Why is Mayweather not the greatest of all time?

All libs do is cry racist.

 

My fault for even giving my views on that topic. I should’ve known what was coming.

 

Never fought anyone with a longer reach?

That's actually a reason why to you he isn't the GOAT? Okay.

Didn't fight any black fighters in "his second run" ...

Except for the black fighters he DID fight in his second run, one of whom is a Hall of Famer? (LOL)

Amazing.

 

To put it simply, Floyd didn't go for it.

Benny Leonard dominated a great division. Bob Fitzsimmons, a middleweight, knocked out the heavyweight champ. Henry Armstrong was a whisker away from owning half the belts in boxing. These are timeless achievements. There's nothing Floyd did (other than amass wealth), than truly sets him apart. Other men have retired undefeated.

Now you can't construct a record like Floyd's unless you're damn good, but we all know it was constructed, shrewdly, with numerous considerations before pen hit paper. Wins over an undefeated Cotto and rampaging Pacquiao would mean much more than his respective victories over them. I also suspect he didn't like the idea of A. Margarito or P. Williams because it involved giving up certain advantages which - as Max Kellerman nicely observed - allowed him to impose his skill.

On one side of the coin, Floyd shot his legacy in the foot, missing the chance to confirm what many of us suspected - that he was point-blank better than his peers. On the other, had he scrapped semi-retirement and continued with the kind of 'open all hours' policy needed for legendary status the chance of losing goes way up.

When Floyd literally put himself above Ali, Duran, and Robinson a few years ago, he did at least try to sound objective, but reasons like "beat more champions" doesn't wash. Charles Martin was a champion. It's about who you fight, when you fight them, and the latter point shall forever provide critics with ammo.

In many ways Floyd was the best. The most business savvy. The most health conscious.

What he fails to acknowledge is greatness and caution don't mix.

Brilliant he was, many shine brighter.

 

Let me be very clear about this.

If you want to be regarded as the GOAT in your division, you need to go after the best available opposition, because the historical opposition is just so damn tough!

You can cherry pick your opposition to improve your career, or you can shoot for being the GOAT, but you can't have it both ways!

 

THIS.

 

How can you say "THIS" ... LOL.

Do you mean if he did all those things EXCEPT never fight someone with a longer reach, you'd say he wasn't the best ever?

Give me a break. That's comical.

 

Henry Armstrong was a whisker away from owning three belts and the equivalent of the WBA "regular" belt. Ceferino Garcia wasn't THE Middleweight Champ.

Bob Fitzsimmons didn't knock out 270-pound Tyson Fury. He knocked out the heavyweight champ who weighed 14 pounds more than him. And it was JIM CORBETT. (LOL)

Give me a break.

Floyd Mayweather beat Canelo Alvarez, Manny Pacquaio, Miguel Cotto, Oscar De La Hoya, Shane Mosley, Juan Manuel Marquez, Ricky Hatton, Genaro Hernandez, Arturo Gatti, Jose Luis Castillo, Diego Corrales ... he only fought 47 pro boxers. All 11 of them will arguably be in the Hall of Fame, not counting the lesser champs he fought. Oscar, Shane, Juan and Gatti already are. Canelo, Manny, Miguel are locks. Hatton and Hernardez are on the ballot.

I don't know if I'd rate him the best ever, but he rates higher than freaking Bob Fitszimmons. Christ. Floyd could beat Jim Corbett, for God's sake. So would Canelo.

Jim Corbett (LOL)

 

Great post, as usual!

 

That's fair.

 

Other guys frequently ranked in the top 10 have gaping holes in their resumes. I don't see how Mayweather's alleged cherry picking is more egregious.

 

When you get to top 10 territory, it’s less to do with any cherry picking and more to do with the fact that the opposition he beat simply wasn’t anywhere near as strong.

Duran is probably the only one in that top 10 category you could say is lacking in wins resume by comparison to the others. He’s the outlier. There’s no more room at the Inn.

 

Rummy did a survey on here with video included where this forum placed him 17. I could feasibly see him anywhere from top 8 (I don’t) to 20 (I do) in a realistic unbiased poll. Contextually he is a top 25 lock by just about any reasonable and consistent evaluation. I imagine he will solidify himself around 15 after some time passes by.


https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/top-35-all-time-reveal-boxing-survey-series.653021/

 

I just can't see it .. Too many Greats througout the History of this sport with WAY better resumes and fighting other greats in their Prime .... to assume Mayweather solidifies a top 25 spot ... It's too high for playing doge ball

 

Floyd's entire career was not as great as Harry Greb was in just 1919.