them fighting a rematch a whole year later will somehow be relevant when you give no relevance to their actual match?

Sounds like the guy you were rooting for lost.

I hope you never reference a H2H meeting when discussing comparative levels of greatness between any two fighters.

 

They are too in the moment now. It will be safer to ask them in ten years time. I saw a couple of ESB threads from 2004 back in the day where they talked about Roy Jones Jr the same way that they do now. All that TBE better than Robinson nonsense. It was a bit before I joined this place, but I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't talking about Bernard Hopkins the same way they do about Pac today.

 

I think if they were both healthy and really went at it it would count. I don't think sparring sessions count either. Sometimes fights just shouldn't count. Take the Ortiz vs Mayweather fiasco for instance. I see it more as a no contest. I also don't give full marks to fights which are stopped on cuts like Lewis vs Klitschko. I think those deserve a rubber match to see how things would have gone were it not for the injury. Like I don't rate Chris Byrd's win over Vitali Klitschko highly either. I think there ought to be some asterisks next to Cotto's knockout of Martinez since the dude couldn't stand up on his legs, etc.

 

Haha, OK.

Some people don't like pure boxers. Some people don't rate Ivan Calderon based on that.

My response? I don't respect those baseless opinions.

A fight is a fight. Anything (within reason) can and does happen. No two fights are the same (within reason).

 

I had plenty of respect for Ivan Calderon when he was boxing, although he was good enough that he should have unified the titles at his weight class. Same thing with Rigondeaux. The guy is so talented, why doesn't he have the other two belts? He can beat Frampton and Santa Cruz. But what's most important, I think, is that Calderon gave us one of the greatest fights of all time against Segura. And for that he will be remembered fondly.

 

Agree completely. However, it is not the fault of Calderon nor Rigondeaux in these cases.

Honestly I'm still not sure there has been a fight since Calderon/Segura that I find more entertaining. That was epic.

He also gave us the Cazares fights (with the most outrageous in-ring size differential you will ever see anywhere near those weight ranges).

Calderon is the second best 105'er ever with his long reign, scooped up a 108 belt against notable comp there, and went out on his shield.

But for some reason, some people out there don't like him and don't rate him... all because he routinely went 12 rounds and boxed defensively.

 

basically