What is the criteria for being considered an ATG?

The reason is just because Mosley is more popular. Hill in the ring has done just about much as Mosley, perhaps slightly less. It is just that he was never as popular a fighter.

 

you biased, pathetic ****

 

I think the fact that Mosley won a title 3 divisons up from what the divison he became his carrier at is highly impressive. The Oscar win does raise him up significantly. As it did for Floyd and the Oscar who Mosley beat was a better fighter than the one that Floyd beat.

Hill is an ATG. Him and Mosley are on a very similar level.

 

Mosley was consdered p4p the best in the world at one time, Hill never was, that must stand for something.

Hill isnt very noticed though you are right, maybe he should be considered an ATG.

 

I agree with this.

 

Hill was a good champion but Mosley was way better than him and at one point in his career he was the best fighter in the world.

 

Allow me to take a stab at this, KG.

In the case of Mosley...he was utterly dominant at lightweight against a reasonable, though not exceptional class of contender. It would have been nice for him to meet, say, Stevie Johnston in a unification fight, but, by and large, Mosley's performances at 135lb seem to indicate that he had the ability to stay with virtually every one of the atg lightweights in hypothetical match-ups.

Mosley, of course, went on to have success against DLH, and has remained a viable contender even in the autumn of his career. That's enough, in my opinion, to accord him the status of "great" fighter...if not the staus of all-time legend.

As for Hill, he never really seemed to have that aura of being unbeatable. Moreover, he kind of froze againt the only truly great fighters that he ever faced. The 20 title defences at LH are a hell of an accomplishment, but, it can't be denied that there are some names that he could, and maybe should have faced instead of some of the non-entities that he defended against. A fight with Moorer...or Prince Charles Williams...or Harding or Andries would have enhanced his LH legacy...and given us a better indication of how he might have fared against some of the better LH's in history.

That's the reason why Mosley will probably crack a Top 100 list when all is said and done, while Hill might struggle to be accorded the same staus.

 

Are you referring to my criteria?

 

You're a pretty **** poster.

 

DM's close...but, like Hill and Maske, generally was content to fight RJJ retreads like Griffin, Harmon, et al. Both Hill and DM are certainly worthy of consideration for, say, a Top 20 slot all-time among all-time great LH's...and certainly warrant inclusion into the IBHOF. But, I wouldn't quite rate either as ATG's, in the truest sense of the word. I wouldn't be so inclined to rate SSM as ATG material, either...but I'd be a bit more likely to consider it, based on his work against DLH and his dominance at 135lbs.