Will Floyd Mayweather become more well appreciated as time goes on?

The problem is you couldn't name 50 guys to rank ahead of him who could withstand the exact same analysis.

Name 50 boxers who never lost; whose opponents were all in their primes; who half the men they fought were current, past or future champs; and whose opponents (not them but also their opponents) all had to go on to great success after losing to those 50 or they weren't "quality" wins?

The Mayweather "critical analysis" is comical.

I think I rooted for Floyd Mayweather to win maybe one fight in his whole career. I'm not some fanboy.

But you can root against someone and still appreciate what they accomplished.

Floyd Mayweather IS NOT going to be viewed in a lesser light going forward.

He's the guy whose career EVERY active fighter today wants ... and his career is the one everyone's career going forward is going to be measured against.

THINK ABOUT THAT. Guys outside the top 50 don't set the bar for success for an entire sport like that.

He doesn't have those pathetically sad losses like many do. He hasn't spent the last decade (or two in Duran's case) making whatever greatness he once had a distance memory.

There will always be old timers who fought more. That's fine. They also all lost more. They also don't have all the fights in their careers available so you can't compare apples to apples. You can't scrutinize their wins and losses fully, and scrutinize all their opponents' wins and losses like people do Mayweather's.

Anyone who says "I'd rate someone like Tony Canzoneri higher" is kidding themselves. Canzoneri didn't beat everyone fought. Mayweather never lost to guys like Cowboy Anderson in his career, like Canzoneri did. More importantly, 95 percent of the people watching the sport - and most of the people running it today - couldn't tell you who the hell Canzoneri was or what titles he held or what fights he was known for.

And if boxrec and YouTube went away tomorrow, most people on here couldn't either.

The guy making the list saying Canzoneri was better may believe it, but the people who never saw him and DID see Mayweather won't.

Mayweather's stock will only rise.

Because when guys fighting now and coming up don't beat as many champs, and don't stay undefeated, and don't make the money and achieve the fame he did, they aren't going to measure up, either.

And Mayweather's name will keep getting brought up as a career they should aspire to have. Canzoneri's won't. Duran's won't. Whitaker's won't.

Mayweather's will.

I don't think he was hands down the best fighter ever. His power was sorely lacking. But there certainly weren't 50 boxers whose careers were better than his, or whose careers could stand up to the same scrutiny his does, that's for damn sure.

The people picking at his bones are the ones who never rated him highly to begin with and, now that his career is over, can't admit they were wrong.

Their problem is they also don't put the fighters they rank above him under the same scrutiny. That's where they get exposed.

 

Hey Flash24, still waiting for your criteria on how many wins and how many titles does an opponent have to win post-losing-to-great to be considered a "decent win?"

 

To an extant, but both were still in a position where Floyd needed to face them to establish himself as either a top draw (in the case of p4p king DLH) or to gain a title against someone who was rated as the number 2 WW at the time (Mosley, which was made as the next best choice when the PAC fight fell through). If Floyd had overlooked them to face others, he would have been excoriated.

I'd rate both fighters mentioned above Floyd in my personal ranking, yeah. Who would you have just behind, Floyd on your ranking? Someone like Saddler or Jofre? Marciano or Tunney? Bazooka Gomez, Alexis Arguello, and/or Rueben Olivares? JCC? Micheal Spinks? Lots of good fighters vying for spots in that position.

. The Alvarez and Pac fights really helped his cause in terms of establishing a higher position on a p4p ranking.

 

You bring up some good points here .. Some I agree with , some I don't .. There is no doubt, Floyd's stock will rise huge with mainly the Millennial boxing fan base and others as well. And yes he is the blueprint of every modern day fighter .. Who wouldn't want to be probably the best or close to of his era, have his record, make the most money and have a shot at McGregor for 300 million dollars.. The problem I have, as this thread is about him being TBE and his place against the history of boxing, is that Floyd wasn't the I'll fight anyone anywhere anytime boxer.. He had only 45 fights in 18 years of healthy boxing and I feel passed on a lot of opportunity to prove he was TBE .. Among the experts/historians, I feel that this is always going to hold him back.. HOWEVER, when I start seeing Floyd consistently coming in the Top 30 p4p all time list. I will be the first to say .. you were right, and I was dead wrong, as I am the type to say that instead of digging my heels in ... I just haven't seen it yet

 

Just want to get your position straight here bud. Nobody is saying he's Green i.e. that was his first pro fight or even his 10th. He was green fighting at that level. He had one meaningful fight against a quality foe before May, and that foe wasn't really near May. So which fights of his are you thinking prepared him, and gave his experience enough to deal with Floyd?

 

Of course, he was green fighting at that level. Most who faced Mayweather was, since very few are at Floyd's level.

Gavilan was green at fighting someone at Robinson's level, Clay was green fighting someone at Liston's level, Frazier was green at fighting someone at Ali's level, Leonard was green fighting someone at Benitez' level, Hearns was green at fighting someone at Leonard's level, Bowe was green at fighting someone at Holy's level, Tyson was green at fighting someone at Holy's level, and so on and so on.

Yes, Canelo definitely took a step up in comp, like most do when they face an ATG. But seven title fights had given him a reasonable experience at world level.

 

To get some kind of reference we can use Duran, who many rank in their top 10. Duran definitely had the top win of the two (Leonard) and he also has a greater achievement in winning a MW title in his late 30's than anything Floyd has.

But he also has only about half as many wins in title fights, the whole No Mas thing, an embarrassing loss to Laing, one-sided losses to Hearns and Benitez and a loss in his prime to DeJesus.

I personally think that Floyd narrowly lost the first fight to Castillo, but other than that his record is quite spotless. Not even a close fight imo (no DLH didn't run him close) apart from the first Castillo fight.

So I'll commit heresy here and say that it is not crystal clear to me that Duran should be ranked ahead of Floyd.

 

Canelo's level of experience was analogous to Floyd's level going into the Corrales fight, for which he was an underdog.

 

Yep. It's not many fighters that have had more than 7 title fights, and the ones who has is often on the downside of their career. For example, I don't think Jacobs really had more experience when he faced GGG.

 

And he also more than twice as many fights as Floyd.As for his losses, I submit to you that Floyd never fought anybody's as good as prime benitez, prime hagler, prime hearns.Further I believe that Floyd would not go the distance with Hagler.

 

I disagree about the Barkley win being the best late 30s win. Canelo was more one sided and against a better fighter imo. Barkley never was lineal and cut it close. Pac was also pfp 2 behind Floyd so he has a case.

 

Barkley would Knock Floyd out.Barkley has beaten ATG Hearns twice.Who has canelo beaten?

 

So that's the criteria you use to judge fighters and their place among the best of all time - fair enough. You clearly give more weight to unbeaten records than I do. And a guy who is ranked among the 50 best of all time is still an all-time great. The fact that I could name at least 50 fighters I could reasonably and objectively rate ahead of him doesn't mean I think Mayweather is ****.

 

Hearns wasn't an ATG at 160. Roldan almost sparked him in the fight before Barkley. Canelo is lineal at 160 and just drew with an ATG at 160.