Why do modern historians have a problem with Mayweather?

I still dont understand the question, specifically what "top 20 ATG in his weight class" means ?

Is it 130 or 140 or 147 ?
And I'd be surprised if anyone's saying he's barred from the top 20 in every division.

 

To be honest I find that most non-biased boxing fans come to the same conclusion about Floyd......

A top level fighter without a top level resume.

 

Mayweather will never go down alongside the best ever WWs, the division is too deep thru history, he`s not naturally big enough & it has produced some of the very best boxers in the whole history of the sport regardless of weight anyway.

FMJ can argue he was the best ever at 130, he`s certainly up there with the Arguello`s n Chavez`s & in a pure boxing & p4p sense, he is one of the best ever... a Mosely victory will go some way to making this less arguable... depending on manner of victory of course.

His defense is certainly on the level of any boxer that ever laced em up IMO.

 

i don't rate fighters till they finish

 

A win over Pacquiao would already be on his record if that fight went ahead march 13th.... hopefully we will get to see it for real if he gets past Mosely - a tall order despite what the bookies are saying.

 

Nah, Mayweather is the better boxer of the 2 IMO but its a very close thing... no need for all this `>>>>>>>>` ****.

 

Roy is a better physcial talent by a LONG WAY. Would a 168lb shutout James Toney? no chance

 

Floyd is massively overrated.

 

Spurious.

 

He is.

 

Not really, especially by historians. In fact most people dont give him too much credit for his past accomplishments because of his current situation as a welterweight and his big mouth.

 

I'll tell you why.

Because when you are as talented as someone like Floyd or Roy, good enough to be a top-20 ATG, you have to challenge yourself to prove your status. You must take that 50/50 fight against the toughest opponent, and be the underdog a couple of times. Corrales aside, Mayweather hasn't done that, because he cherrypicks.

That's what guys like Ali and Leonard did, and that's what Pacman is doing. But Mayweather has no desire to really test himself. How can we know how tough he really is if he picks and chooses his opponents and fights just hard enough to win a clear decision? His abilities remain in question, unproven to some extent.

He doesn't have to be a blood-and-guts slugger. And he has a couple of good wins on his resume. But he is content to fritter away his prime years on bul****, just like Roy was happy to beat up part-timers in his late-20s, early 30s, his best years.

:hat

 

:dealAlthough Roy at least fought some very good fighters, and has that win over Toney.

 

His career is not done, but he has already missed out on some names. Mayweather should have faced Acelino Freitas and Joel Casamayor when he was around 130 pounds.

Mayweather still has a chance to add to his legacy. Wins over Mosley and Pacquiao would do that.

I think Mosley is going derail his future plans next week. Mosley likes to apply pressure when being out boxed. Mosley tried and failed against Forrest, but Forrest was bigger and stronger than Mayweather. Castillo had success pressuring Mayweather. Hatton has his moments as well. Shane Mosley is bigger, faster, stronger, and more powerful than those fighters. I think Mosley is better suited for the game plan Freddie Roach mapped out for De la Hoya against Mayweather, and will attempt to fight with a similar approach.

I realize this isn't a prediction thread. I somehow got steered into posting mine.

I believe Mosley is going to bring the heat, bust up Mayweather's body, and stop him in impressive fashion.

I'm curious to see what the thoughts of Mayweather's future are after next weekend, win or lose.