Who do you rank higher as an ATG: Azumah Nelson or Floyd Mayweather Jr?

There are plenty of guys here who simply don't have a case to rate above Mayweather. I mean, Buchanan? Really? I'd like to here that arguement.

 

There's shedloads that are laughable, Buch was quality for 3 title fights or whatever it was but come on that isn't enough. I mean Carpentier - where was he ever near the best in a division exactly?

Really there's plenty more that are laughable, but he hates Mayweather and doesn't want to be rational, so there's no need for debate

 

I will say that I don't think Floyd is guaranteed a spot inside the top 50. Too many great fighters with superior resumes in the history of the sport, but the overall combination of his resume, multi-weight success, in-ring dominance, and ability level (he was a very, very special fighter at his best) is enough for me to say that on a basis of simply what they were for their era, Mayweather is one of the 50 greatest boxers ever.


No slight on Popkins, he's an exceptional poster, but I can't understand how someone can say the likes of Jones, Hopkins, and Hagler are somewhere in the 30-40 range, and then conclude that Mayweather doesn't even crack the top 70. He should be behind those 3, certainly, but not by such a great distance.

 

This is not anythign against you, but I just want to make a point in general; I will never understand why the hell Mayweather gets so much credit for beating gatekeepers, fringe top 10 contenders and paper champions.

Whenever mentioning Floyd's top wins, inevitably people mention names like Gatti, (who was great for action but essentially a glorified gatekeeper that got brutally stomped by anyone he fought that was even near the A level and old as **** when Mayweather fought him) Manfreddy (who biggest accomplishments were holding the WBU belt, getting smacked around every time he challenged for a real title, and beating Gatti) Corley, (gatekeeper) Chavez, (went on to become a paper champ afterwards) Baldomir, (journeyman who got lucky) etc.

As I see it, the only vitories Floyd has that are worth bragging about are Genaro Hernandez, Corrales, Castillo, De La Hoya, (despite Oscar being on the downside) Judah and arguably Hatton. (Hatton was a good B level champ at 140 but a mediocre welter).

Everyone else was either dead old, comprised by the situation (like Marquez jumping two weights to fight him and Floyd coming in overweight) or, simply put, were the guys that any real champion or even top contender from that time should have been beating anyway.

Floyd doesn't deserve a medal for consistently beating guys like Bruseles, N'dou, Baldomir or ****ing ****** Juuko. Anyone operating at the world level should have beaten those guys. Anyone claiming to be a top fighter would have beaten an old ass Shamba Mitchell down. Victories like this should count as a drop in the bucket at most. And in a conversation about ATG standing, Floyd deserves exactly as much credit for them as the average person does for not randomly killing someone on the street during the course of their day.

Ok, rant over.

 

I'm not going to debate Floyd over each name I disagree with because in a subjectve sport like this it is hard to know exactly what criteria poeple use and what emphasises on that criteria they use.

However I will say I'm largely happy with my placing but you and another poster on here have highlighted a couple of guys worth looking into who by my own criteria could knock him down a peg or two.

 

fixed

 

I wasn't putting any special love for those victories, just listing them as his notable victories over the 135 limit.

to play devils advocate, things can, of course be spun in a positive way.

however people saying "Bald as lineal champ is better than anything cotto ever did" that kinda **** pisses me off.

As it stands I have Floyd about 40, gonna look into about 30 or so names and see how he holds up.

 

I doubt I'll find another 40 greater names as there are a good few on the lists that I already disagree with.

it's not beyond reason he'll drop from 40 to 50 however.

But a win over Ortiz shoots him up some.

 

It's not beyond reason he'd dropd to top20 or even top 20 either, I don't see any particular reason why Pep or Armstrong would be above of him, none of their wins impress me that much

 

Haha, you should see me in the general, every so often I let my tone drop unfortunately. I do consider myself quite unbiased however, which unfortunately leads people to label me a *******, *****, klit hater, klit lover etc depending on what thread I post in

My favourite fighter by far is Frank Bruno and only once have I ever talked him up, but that was in a thread designed for just that so I can let myself live with it

 

Yeah, but we can play the same game for any fighter, can't we?

Take Nelson...

He beat fading, partied-out Bazooka Gomez- who was ripe for a beating the next time he stepped into the ring against a top level featherweight who threw more than 10 punches a round.

He defends his featherweight title against good but not great opposition (struggling against Villasana in the process), gets dropped and run very close by a not particularly amazing Mario Martinez. He defends a few times against a group of challengers that aren't necessarily noteworthy, with the exception of a past-prime Jeff Fenech, who was robbed in the first fight. And, unlike Mayweather, he gets run close by a few of them (e.g. Leija).

Basically, Nelson is best known for fights that he lost, and while he performed well against Sanchez, and didn't embarrass himself against Whitaker, he was defeated with controversy in this encounters.

So...

Does that sound like an ATG to you...?

 

well I have him at number 40 as it stands, so logic dictates me looking into further names can only increase their ranking therefore lower Floyd's.

You don't really believe Floyd is above Pep and Armstrong tho?