# Floyd's Rank As An ATG After Easily Kicking Pacquiao's Ass



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

boxing resumes was never my focus

and what is emmanuel's new rank after getting owned by Floyd


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Floyd's in the top 20 now :rasta He and Pernell aren't as far apart as some people would like to think


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Floyd's in the top 20 now :rasta He and Pernell aren't as far apart as some people would like to think


what's pernell top 15?


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) said:


> what's pernell top 15?


between 15-20. I don't have a full list, but everytime I've seen a list that I've mostly agreed with, Pernell fell in that range.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> between 15-20. I don't have a full list, but everytime I've seen a list that I've mostly agreed with, Pernell fell in that range.


Floyd was 149 on fight night

emmanuel outweighed him and still got easy worked


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

def top 112


----------



## ChampionsForever (Jun 5, 2013)

I have both in the top 30, Mayweather is higher, his longevity is outstanding, call him what you like, but 19 years undefeated, 18 years a champion, it's fucking good going. Pacs run from 2006-2012 was one of the best in boxing history, he destroyed some really good fighters, some great, one of the best southys in history.


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Honestly, I'd hold Mayweather's win in much higher regard if Pac hadn't already been laid out by JMM. I don't see how anyone can deny that takes some of the luster off it.


----------



## Reidy (May 6, 2015)

I never thought Manny was on Floyd's level, so I would have him in the same position as before the fight. Floyd is definitely top 10 for me, with Manny top 40, I don't rate this fight in Mayweather's top 5 victory's.


----------



## Mr Magic (Jun 3, 2013)

He's a solid ATG.

I'd say top 20, at this point.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

Mr Magic said:


> He's a solid ATG.
> 
> I'd say top 20, at this point.


interesting saw lot of people having him at top 25-30 prior to this match


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Floyd's in the top 20 now :rasta He and Pernell aren't as far apart as some people would like to think


Floyd should kick Keith and/or Kell's AZZ

the better their careers turn out the more Floyd's standing over time improves

They are ROI based victories sort of like Saul, although he doesn't know how to win big fights convincingly


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

@Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) you should edit the OP and encourage people to back it up with a list to avoid the farce of the same thread in the Brit forum. Even if not an actual list at least have people be willing to show their categories of boxers who are above and around.

That one had people arguing for places and then saying they couldn't say who was ahead because they didn't know any boxing history:roflatsch


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

Abraham said:


> Honestly, I'd hold Mayweather's win in much higher regard if Pac hadn't already been laid out by JMM. I don't see how anyone can deny that takes some of the luster off it.


Not when Floyd also dusted off Marquez, this embarrassingly easy victory just seals the loop and gives a case for the dreaded :franklin triangle theory to live on bama ain't that right @Bogotazo?


----------



## icebergisonfire (Aug 22, 2013)

Reidy said:


> I never thought Manny was on Floyd's level, so I would have him in the same position as before the fight. Floyd is definitely top 10 for me, with Manny top 40, I don't rate this fight in Mayweather's top 5 victory's.


I agree word for word.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Group 1:Sugar Ray Robinson, Harry Greb, Ezzard Charles, Henry Armstrong, Sam Langford, Roberto Duran, Benny Leonard, Sugar Ray Leonard, Willie Pep, Archie Moore.

Group 2: Muhammad Ali, Barney Ross, Joe Gans, Tony Canzoneri, Mickey Walker, Julio Cesar Chavez, Joe Louis, Bob Fitzsimmons, Pernell Whitaker, Packey MacFarland

Group 3: Jimmy Bivins, Gene Tunney, Lloyd Marshall, Marvin Hagler, Thomas Hearns, Roy Jones Jnr, Floyd Mayweather Jnr, Lennox Lewis, Terry McGovern, Jimmy McLarnin

In no order but he'd be in the third grouping for me.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Group 1:Sugar Ray Robinson, Harry Greb, Ezzard Charles, Henry Armstrong, Sam Langford, Roberto Duran, Benny Leonard, Sugar Ray Leonard, Willie Pep, Archie Moore.
> 
> Group 2: Muhammad Ali, Barney Ross, Joe Gans, Tony Canzoneri, Mickey Walker, Julio Cesar Chavez, Joe Louis, Bob Fitzsimmons, Pernell Whitaker, Packey MacFarland
> 
> ...


based on your list Floyd ranks as #22 ATG at the best

also why is SRL better than Muhammad Ali


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) said:


> based on your list Floyd ranks as #22 ATG at the best
> 
> also why is SRL better than Muhammad Ali


Nah they arent in order - hes somewhere between 20-29 just aint made up my mind on exact orders.

Leonard has better wins than Ali and was a better all round boxer imo. I also do my list on how I scored fights (or general consensus on result) and I though Ali lost to Young and Norton (*3) plus Jones a draw.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

My top 3 is SRR, SRL, and Floyd. And you can make a case for any 3 of them.

SRR got the vast experience at the pro level and fought everybody and anybody at any given day. He is the real "CAN" man.
SRL got the 3-4 arch rivals and got the showmanship along with who's who in boxing at that era.
Floyd got 2-3 arch rivals and got ridiculous longevity at the top level with Flawless technique.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

tliang1000 said:


> My top 3 is SRR, SRL, and Floyd. And you can make a case for any 3 of them.
> 
> SRR got the vast experience at the pro level and fought everybody and anybody at any given day. He is the real "CAN" man.
> SRL got the 3-4 arch rivals and got the showmanship along with who's who in boxing at that era.
> Floyd got 2-3 arch rivals and got ridiculous longevity at the top level with Flawless technique.


who's Floyd's arch rivals

Josue Castillo and Marcus Maidana?


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) said:


> who's Floyd's arch rivals
> 
> Josue Castillo and Marcus Maidana?


Arch rival is Oscar and Manny.
Top Rivals Corrales, Shane, Hatton, Cotto. 
JMM, Castillo, and Canelo could be had they prolong the fight but Floyd fought them rather quickly.


----------



## TheGreat (Jun 4, 2013)

Easily top 20, perhaps even top 10, it's been a real pleasure to witness his greatness.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

TheGreat said:


> Easily top 20, perhaps even top 10, it's been a real pleasure to witness his greatness.


Many people had FLoyd top 25-30 prior to this fight

HOw does kicking *emmanuel* AZZ bump someone into at least 15-20 spots up the list


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Top 20 or even top 15.

I like what @Chatty did. Would do something like this myself (My knowledge is not great on some fighters from the 20s and earlier so I apologize in advance for some historians seeing this

No order

_Group 1 is very select imo _- Harry Greb, Ray Robinson, Joe Gans, Benny Leonard, Sam Langford

_Group 2 is quite big with not much between them, some are here because I judge their skills/ability highly, a guy like Chavez for example_ - Joe Louis, Roberto Duran, Henry Armstrong, Sugar Ray Leonard, Muhammad Ali, Pernell Whitaker, Ezzard Charles, Roy Jones Jr, Floyd Mayweather Jr, Julio Cesar Chavez, ARchie Moore, Marvin Hagler, Eder Jofre, Willie Pep, Sandy Saddler

3- Jose Napoles, Carlos Monzon, Barney Ross, Mickey Walker, Bernard Hopkins, Thomas Hearns, Alexis Arguello, Salvador Sanchez, Wilfredo Gomez, Jimmy Wilde, Miguel Canto, Carlos Ortiz.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Nah they arent in order - hes somewhere between 20-29 just aint made up my mind on exact orders.
> 
> Leonard has better wins than Ali and was a better all round boxer imo. I also do my list on how I scored fights (or general consensus on result) and I though Ali lost to Young and Norton (*3) plus Jones a draw.





tliang1000 said:


> My top 3 is SRR, SRL, and Floyd. And you can make a case for any 3 of them.
> 
> SRR got the vast experience at the pro level and fought everybody and anybody at any given day. He is the real "CAN" man.
> SRL got the 3-4 arch rivals and got the showmanship along with who's who in boxing at that era.
> Floyd got 2-3 arch rivals and got ridiculous longevity at the top level with Flawless technique.





Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) said:


> Many people had FLoyd top 25-30 prior to this fight
> 
> HOw does kicking *emmanuel* AZZ bump someone into at least 15-20 spots up the list


I might get beat up for this, but IMO Sugar Ray Leonard gets wayyyy too much credit on these boards now a days. Here's my reasoning off the top of my head:

1. Lost to Duran.

2. Got a gift draw against Hearns (2nd fight) in a fight many said Leonard lost.

3. Ducked Aaron Pryor for many years

4. Ducked Hagler for like 6 years and waited to fight an out of prime Hagler. Many say Leonard lost that fight as well.

5. Leonard was 35 when he was whooped by Terry Norris and was 41 when he was beat to a pulp by Camacho. Floyd is still kicking ass fighting at 38.

6. Leonard was dropped and hurt bad by Kevin Howard... Floyd has never been closely dropped by such opposition.

Leonard is an ATG, don't get me wrong, but many things in his career get swept under the rug because he's likable and has a fantastic image even til this day. Had he not been liked so much, I think his career would've been picked a part as other great boxers have been.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> I might get beat up for this, but IMO Sugar Ray Leonard gets wayyyy too much credit on these boards now a days. Here's my reasoning off the top of my head:
> 
> 1. Lost to Duran.
> 
> ...


His first run in the sport was great, lost to another top ten ATG but avenged in, stopped a prime Hearns and Benitez and beat Kalule as a warm up fight (lol), rest of his resume was very solid as well.

After he fucked his eye and came back a few times he was past prime, not near the fighter he was and still beat Hagler, close fight woth Hearms 2 and beat Lalonde.

Extremely good imo if a little light overall.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

browsing said:


> Not when Floyd also dusted off Marquez, this embarrassingly easy victory just seals the loop and gives a case for the dreaded :franklin triangle theory to live on bama ain't that right @Bogotazo?


:yep :thumbsup


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

browsing said:


> Not when Floyd also dusted off Marquez, this embarrassingly easy victory just seals the loop and gives a case for the dreaded :franklin triangle theory to live on bama ain't that right @Bogotazo?


Honestly, though, JMM didn't have anything to be ashamed of after losing to Mayweather. It was a schooling, but not an embarrassing loss. The triangle is applicable at times in boxing, contrary to popular belief.

To answer the OP's question, I don't think the Pac win raises Mayweather's standing at all, because of other circumstances (fight coming too late, Pac losing three times, the way Floyd won). Without a doubt, though, one one thing people often overlook is how much credit Mayweather deserves for never being upset. Upsets are very common in boxing, even amongst ATGs. Mayweather deserves credit for doing what he had to do every single time he's stepped into the ring, despite the immense pressure that has been on him. I think Floyd is a top 25 fighter, easily.


----------



## DobyZhee (May 19, 2013)

His ranking actually went down since he didnt really hurt or knock him down.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)




----------



## TheGreat (Jun 4, 2013)

Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) said:


> Many people had FLoyd top 25-30 prior to this fight
> 
> HOw does kicking *emmanuel* AZZ bump someone into at least 15-20 spots up the list


It's his total body of work obviously, otherwise EM, JMM and Bradley would be ATGs, Mayweather has an opportunity to top Marciano and retire unbeaten having won 25 title fights, winning titles in 5 weight classres etc I had him in the top 20 before this fight breaking Marciano's record would be huge IMO.


----------



## bedders (Jun 6, 2012)

I genuinely gave Pac a chance, to the point I declined putting money on the fight. And I seen Pac as being three rounds up from the off, I thought the first three were bankers for Pac. Thought one great threat was from the uppercut, Floyd has had a habit in the past of leaning in with his lead rights against lefties, I thought that could be a real target for Manny, to catch Floyd on the stretch. However, I can't recall Floyd over-stretching with his right once during the fight. Most fighters are creatures of habit, certain traits recorded in muscle memory; not Floyd, he's a thinker, master of angles and strategy. To adjust small touches like that, what a brain. I don't know where he sits in historical terms but what a joy.


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

bedders said:


> I genuinely gave Pac a chance, to the point I declined putting money on the fight. *And I seen Pac as being three rounds up from the off, I thought the first three were bankers for Pac.* Thought one great threat was from the uppercut, Floyd has had a habit in the past of leaning in with his lead rights against lefties, I thought that could be a real target for Manny, to catch Floyd on the stretch. However, I can't recall Floyd over-stretching with his right once during the fight. Most fighters are creatures of habit, certain traits recorded in muscle memory; not Floyd, he's a thinker, master of angles and strategy. To adjust small touches like that, what a brain. I don't know where he sits in historical terms but what a joy.


:lol:

How you going to say you saw the first three for him and not go ahead and say the first four? :franklin


----------



## bedders (Jun 6, 2012)

browsing said:


> :lol:
> 
> How you going to say you saw the first three for him and not go ahead and say the first four? :franklin


Okay, I really saw Pac taking the early rounds. Better? Fucking hell, JEEZ MUSH (sun)


----------



## bjl12 (Jun 5, 2013)

Reidy said:


> I never thought Manny was on Floyd's level, so I would have him in the same position as before the fight. Floyd is definitely top 10 for me, with Manny top 40, I don't rate this fight in Mayweather's top 5 victory's.


Floyd's top 20 for me. manny is top 50. manny's achievements are incredibly inflated considering everything surrounding them and the way he went about fighting bigger guys. His achievements at 126-135 are impressive though.

Floyd > manny in every way


----------



## bjl12 (Jun 5, 2013)

bedders said:


> Okay, I really saw Pac taking the early rounds. Better? Fucking hell, JEEZ MUSH (sun)


You are pretty shit at scoring fights mate. Everyone, including all three official judges, agrees Floyd swept the first three rounds. Everyone also agrees pacfuck won rounds 4 and 6 - which he did. So it's tough to have any score except for 4-2 Floyd going into the 2nd half of the fight...and Floyd clearly won at least 4 more rounds on the back half, if not 5.

Either way, I hope scoring fights isn't a career goal of yours


----------



## Hoshi (Aug 21, 2012)

People saying top whatever show a list please or it sounds like you are just clueless.

Mayweathers wins over prime very good fighters are Corrales and Castillox2. Both are borderline great imo. His wins over greats are Pacquiao and Oscar but they were declined I guess.

Think people are selling Pacquiao short here, his resume is outstandingly good, Morales x3, Marquez x 4 Barrera x2. His 147 run is irrelevant next to those wins. He was never as dominant as Mayweather though.


----------



## bedders (Jun 6, 2012)

bjl12 said:


> You are pretty shit at scoring fights mate. Everyone, including all three official judges, agrees Floyd swept the first three rounds. Everyone also agrees pacfuck won rounds 4 and 6 - which he did. So it's tough to have any score except for 4-2 Floyd going into the 2nd half of the fight...and Floyd clearly won at least 4 more rounds on the back half, if not 5.
> 
> Either way, I hope scoring fights isn't a career goal of yours


Oh fucking hell, wow, I see what this is now :-/ When I say "I seen Pac as being three rounds up from the off" I meant _before the fight_. I'm a Floyd man but him taking control from the outset, I just didn't see that. The point I was making was that I GENUINELY seen Manny as a serious threat going in to the fight but that Floyd - with subtle changes - shattered what I think was the conventional "wisdom".


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

so seems he has secured himself a spot in the top 20 by kicking emmanuel azz

His southpaw equivalent Pernell is somewhere in the top 15


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

20-25. Around Pernell, Chavez and Roy


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

I've got Floyd in front of Pernell. Like many, Pernell has a better win than Floyd (meaning the Chavez "draw"). But Floyd has been on top for almost twice as long as Pernell was, and Floyd has a very long list of wins that can contend with any other Whitaker victory. I also feel like Whitaker lost to Oscar. It doesn't take away from his legacy having been past it by then and giving a decent account of himself, but I feel like he'd need to have won that to still be ahead of Floyd.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> I've got Floyd in front of Pernell. Like many, Pernell has a better win than Floyd (*meaning the Chavez "draw"*). But Floyd has been on top for almost twice as long as Pernell was, and Floyd has a very long list of wins that can contend with any other Whitaker victory. I also feel like Whitaker lost to Oscar. It doesn't take away from his legacy having been past it by then and giving a decent account of himself, but I feel like he'd need to have won that to still be ahead of Floyd.


is Cesar a better fighter than emmanuel


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) said:


> is Cesar a better fighter than emmanuel


At the time Pernell fought him, yeah I'd say he was compared to the Pac that Mayweather fought. If you're comparing Manny to Chavez all time, that's a different discussion that I don't want to get into.


----------



## Sweethome_Bama (Jul 29, 2012)

Floyd is where he was befoer the fight for me.
I don't award points for popping a hype bubble.


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

I don't have a list, and I'd be surprised if many people in here saying top 30/20/15 etc do. He goes ahead of Pacquiao now for me, it's not the career defining win he should have claimed five years ago but it's enough to cement himself as the no.1 of his era.


----------



## DobyZhee (May 19, 2013)

Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) said:


> so seems he has secured himself a spot in the top 20 by kicking emmanuel azz
> 
> His southpaw equivalent Pernell is somewhere in the top 15


Lol, singsurat, torrecampo, Morales 1, JMM 4 all did a better job at kicking Pac's ass compared to Floyd.

Heck Cotto and Margarito did a better bang up job


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

Going by tiers (what i see more and more as a fair assesment instead of an definitive number 1)

Tier 1: Ray Robinson, Ezzard Charles, Muhammed Ali, Joe Gans, Roberto Duran, Willie Pep, Henry Armstrong, Joe Louis
(Sam Langford and Harry Greb are typically placed high but I don't know enough of either men to make a fair judgement)

Tier 2: Archie Moore, Ray Leonard, Benny Leonard, Bob Fitzsimmons, Mickey Walker, Gene Tunney, 

Tier 3: Emille Griffith, Marvelous Marvin Hagler, Pernell Whitaker, Bernard Hopkins, Holman Williams, Charley Burley, Roy Jones Jr, Floyd Mayweather

Tier 4: Joe Frazier, Larry Holmes, George Foreman, Kid Gavilan, Barbados Joe Walcott, Evander Holyfield, Carlos Monzon, JCC, Eder Jofre, Thomas Hearns

to give you an impression where i would kinda place him for now


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

knowimuch said:


> Going by tiers (what i see more and more as a fair assesment instead of an definitive number 1)
> 
> Tier 1: Ray Robinson, Ezzard Charles, Muhammed Ali, Joe Gans, Roberto Duran, Willie Pep, Henry Armstrong, Joe Louis
> (Sam Langford and Harry Greb are typically placed high but I don't know enough of either men to make a fair judgement)
> ...


Your first tier sucks. Duran and Ali shouldn't be in there. Hagler didn't do enough to be third tier either.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

Knox Harrington said:


> Your first tier sucks. Duran and Ali shouldn't be in there. Hagler didn't do enough to be third tier either.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks for the constructive critisism, have to go now will reply later why they deserve that place


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

Excluding a lot of guys who I don't have enough knowledge on to include here's the tiers I'd go with:

No order:

Tier 1:

Ali, Robinson, Duran, Leonard (SR), Louis, Pep, Charles, Armstrong

Tier 2:

Benny Leonard, Moore, Whitaker, , Jones Jr, Tunney, Saddler, Fitzsimmons

Tier 3:

Hearns, Hagler, JCC, Monzon, Ketchell, Hopkins, Mayweather Jr, Spinks, Loughran

Tier 4:

Pacquaio, Marciano, Holyfield, Arguello, LaMotta, Frazier, Foreman

I use @McGrain's list as the Holy Grail and reckon it's pretty accurate, obviously I've left out a lot of names that I can't include due to not seeing enough of them and just not being knowledgeable enough about them yet. Although if a lot of the familliar names are included where they usually go I'd say Mayweather would certainly be top 40ish, perhaps top 30.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Ivan Drago said:


> Excluding a lot of guys who I don't have enough knowledge on to include here's the tiers I'd go with:
> 
> No order:
> 
> ...


Perhaps holyfield's p4p greatness is being overlooked? Always feel like holy gets underrated in these kinds of discussions, he has a very deep resume and is in the discussion as both the GOAT CW and potentially a top 5 (or at least top 10) HW. 
Call me crazy but i think you can make a pretty good argument for holy being ranked over mayweather. Thats probably an unpopular opinion. Overall though pretty good listing.

Would you rank Pernell Whitaker over Floyd?


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Floyd's in the top 20 now :rasta He and Pernell aren't as far apart as some people would like to think


Whitaker still has a much better resume and is a better fighter prime for prime.

Floyd's best wins: Past Prime Mosley, bloated up JMM, past prime DLH, 152 catch weight Canelo, past prime Pacquiao, G. Hernandez, Corrales, Castillo

Whitaker's best wins: PRIME DLH, undefeated almost prime Chavez, Ramirez x2, Hurtado, Vasquez, McGirt x2, R. Mayweather, etc.

Despite having less wins & less fights than Floyd I think he actually has a much better resume.

if Floyd had fought & beat Pacquiao in 2010 or 2011 it would have been a much better win.


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Perhaps holyfield's p4p greatness is being overlooked? Always feel like holy gets underrated in these kinds of discussions, he has a very deep resume and is in the discussion as both the GOAT CW and potentially a top 5 (or at least top 10) HW.
> Call me crazy but i think you can make a pretty good argument for holy being ranked over mayweather. Thats probably an unpopular opinion. Overall though pretty good listing.
> 
> Would you rank Pernell Whitaker over Floyd?


I'd definitely have Pernell above Floyd.

Holyfield vs Floyd is a tough debate

Resume: Holyfield
Ability: Mayweather

I place the most importance on resume as that shows what a fighter actually DID rather than speculating what they potentially could have done and I rate Holyfields resume ahead of Floyd but I'd give the edge to Mayweather for being the more polished in ring technician, having the greater longevity and he also has the dominance factor. I imagine a debate can be made but Mayweather's clean cut record combined with his amazing longevity puts him in very good standing in this kind of debate.


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

tommygun711 said:


> Whitaker still has a much better resume and is a better fighter prime for prime.
> 
> Floyd's best wins: Past Prime Mosley, bloated up JMM, past prime DLH, 152 catch weight Canelo, past prime Pacquiao, G. Hernandez, Corrales, Castillo
> 
> ...


We both know Pernell's ass didn't beat DLH. Take away Chavez and his other victories have nothing on Mayweather's, like I said earlier.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Ivan Drago said:


> I'd definitely have Pernell above Floyd.
> 
> Holyfield vs Floyd is a tough debate
> 
> ...


Well, Holyfield lost the important trilogy in his career, lost the fights to Lewis, and lost the other less important trilogy to Ruiz. That's an issue. Also, the loss to Moorer in the middle of his career isn't good.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Knox Harrington said:


> We both know Pernell's ass didn't beat DLH. Take away Chavez and his other victories have nothing on Mayweather's, like I said earlier.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I thought Pernell beat Oscar- its a very close fight that could have easily swung.

Also I'd rank Ramirez above anything on Floyds record at the time they fought their opponents - he was better than Castillo/Corrales and pernell beat a better version than Pacquaio/Mosley/Oscar. McGirt and Vasquez are better than 95% of the fighters on FLoyds record imo as well.


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> Well, Holyfield lost the important trilogy in his career, lost the fights to Lewis, and lost the other less important trilogy to Ruiz. That's an issue. Also, the loss to Moorer in the middle of his career isn't good.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's what I mean, Floyd doesn't have the slip ups so whilst not having as great a resume it is at least unblemished.

However there are reasons for that,

36 year old Pac post KTFO6 is not the same challenge for Floyd that 30 year old huge favourite Tyson was for Holyfield.
Riddick Bowe is a greater challenge for Holyfield than the likes of 152lb catchweight Canelo or 145lb catchweight (ignored by Mayweather) Marquez was to Floyd.

And he still beat Moorer, Tyson, Ruiz and Bowe.


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Chatty said:


> I thought Pernell beat Oscar- its a very close fight that could have easily swung.
> 
> Also I'd rank Ramirez above anything on Floyds record at the time they fought their opponents - he was better than Castillo/Corrales and pernell beat a better version than Pacquaio/Mosley/Oscar. McGirt and Vasquez are better than 95% of the fighters on FLoyds record imo as well.


Ramirez lost almost every meaningful fight in his career. It would be favoritism to say he's better than anyone on Floyds resume.

Vazquez was legit, but I see no reason to claim he's better than Floyd's better wins.

McGirt--overrated. Guy didn't really do much in his career.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Ivan Drago said:


> That's what I mean, Floyd doesn't have the slip ups so whilst not having as great a resume it is at least unblemished.
> 
> However there are reasons for that,
> 
> ...


Tyson at that point was hyped like Pac, but without the wins. 2014 was one of Pac's better years imo.

Holyfield fights down to the level of his opponents. If there were a 147 pound version of him, he'd probably be having brutal trilogies w Marquez and Canelo. Think Bradley w a little more pop. Anyway, holy was great but the losses keep him out of discussions involving Floyd, Pernell, Ray Leonard, etc.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Ivan Drago said:


> That's what I mean, Floyd doesn't have the slip ups so whilst not having as great a resume it is at least unblemished.
> 
> However there are reasons for that,
> 
> ...


Everyone knows that Post jail Tyson wasn't remotely close to being the same fighter he was pre-jail before the Douglass KO

It's kind of hard to count the Pac KO against Mayweather, but give Holyfield more credit for his KO over Tyson post jail/Douglass


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> Tyson at that point was hyped like Pac, but without the wins. 2014 was one of Pac's better years imo.
> 
> Holyfield fights down to the level of his opponents. If there were a 147 pound version of him, he'd probably be having brutal trilogies w Marquez and Canelo. Think Bradley w a little more pop. Anyway, holy was great but the losses keep him out of discussions involving Floyd, Pernell, Ray Leonard, etc.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk





BoxingGenius27 said:


> Everyone knows that Post jail Tyson wasn't remotely close to being the same fighter he was pre-jail before the Douglass KO
> 
> It's kind of hard to count the Pac KO against Mayweather, but give Holyfield more credit for his KO over Tyson post jail/Douglass


I'm not saying he was prime or anything just that Tyson was a greater challenge than Pacquiao.

Ultimately I'm agreeing that Mayweather is greater in an ATG sense.


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Everyone knows that Post jail Tyson wasn't remotely close to being the same fighter he was pre-jail before the Douglass KO
> 
> It's kind of hard to count the Pac KO against Mayweather, but give Holyfield more credit for his KO over Tyson post jail/Douglass


I think it's kind of ridiculous to bring the Marquez ko into it. Mayweather shut down Marquez. So you have to elevate that win for Floyd if you're gonna heavily factor in Pac's ko loss. You can't write off both.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Ivan Drago said:


> I'm not saying he was prime or anything just that Tyson was a greater challenge than Pacquiao.
> 
> Ultimately I'm agreeing that Mayweather is greater in an ATG sense.


Well, why? Pac's 2014 resume alone is better than Tyson's entire post prison career.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> I think it's kind of ridiculous to bring the Marquez ko into it. Mayweather shut down Marquez. So you have to elevate that win for Floyd if you're gonna heavily factor in Pac's ko loss. You can't write off both.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Well, there have been many contradictions when it comes to Manny, JMM and Floyd...

One being the point you just made. The other being Manny and JMM are the same size, but Floyd was too big for Marquez. Or Manny and Floyd are the same size, but Manny's too small to fight Canelo or GGG like what was being asked of Floyd currently with GGG and back in 2012 with Canelo.

Too many contradictions for me to keep up with. It seems like people use certain arguments only when it's in their favor.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> We both know Pernell's ass didn't beat DLH. Take away Chavez and his other victories have nothing on Mayweather's, like I said earlier.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


disagree, i think pernell won agains DLH. Again ,this was a PRIME DLH, not the faded version that Floyd narrowly beat. and his other victories, such as Vasquez, McGirt, or Zoom Zoom Nelson are all very good wins.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> Well, why? Pac's 2014 resume alone is better than Tyson's entire post prison career.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


lol, no it's not. I'm not buying that bullshit. in 2014 Pac beat Algieri, Rios and Bradley. Somehow you are going to tell me that those wins are better than Rudduck x2, Seldon, Golota, Bruno, Buster Mathis, or alex stewart. nope. Bradley is the only very good win of Pac's career in 2014.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Ivan Drago said:


> I'd definitely have Pernell above Floyd.
> 
> Holyfield vs Floyd is a tough debate
> 
> ...


i think it's definitely close. while Floyd has been more consistent than Holyfield, Holyfield has more depth to his resume, and to his own right was able to be competitive with top level HWs for a long long time. Tyson, Bowe, Qawi, Holmes, Moorer, Mercer, Cooper, Douglas, Dokes, Valuev, very deep resume.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

lol @tommygun711


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> Well, why? Pac's 2014 resume alone is better than Tyson's entire post prison career.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


"Out of nearly 50 boxing writers polled, only Ron Borges of the Boston Globe thought that the challenger could upset the odds. Other writers picked Tyson by early knockout"

Most experts, writers, analysts were picking Mayweather form what I have saw in this fight I think the poll on here showed around 70% expected him to win.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Mayweather has beaten 26 champions and 7-10 HOF'ers... Take your pick at ATG's... Although Holyfield was a great HW, his resume isn't remotely close to Mayweather's. Losses don't count. 

If you're talking "wars", that's a different story


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Ivan Drago said:


> "Out of nearly 50 boxing writers polled, only Ron Borges of the Boston Globe thought that the challenger could upset the odds. Other writers picked Tyson by early knockout"
> 
> Most experts, writers, analysts were picking Mayweather form what I have saw in this fight I think the poll on here showed around 70% expected him to win.


That's not an objective way of looking at it. You're discounting Mayweather's win because he's very highly regarded by boxing writers. Put his heavyweight equivalent in against Tyson and he'd get lots of votes.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Knox Harrington said:


> Ramirez lost almost every meaningful fight in his career. It would be favoritism to say he's better than anyone on Floyds resume.
> 
> Vazquez was legit, but I see no reason to claim he's better than Floyd's better wins.
> 
> ...


Ramirez beat Arguello and Rosario twice imo, also beat Boza Edwards and gave a good account of himself against Chavez. He's definitely better than most of Floyds wins imo, beatter fighter than Corrales/Castillo/Chavez/Hernandez.

Also forgot to add Nelson who is most certainly a better win than any of Floyds at the time he fought him.

McGirt was a real good fighter, other than the end of his career he only really lost to elite level fighters and had some solid wins in the likes of Mamby, Bramble, Brown, Oliva, Baltazar, Davis Jnr, Warren. He's a better boxer than your Guerreros and Ortiz for sure.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Mayweather has beaten 26 champions and 7-10 HOF'ers... Take your pick at ATG's... Although Holyfield was a great HW, his resume isn't remotely close to Mayweather's. Losses don't count.
> 
> If you're talking "wars", that's a different story


i think holyfield actually has a better resume. what makes it close is Floyd's skillset and longevity. Holyfield picked up more losses as he went on but that's because he had a deeper era as a HW than Floyd did his entire career.

Tyson, Bowe, Ruiz, Qawi, Holmes, Ocasio, Moorer, Rahman, Mercer, Cooper, Douglas, Dokes, Valuev.. holy's resume can easily compare to Floyd's.

and remember that in Floyd's time it was easier to be a "champion" or alphabet titlist.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Whitaker still has a much better resume and is a better fighter prime for prime.
> 
> Floyd's best wins: Past Prime Mosley, bloated up JMM, past prime DLH, 152 catch weight Canelo, past prime Pacquiao, G. Hernandez, Corrales, Castillo
> 
> ...


I didn't say he's over Pernell, I said they aren't far apart. And personally scored the Pernell/Oscar fight for Oscar the first time and a draw a second time. It was tough to score


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Mayweather has beaten 26 champions and 7-10 HOF'ers... Take your pick at ATG's... Although Holyfield was a great HW, his resume isn't remotely close to Mayweather's. Losses don't count.
> 
> If you're talking "wars", that's a different story


Probelm is how many of them were really champions though. 26 champions probables equates to about five in truth especially when you compare it to the older generation, theres more champions in one weight than their were divisions back then.

Broner a three weight champions and he's done fuck all in terms of top level boxing so far and he has beaten 5-6 champions.


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> That's not an objective way of looking at it. You're discounting Mayweather's win because he's very highly regarded by boxing writers. Put his heavyweight equivalent in against Tyson and he'd get lots of votes.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I'm not discrediting it I'm saying Holyfield taking on Tyson at that stage was a bigger challenge than Mayweather taking on Pacquiao at this stage in their respective careers. If you disagree that's fine, I only brought it up as a reason why Mayweather has had the superior longevity because his challenges weren't as great as Holyfields.

It doesn't mean I'm saying his longevity doesn't count or his win doesn't count, I actually stated that his longevity and dominance are what put him ahead of Holyfield for me.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> i think holyfield actually has a better resume. what makes it close is Floyd's skillset and longevity. Holyfield picked up more losses as he went on but that's because he had a deeper era as a HW than Floyd did his entire career.
> 
> Tyson, Bowe, Ruiz, Qawi, Holmes, Ocasio, Moorer, Rahman, Mercer, Cooper, Douglas, Dokes, Valuev.. holy's resume can easily compare to Floyd's.
> 
> and remember that in Floyd's time it was easier to be a "champion" or alphabet titlist.


Ok. for one, why are you counting Valuev when he lost to Valuev? Being competitive doesn't count.

Then you mention Bert Cooper who was a career journeyman?

Rahman, Ocasio and John Ruiz??? Really Tommygun

This isn't even debatable, I'm just going to stop there.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Ivan Drago said:


> I'm not discrediting it I'm saying Holyfield taking on Tyson at that stage was a bigger challenge than Mayweather taking on Pacquiao at this stage in their respective careers. If you disagree that's fine, I only brought it up as a reason why Mayweather has had the superior longevity because his challenges weren't as great as Holyfields.
> 
> It doesn't mean I'm saying his longevity doesn't count or his win doesn't count, I actually stated that his longevity and dominance are what put him ahead of Holyfield for me.


part of the reason was that people didn't hold Holyfield in the same esteem as Mayweather. Holyfield prior to the Tyson fight got knocked out by Riddick Bowe for the first time. People were asking Holyfield if he was going to retire or not after the third fight with Bowe.

Mayweather has been on the p4p list since 1998 except for the years he was inactive.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> part of the reason was that people didn't hold Holyfield in the same esteem as Mayweather. Holyfield prior to the Tyson fight got knocked out by Riddick Bowe for the first time. People were asking Holyfield if he was going to retire or not after the third fight with Bowe.
> 
> Mayweather has been on the p4p list since 1998 except for the years he was inactive.


TBF to Holyfield, much of that wasn't because of the Bowe defeat because he performed well in that fight and had Bowe down and nearly out before he got caught - it was because a test showed he had a hole in his heart and because of the first performance against Moorer people had wrote him off - meanwhile people assumed Tyson who was back on a killing spree post jail (not great opponents but looking great against them) would be way too much at this point.

Holyfield was just massively underrated in this fight (think he was something daft like 25/1 just to win, fuck knows what the stoppage was) but people just thought he was shot when he wasn't.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Holy beat Valuev imo but Valuev is shit so its not great a win anyway - still impressive for his age though.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Probelm is how many of them were really champions though. 26 champions probables equates to about five in truth especially when you compare it to the older generation, theres more champions in one weight than their were divisions back then.
> 
> Broner a three weight champions and he's done fuck all in terms of top level boxing so far and he has beaten 5-6 champions.


Well, let's not make Holyfield's generation of HW's to be comparable to that of Ali's in the 70's. Holyfield fought in a HW era that was cleaned out by Tyson before he went to jail.

Now, I'm not in the business of discrediting the heart of someone like Holyfield because even though he came up short, the man fought everybody and avoided NO ONE. I know this. But in the same breath, Evander came up short in some of the biggest fights of his life (i.e. Bowe, Moorer, Lewis, etc).

His biggest win of his career was against a post prime Tyson; it was the equivalent of Pac's victory over DLH, in a sense that it was mesmerizing and made history, but Floyd has more great victories over the course of his career.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

On another note you can make an argument for Holyfield beating Lewis in the rematch - that fight was close as fuck but he was never gonna get the points of the judges after the farsical scores in the first fight.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Chatty said:


> TBF to Holyfield, much of that wasn't because of the Bowe defeat because he performed well in that fight and had Bowe down and nearly out before he got caught - it was because a test showed he had a hole in his heart and because of the first performance against Moorer people had wrote him off - meanwhile people assumed Tyson who was back on a killing spree post jail (not great opponents but looking great against them) would be way too much at this point.
> 
> Holyfield was just massively underrated in this fight (think he was something daft like 25/1 just to win, fuck knows what the stoppage was) but people just thought he was shot when he wasn't.


yeah that's part of it also. And I remember Holyfield having heart problems, but I forgot if it was known at that time or not. Since it was, it makes much more sense now.

Holyfield such a true warrior though. How many times has he been massively undersized and the underdog


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> i think it's definitely close. while Floyd has been more consistent than Holyfield, Holyfield has more depth to his resume, and to his own right was able to be competitive with top level HWs for a long long time. Tyson, Bowe, Qawi, Holmes, Moorer, Mercer, Cooper, Douglas, Dokes, Valuev, very deep resume.


It's a debate, I just can't see Holy winning it though.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> I didn't say he's over Pernell, I said they aren't far apart.


They are close in reality.

You can nitpick over particular names/achievements - that ancient version of Ramriez was hardly any better than his son Castillo; while on the other hand McGirt wasn't just an ordinary good champ like G.Hernandez and was rated highly at the time Whitaker beat him (the first time), etc.

It's not the resume or longevity that really separates them - it's perception of Floyd by the masses which is different from people's perception of Whitaker.

That and Whitaker being a slightly better fighter.
But that's usually not the most important factor.


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> part of the reason was that people didn't hold Holyfield in the same esteem as Mayweather. Holyfield prior to the Tyson fight got knocked out by Riddick Bowe for the first time. People were asking Holyfield if he was going to retire or not after the third fight with Bowe.
> 
> Mayweather has been on the p4p list since 1998 except for the years he was inactive.


Exactly, the guy had even been diagnosed with a heart problem. Although incorrectly, people were genuinely worried for his health vs Tyson.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Ivan Drago said:


> Exactly, the guy had even been diagnosed with a heart problem. Although incorrectly, people were genuinely worried for his health vs Tyson.


Holyfield was a fucking warrior. One of the first fighters I idolized as a kid growing up. The heart, coupled with going toe to toe with fighters he was naturally smaller than. This is heavily documented in my post history since being a member of boxing forums, but I cried tears of happiness the night Holy beat Tyson. It was a remarkable moment in boxing history.... TBF, I was just as shocked when Douglass knocked Tyson out 6 years prior.

I think a better topic for this conversation would be "who has more heart or laid it all on the line or who was more exciting Evander or Mayweather, etc". But if we're talking resume's, as much as I love Evander, he's just not close to Floyd


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Well, let's not make Holyfield's generation of HW's to be comparable to that of Ali's in the 70's. Holyfield fought in a HW era that was cleaned out by Tyson before he went to jail.
> 
> Now, I'm not in the business of discrediting the heart of someone like Holyfield because even though he came up short, the man fought everybody and avoided NO ONE. I know this. But in the same breath, Evander came up short in some of the biggest fights of his life (i.e. Bowe, Moorer, Lewis, etc).
> 
> His biggest win of his career was against a post prime Tyson; it was the equivalent of Pac's victory over DLH, in a sense that it was mesmerizing and made history, but Floyd has more great victories over the course of his career.


I think you are selling him short somewhat - Holy had a range of excellent to very good wins throughout his career - Bowe, Tysonx2, Qawix2, DeLeon, Foreman, Dokes, Thomas, Holmes, Moorer, Douglas, Mercer, Ruiz, Rahman.

Then you can make an argument for him beating Lewis in the second fight - I didn't personally but it was very close, he beat Valuev imo and put in good showings against Bowe in the other fights.

I wouldn't say he came up short in his biggest fights because I would say his biggest fights were Bowe 1-3, Tyson 1-2, Lewis 1-2, Qawi 1 and Dougals which would be a record of 5-3-1 literal which is pretty good.

EDIT I have Floyd over Holyfield BTW - just stating Holyfields got an ATG career and it aint a whole lot behind Floyd imo.


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Mayweather has beaten 26 champions and 7-10 HOF'ers... Take your pick at ATG's... Although Holyfield was a great HW, his resume isn't remotely close to Mayweather's. Losses don't count.
> 
> If you're talking "wars", that's a different story


Holyfield's resume -> Mayweathers

Holyfield had only two divisions (well three but is 175 stint was short) to compete in so there are less titilist and champions then a guy who comes from sfw to welterweight. Holy beat the most lineal champ's of any heavyweight, in some of his fight gave up 20/30 pounds. Also who are the HOF Floyd beat? Pac, Cotto, Marquez, DLH. Maybe Mosley and Hatton?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> yeah that's part of it also. And I remember Holyfield having heart problems, but I forgot if it was known at that time or not. Since it was, it makes much more sense now.
> 
> Holyfield such a true warrior though. How many times has he been massively undersized and the underdog


Holy was amazing, probably the fighter I most enjoy watching - he's not technically the best ever even though he is technically very good but combine that with his fighting instinct and his almost need to go to war and their isn't many fights where you would walk away disappointed.


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

bballchump11 said:


> part of the reason was that people didn't hold Holyfield in the same esteem as Mayweather. Holyfield prior to the Tyson fight got knocked out by Riddick Bowe for the first time. People were asking Holyfield if he was going to retire or not after the third fight with Bowe.
> 
> *Mayweather has been on the p4p list since 1998 except for the years he was inactive*.


tbf Holy was in a p4p stacked era and still made the list from time to time: whitaker, chavez, tyson, lewis, bowe, jones, toney, dlh, hopkins etc

it's hard to compete with that


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Lester1583 said:


> They are close in reality.
> 
> You can nitpick over particular names/achievements - that ancient version of Ramriez was hardly any better than his son Castillo; while on the other hand McGirt wasn't just an ordinary good champ like G.Hernandez and was rated highly at the time Whitaker beat him (the first time), etc.
> 
> ...


yeah very good post. I wonder how much it'll change once Floyd retires.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> tbf Holy was in a p4p stacked era and still made the list from time to time: whitaker, chavez, tyson, lewis, bowe, jones, toney, dlh, hopkins etc
> 
> it's hard to compete with that


the main point is that Floyd's been on top for so long that he'll never find himself in the position of underdog. Even if he fought GGG, he'd probably be the favorite while Holyfield has had so many ups and downs in his career that people would undervalue him often


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

bballchump11 said:


> the main point is that Floyd's been on top for so long that he'll never find himself in the position of underdog. Even if he fought GGG, he'd probably be the favorite while Holyfield has had so many ups and downs in his career that people would undervalue him often


Good point, Holy's underdog position helped him a lot with getting big fights and whatnot but sadly some people underrate him because of the underdog position. Altough I must admit maybe overrating Holy from time to time but it's one of my all time fav's.

I would favor GGG vs Mayweather tbh, too big, too strong, too Kazakh, even if Floyd blocks the shots their still going to hurt him. but that fight is (deseverdly so( never going to happen


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

I think with longevity you have to also account for eras - guys fight way less now than they used to so they can fight on for years longer wheras fighters would be war torn and on the downslope a lot faster than they are now. 

If you look at the top fighters today - Floyd, Pacquaio, Wlad, Hop, Juan etc all have been at the top of the game for 15 years ish and you look at guys like Bradley who is coming up to ten years fighting at world level you can get an overview that fighters are built to last longer now (or at least boxing is designed so they can).

EDIT - obviously that aint so bad when comparing Floyd to Pernell for example as they aint that far apart but say comparing Floyd with LaMotta then it can becoem a factor (I'm not saying LaMotta is ahead of FLoyd although his resume might be better).


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Chatty said:


> Ramirez beat Arguello and Rosario twice imo, also beat Boza Edwards and gave a good account of himself against Chavez. He's definitely better than most of Floyds wins imo, beatter fighter than Corrales/Castillo/Chavez/Hernandez.
> 
> Also forgot to add Nelson who is most certainly a better win than any of Floyds at the time he fought him.
> 
> McGirt was a real good fighter, other than the end of his career he only really lost to elite level fighters and had some solid wins in the likes of Mamby, Bramble, Brown, Oliva, Baltazar, Davis Jnr, Warren. He's a better boxer than your Guerreros and Ortiz for sure.


No, the Nelson win isn't better than Floyd's best wins. Nelson did nothing at lightweight other than lose that fight. His style was awful for moving up in weight. The Marquez win is arguably better considering that Marquez would go on to knock out the pfp number 1 at 47, and Marquez certainly wasn't past it and will not be ranked lower than Nelson all time.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> Holyfield's resume -> Mayweathers
> 
> Holyfield had only two divisions (well three but is 175 stint was short) to compete in so there are less titilist and champions then a guy who comes from sfw to welterweight. Holy beat the most lineal champ's of any heavyweight, in some of his fight gave up 20/30 pounds. Also who are the HOF Floyd beat? Pac, Cotto, Marquez, DLH. Maybe Mosley and Hatton?


Floyd has also given up major pounds against foes in victory's.

Sure HOF are Pac, Cotto, Marquez, DLH, Mosley, G. Hernandez, Gatti and nominee's are Castillo, Corrales, Judah and Canelo will be.


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

McGirt was real good and placed in the top 10 p4p for some time in a stacked era for p4p lists, thatÂ´s quite something. I placed Floyd and Pernell in the same tier though, Floyd has a greater career while Pernell, imo, was more skilled all things considered.


----------



## Carpe Diem (Jun 6, 2013)

Abraham said:


> Honestly, I'd hold Mayweather's win in much higher regard if Pac hadn't already been laid out by JMM. I don't see how anyone can deny that takes some of the luster off it.


Typical. I bet you weren't saying that before the fight happened. It's not Floyd's fault that Manny got KO before they fought. Floyd won and you'll have to live with it knowing it happened no matter how hard you try to discredit the win.


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Floyd has also given up major pounds against foes in victory's.
> 
> Sure HOF are Pac, Cotto, Marquez, DLH, Mosley, G. Hernandez, Gatti and nominee's are Castillo, Corrales, Judah and Canelo will be.


I know Floyd did that just saying Holy sometimes gave up more but maybe not as reguraly

Don't think Hernandez makes the cut, same with Coralles and Judah, but at least you can make a case for them. Canelo hasn't done anything that indicates that he will be in HOF


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> I know Floyd did that just saying Holy sometimes gave up more but maybe not as reguraly
> 
> Don't think Hernandez makes the cut, same with Coralles and Judah, but at least you can make a case for them. Canelo hasn't done anything that indicates that he will be in HOF


I said Canelo will be a nominee. That's a prediction, not a statement based off his current resume


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

Knox Harrington said:


> Your first tier sucks. Duran and Ali shouldn't be in there. Hagler didn't do enough to be third tier either.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Duran is argubally the greatest lightweight of all time and thats saying something. Beat guys like Marcel, DeJesus etc and avenged all his defeats before moving on to the ww division were he defeated the no2 ww of all time in Leonard. After that his career slipped a little but still holds quite a few very good victories, even holding the 168 belt by defeating Barkley who just defeated Hearns. And hold is own with Hagler despite being the natural smaller man.

Do I really have to explain why Ali is a top 10 atg? Really?


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> I said Canelo will be a nominee. That's a prediction, not a statement based off his current resume


Read it wrong, my bad, we will see, one things for sure and that is that he's going to be an exciting fighter to follow and is willing to take on the best


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> Read it wrong, my bad, we will see, one things for sure and that is that he's going to be an exciting fighter to follow and is willing to take on the best


No problem.

How many HOF'ers or ATG's would you say Holyfield has beaten?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Knox Harrington said:


> No, the Nelson win isn't better than Floyd's best wins. Nelson did nothing at lightweight other than lose that fight. His style was awful for moving up in weight. The Marquez win is arguably better considering that Marquez would go on to knock out the pfp number 1 at 47, and Marquez certainly wasn't past it and will not be ranked lower than Nelson all time.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Can say the same for Hatton, Guerrero, Canelo though - that doesnt make a whole lot of diffrrence.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Durans a definitive top ten ATG, anyone who thinks he isnt worthy of that discussion knows nothing about boxing.

Duran ticks every box of greateness - technical ability, resume, longevity, domince of division amd weight hopping, beating many ATG and HOFers, the full works - guy was beating world level fighters when he was nearly 50 and at 30 years of being a pro.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> i think holyfield actually has a better resume. what makes it close is Floyd's skillset and longevity. Holyfield picked up more losses as he went on but that's because he had a deeper era as a HW than Floyd did his entire career.
> 
> Tyson, Bowe, Ruiz, Qawi, Holmes, Ocasio, Moorer, Rahman, Mercer, Cooper, Douglas, Dokes, Valuev.. holy's resume can easily compare to Floyd's.
> 
> and remember that in Floyd's time it was easier to be a "champion" or alphabet titlist.


And why are you even mentioning Rahman?

The fight was stopped because Rahman grew a knot the size of an overgrown grapefruit from a "headbutt" from Holyfield. It was a TD, not an actual win


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Holy beat Valuev imo but Valuev is shit so its not great a win anyway - still impressive for his age though.


Sure, but you know as I know, those victory's don't officially count; especially since I wouldn't call it a robbery. But let's say I give it to you. The same can be said about Holy-Ruiz 1, in that Holy loss that fight and was given a gift decision.

Take your pick, loss vs Valuev or 2 losses vs Ruiz?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> And why are you even mentioning Rahman?
> 
> The fight was stopped because Rahman grew a knot the size of an overgrown grapefruit from a "headbutt" from Holyfield. It was a TD, not an actual win


Cause he won the fight, it went eight rounds and he wo those 8 rounds.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Sure, but you know as I know, those victory's don't officially count; especially since I wouldn't call it a robbery. But let's say I give it to you. The same can be said about Holy-Ruiz 1, in that Holy loss that fight and was given a gift decision.
> 
> Take your pick, loss vs Valuev or 2 losses vs Ruiz?


Take Ruiz of, it makes no difference, your grasping at straws now.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Take Ruiz of, it makes no difference, your grasping at straws now.


I'm just making a point. You tried to count a fight Holy loss as a win, but why not count a fight he won as a loss?

It's just funny how during these conversations people can take bits and pieces of history and use it when convenient to supplement their argument.


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Chatty said:


> Can say the same for Hatton, Guerrero, Canelo though - that doesnt make a whole lot of diffrrence.


I don't really know what you're trying to say with this post. That Marquez was a better win?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Cause he won the fight, it went eight rounds and he wo those 8 rounds.


Ok, you're a boxing fan just like me. It's a win on record, but not in a traditional sense on how fights are actually won (i.e. UD, SD, MD, TKO/KO).

Holy won on an accidental headbutt, not a traditional win. Even then, if tommy has to use a TD win over someone like Hasim Rahman as leverage in saying Holy has a better resume than Mayweather, it's not looking good


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Chatty said:


> Durans a definitive top ten ATG, anyone who thinks he isnt worthy of that discussion knows nothing about boxing.
> 
> Duran ticks every box of greateness - technical ability, resume, longevity, domince of division amd weight hopping, beating many ATG and HOFers, the full works - guy was beating world level fighters when he was nearly 50 and at 30 years of being a pro.


Duran stopped being special after the first Leonard fight. That's mainly why I don't think he deserves to be absolute tier one, possibly top ten. Ali had something similar happen in his career but he's a heavyweight so the criteria is different.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> I wonder how much it'll change once Floyd retires.


Impossible to predict.

Not every great fighter is underappreciated in his time, not ever great fighter is appreciated after his retirement.

Floyd has cemented his place as one of the legends of the sport, regardless of whether people agree with that or not.

And that's the bottom line 'cause Senior said so.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Ok, you're a boxing fan just like me. It's a win on record, but not in a traditional since on how fights are actually won (i.e. UD, SD, MD, TKO/KO).
> 
> Holy won on an accidental headbutt, not a traditional win. Even then, if tommy has to use a TD win over someone like Hasim Rahman as leverage in saying Holy has a better resume than Mayweather, it's not looking good


Nah he was winning the fight and would have won, its unfortunate they had to stop it but theres a reason that rule is in place and so ots fighter get the credit for winning in case an injury spoils it.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Nah he was winning the fight and would have won, its unfortunate they had to stop it but theres a reason that rule is in place and so ots fighter get the credit for winning in case an injury spoils it.


Well look at a fight like Dawson vs Pascal.... Pascal was up on the cards just as Dawson was coming on strong, but the fight was stopped due to a cut and awared to Pascal.

You never know what could happen... It's never over 'til it's over.

Listen, Holy is a legend/warrior and any other macho name you can find to describe a man; but his resume just isn't on par with Mayweathers


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Knox Harrington said:


> I don't really know what you're trying to say with this post. That Marquez was a better win?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The point is your disregarding it on weight alone but look at Hatton and Guerreros records at 147 and they are awful as is Canelos below 154 - dude got near chinned by lesser Cotto.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Knox Harrington said:


> Duran stopped being special after the first Leonard fight. That's mainly why I don't think he deserves to be absolute tier one, possibly top ten. Ali had something similar happen in his career but he's a heavyweight so the criteria is different.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Guy had had 73 fights by that point. He could have retired then and there with his legacy intact - cant knock him for moving further up and fighting more greats, sure he was patchy after that but he still beat some very good boxers. It takes nothi g away from him.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Well look at a fight like Dawson vs Pascal.... Pascal was up on the cards just as Dawson was coming on strong, but the fight was stopped due to a cut and awared to Pascal.
> 
> You never know what could happen... It's never over 'til it's over.
> 
> Listen, Holy is a legend/warrior and any other macho name you can find to describe a man; but his resume just isn't on par with Mayweathers


I know that bit the rule is after 4 the result is the result whether you go 5 or 12. It is what it is - he didnt cheat or anything, its unfair to take it away, its not his fault Rahman didnt win many of the first 8.

I agree Floyds is better though but I dont think hes far off. Not enough to write him out of the debate anyway.


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Chatty said:


> The point is your disregarding it on weight alone but look at Hatton and Guerreros records at 147 and they are awful as is Canelos below 154 - dude got near chinned by lesser Cotto.


I'm not disregarding the Nelson fight, it was a good win, but the weight was part of it. I was responding to a post claiming that Floyd doesn't have wins at that level, which is false.

Canelo fought Floyd as a junior middle. Two pounds isn't the same as jumping to lightweight from jr. light.

Hatton won a belt at 147 despite a lackluster performance and was physically bigger than Floyd. Neither of points were true for Nelson.

Guererro knocked off a contender and belt holder at 47 and was physically bigger than Floyd. Again, not analogous to Nelson-pea.

But none of that matters. I was pointing out that the Nelson win wasn't better than every fight on Floyds resume, using Marquez as the comparison.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

Chatty said:


> Guy had had 73 fights by that point. He could have retired then and there with his legacy intact - cant knock him for moving further up and fighting more greats, sure he was patchy after that but he still beat some very good boxers. It takes nothi g away from him.


The 73 is a little misleading. He was 28-0 when he beat Buchanan. He didn't just go and defend it 40 times against top contenders. He mostly just fought stiffs in between meaningful fights in non title bouts. He had a nice run at lightweight but that alone isn't enough for first tier all time. The two fight run at 47 puts him closer to first tier, but no mas, Hearns, Laing, and Benitez knock him off that tier imo. I'm not going to just pick and chose fights after Leonard I.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Chatty said:


> I know that bit the rule is after 4 the result is the result whether you go 5 or 12. It is what it is - he didnt cheat or anything, its unfair to take it away, its not his fault Rahman didnt win many of the first 8.
> 
> I agree Floyds is better though but I dont think hes far off. Not enough to write him out of the debate anyway.


How many HOF'ers and ATG's would you say Holy has beaten?


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> No problem.
> 
> How many HOF'ers or ATG's would you say Holyfield has beaten?


Top of my head: Moorer, Foreman, Holmes, Tyson, Bowe and a pretty close second fight at 38 years of age vs a prime Lennox Lewis

Maybe Douglas will make the HOF, not joking he's part of the biggest upset ever in boxing history. wonder if one could get in based on that, propably not


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> The 73 is a little misleading. He was 28-0 when he beat Buchanan. He didn't just go and defend it 40 times against top contenders. He mostly just fought stiffs in between meaningful fights in non title bouts. He had a nice run at lightweight but that alone isn't enough for first tier all time. The two fight run at 47 puts him closer to first tier, but no mas, Hearns, Laing, and Benitez knock him off that tier imo. I'm not going to just pick and chose fights after Leonard I.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Canelo had almost 50 fights before he fought a worthy opponent


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Canelo had almost 50 fights before he fought a worthy opponent


Who is claiming that Canelo is a first tier boxer all time? Sit down.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Knox Harrington said:


> The 73 is a little misleading. He was 28-0 when he beat Buchanan. He didn't just go and defend it 40 times against top contenders. He mostly just fought stiffs in between meaningful fights in non title bouts. He had a nice run at lightweight but that alone isn't enough for first tier all time. The two fight run at 47 puts him closer to first tier, but no mas, Hearns, Laing, and Benitez knock him off that tier imo. I'm not going to just pick and chose fights after Leonard I.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


His resume is ridiculous - if ypu tke into account robberies when he was older he beat - Leonard, Marcel, DeJesus, Palimino, Cuevas, Moore, Guts, Barkley, Viruets, Buchanan, Camacho, Paziena, Kobayashi, Castro, Mamby, Brooks, Fernandez, Lampkin and Thompso in that time as well as fighting a lot of great fighters out of his weight range (Hagler, Hearns, Benitez, even Joppy when he was 48 or something daft).

Cant knock that and he dominated most of his opponents before Leonard 2. You can pick moat boxera and take a chunk out of their record by disposing of fighters who arent world level - near all boxers go that route, even more so in poorer countries where their amateur system.is shite.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> Top of my head: Moorer, Foreman, Holmes, Tyson, Bowe and a pretty close second fight at 38 years of age vs a prime Lennox Lewis
> 
> Maybe Douglas will make the HOF, not joking he's part of the biggest upset ever in boxing history. wonder if one could get in based on that, propably not


Only HOF'ers on the list you provided that Holy actually "beat" are Foreman, Holmes, Tyson, and Bowe.... You're missing Qawi. That's five HOF'ers.

Moorer and Douglass aren't HOF'ers. I'd be surprised if Moorer gets it. I'll put my life on it that Douglass doesn't. If Moorer gets in, so will Corrales, Castillo, G. Hernandez, and Judah.

Floyd still has more HOF'ers on his resume in Cotto, DLH, Pac, Marquez, Mosley and Gatti... That's not even counting the others mentioned


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> Who is claiming that Canelo is a first tier boxer all time? Sit down.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No, I was making a point on how fighters can fight half a hundred fights and pad their records with sparring partners or has beens


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> How many HOF'ers and ATG's would you say Holy has beaten?


Atgs - Foreman, Holmes, Tyson, Lewis (if you score the second to him)

HOFers - Qawi, DeLeon, Moorer, Bowe.

Maybes Rahman and Douglas based on the standards of the HOF.


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

Chatty said:


> Atgs - Foreman, Holmes, Tyson, Lewis (if you score the second to him)
> 
> HOFers - Qawi, DeLeon, Moorer, Bowe.
> 
> Maybes Rahman and Douglas based on the standards of the HOF.


Rahman has one hell of a resume for a non dominant champ, guy gets sold short all the time


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Atgs - Foreman, Holmes, Tyson, Lewis (if you score the second to him)
> 
> HOFers - Qawi, DeLeon, Moorer, Bowe.
> 
> Maybes Rahman and Douglas based on the standards of the HOF.


Holy didn't beat Lewis. The 2nd fight was a clear victory for Lewis. The only HOF'ers Holy beat are Qawi, Bowe, Foreman, Holmes, and Tyson.

I will also say this. If you're counting Holy's win over Holmes as "HOF", then I guess Canelo has also beaten a HOF'er in Shane Mosley even though Shane was far over the hill as was Holmes.

Floyd has still beaten more HOF'ers and HOF nominees than Holyfield. Not "almost beat", but actually beat


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Only HOF'ers on the list you provided that Holy actually "beat" are Foreman, Holmes, Tyson, and Bowe.... You're missing Qawi. That's five HOF'ers.
> 
> Moorer and Douglass aren't HOF'ers. I'd be surprised if Moorer gets it. I'll put my life on it that Douglass doesn't. If Moorer gets in, so will Corrales, Castillo, G. Hernandez, and Judah.
> 
> Floyd still has more HOF'ers on his resume in Cotto, DLH, Pac, Marquez, Mosley and Gatti... That's not even counting the others mentioned


Didn't account his CW career but would add DeLeon and Quawi, btw i don't rank holy over floyd only his resume


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> Didn't account his CW career but would add DeLeon and Quawi, btw i don't rank holy over floyd only his resume


DeLeon isn't a HOF'er


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> DeLeon isn't a HOF'er


You said atg also carlos deleon is that at cw


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> DeLeon isn't a HOF'er


Still a damn good win.. counting up HOFs is a tiring and pointless process, remember that fuckin gatti is in the hof.

Anyway nothing wrong with thinking holy>floyd in resume


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

If Buster Douglass gets into the HOF, so will Ricky Hatton... BTW, I didn't even count Hatton as a HOF'er


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Still a damn good win.. counting up HOFs is a tiring and pointless process, remember that fuckin gatti is in the hof.
> 
> Anyway nothing wrong with thinking holy>floyd in resume


Floyd has many damn good wins similar to that. Many of them

Floyd's resume is deeper and better if we're being objective

I just don't see how it's close


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> You said atg also carlos deleon is that at cw


You're saying DeLeon is an ATG, but not HOF'er?


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> You're saying DeLeon is an ATG, but not HOF'er?


You put to much emphasis on the HOF what im saying is that DeLeon is an atg at the weight of cw, so not an atg in p4p sense but more in the sense of a atg at a certain (not very deep) weightclass


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Floyd's resume is deeper and better if we're being objective


No. What floyd has over holy is dominance and longevity. Thats why he could be considered greater than holy. He didnt pick of a bunch of losses like holy did. i really think holy has the better wins and deeper resume. Definitely close though


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> You put to much emphasis on the HOF what im saying is that DeLeon is an atg at the weight of cw, so not an atg in p4p sense but more in the sense of a atg at a certain (not very deep) weightclass


When trying to compare resume's how can one put too much emphasis on HOF'ers?

If not, we'll be forced to subjectively pick a part the resume of the party we're arguing against....


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> When trying to compare resume's how can one put too much emphasis on HOF'ers?
> 
> If not, we'll be forced to subjectively pick a part the resume of the party we're arguing against....


Because the HOF has a bunch of ppl that shouldnt be in it, like gatti for example or sly stallone.. de leon is an atg CW and much better than a lot of HOFers


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> No. What floyd has over holy is dominance and longevity. Thats why he could be considered greater than holy. He didnt pick of a bunch of losses like holy did. i really think holy has the better wins and deeper resume. Definitely close though


How can you say Holy's resume is deeper when you made this post "Tyson, Bowe, Ruiz, Qawi, Holmes, Ocasio, Moorer, Rahman, Mercer, Cooper, Douglas, Dokes". I can't even include Valuev because he lost the fight

I can name more guys that Floyd has beaten in my sleep.

I mean you mention a journeyman in Bert Cooper and Ocasio... Then you mention someone like John Ruiz, who was a shitty fighter, when Holy actually lost to the man 3 times. Bringing up Ruiz, does Holy no justice because he was well past his prime when he fought Ruiz. The Holmes victory was the equivalent of Canelo's over Mosley.

Listen, if you have to mention Bert Cooper as leverage when trying to make a point that someone's resume is greater than Floyd Mayweather Jr, you have a problem


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Holy didn't beat Lewis. The 2nd fight was a clear victory for Lewis. The only HOF'ers Holy beat are Qawi, Bowe, Foreman, Holmes, and Tyson.
> 
> I will also say this. If you're counting Holy's win over Holmes as "HOF", then I guess Canelo has also beaten a HOF'er in Shane Mosley even though Shane was far over the hill as was Holmes.
> 
> Floyd has still beaten more HOF'ers and HOF nominees than Holyfield. Not "almost beat", but actually beat


Nah the firat was clear, the second was.pretty close. I acore it to Lewis but I ve seen plenty have it to Holy over the years.

HoF is a bumch of bullshit, Gatti and McGuigan are in so ypu can put a whole lot of fighters at that level. DeLeon is par with Gatti, probably better tbh.

Aye Holmes was past hos best, still decent though - you didnt ask for prime ATGs though, again you can take a lot of guya out of resumes with that - Mosley would be gone for Floyd for starters.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Because the HOF has a bunch of ppl that shouldnt be in it, like gatti for example or sly stallone.. de leon is an atg CW and much better than a lot of HOFers


How can you shit on Gatti when you're up here trying to use Bert Cooper, Rahman and John Ruiz as justification to why Holy's resume is better than Floyd's?

Gatti is a GOD compared to those guys.

Yes, the HOF does have questionable guys that made it. But for the most part, they've gotten it right. Not perfect, as no professional sport has a perfect HOF, but they are on point for the most part.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> How can you say Holy's resume is deeper when you made this post "Tyson, Bowe, Ruiz, Qawi, Holmes, Ocasio, Moorer, Rahman, Mercer, Cooper, Douglas, Dokes". I can't even include Valuev because he lost the fight
> 
> I can name more guys that Floyd has beaten in my sleep.
> 
> ...


Cooper was a good banger, nothing more nothing less.. and a dangerous guy if you slept on him.

And valuev was clearly a win for holyfield. He got robbed. Pretty much everyone knows that. Ruiz he split with. Ocasio beat jimmy young and was a decent spoiler..

Tyson, bowe, qawi>floyds top 3 wins imo. Again its close if you compare resume but i give holy the edge


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Chatty said:


> - Mosley would be gone for Floyd for starters.


Mosley was coming off the 2nd biggest career win of his career outside of DLH when he fought Floyd.

Why would Mosley be off?


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Cooper was a good banger, nothing more nothing less.. and a dangerous guy if you slept on him.
> 
> And valuev was clearly a win for holyfield. He got robbed. Pretty much everyone knows that. Ruiz he split with. Ocasio beat jimmy young and was a decent spoiler..
> 
> Tyson, bowe, qawi>floyds top 3 wins imo. Again its close if you compare resume but i give holy the edge


OMG smdh


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> How can you shit on Gatti when you're up here trying to use Bert Cooper, Rahman and* John Ruiz* as justification to why Holy's resume is better than Floyd's?
> 
> Gatti is a GOD compared to those guys.
> 
> Yes, the HOF does have questionable guys that made it. But for the most part, they've gotten it right. Not perfect, as no professional sport has a perfect HOF, but they are on point for the most part.


 @dyna get in here, you have a knack for defending John Ruiz


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

tommygun711 said:


> Cooper was a good banger, nothing more nothing less.. and a dangerous guy if you slept on him.
> 
> *And valuev was clearly a win for holyfield.* He got robbed. Pretty much everyone knows that. Ruiz he split with. Ocasio beat jimmy young and was a decent spoiler..
> 
> Tyson, bowe, qawi>floyds top 3 wins imo. Again its close if you compare resume but i give holy the edge


making him the oldest champ ever (until Hopkins) at 48 years of age, quite a thing


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> OMG smdh


I feel the same way.. btw i wasnt saying ruiz rahman cooper and ocasio were great wins but they are good wins for holy, no need to blow things out of proportion


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> @*dyna* get in here, you have a knack for defending John Ruiz


But Holy lost to Ruiz when he was well past his prime. I just don't understand why people are even using Ruiz to supplement their argument for Holyfield? If anything, it hurts their argument

If you say Holy beat Valuev, then you have to say Ruiz beat Holy in the first and third fight. Can't have it both ways


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Mosley was coming off the 2nd biggest career win of his career outside of DLH when he fought Floyd.
> 
> Why would Mosley be off?


Hmmm. Maybe because mosley was coming off of a big lay off and would never have a significant win after floyd. He looked old against floyd.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> But Holy lost to Ruiz when he was well past his prime. I just don't understand why people are even using Ruiz to supplement their argument?
> 
> If you say Holy beat Valuev, then you have to say Ruiz beat Holy in the first fight. Can't have it both ways


Ruiz isnt a big win for holy lol. Its an average one. And holyfield won at least one of those fights.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> How can you shit on Gatti when you're up here trying to use Bert Cooper, Rahman and John Ruiz as justification to why Holy's resume is better than Floyd's?
> 
> Gatti is a GOD compared to those guys.
> 
> Yes, the HOF does have questionable guys that made it. But for the most part, they've gotten it right. Not perfect, as no professional sport has a perfect HOF, but they are on point for the most part.


What makes Gatti better than John Ruiz?
Holyfield came of a good effort against Lewis, Ruiz beat him.
Kirk Johnson, Rahman, Oquendo, first Valuev fight, McCline who almost stopped Sam Peter.

Who the fuck did he beat?
Ruiz was a good heavyweight, Arturo Gatti got brutally beaten down every time he was in there with a great.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Hmmm. Maybe because mosley was coming off of a big lay off and would never have a significant win after floyd. He looked old against floyd.


Floyd fought once in the last 2 and a half years when he fought Mosley. So many double standards with you

Everyone looks old against Floyd, nothing new there


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Ruiz isnt a big win for holy lol. Its an average one. And holyfield won at least one of those fights.


The last by a point.
Which is good because it shows that Holyfield always managed to improve in the rematch.

He was also doing better in the 2nd fight (compared to the first) until the knockdown.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Everyone looks old against Floyd, nothing new there


Lol, its not that he just looked old, he was old. He lost whatever momentum he had with the margacheato win ( a guy built for mosley to look good against) with that lay off.


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> But Holy lost to Ruiz when he was well past his prime. I just don't understand why people are even using Ruiz to supplement their argument for Holyfield? If anything, it hurts their argument
> 
> If you say Holy beat Valuev, then you have to say Ruiz beat Holy in the first and third fight. Can't have it both ways


Well he fought Ruiz 3 times, will have to rewatch 1, but 2 was clearly for Ruiz and 3 for Holy as far as i can remember.
i have to admite though a lot of Ruiz fights i scored against him for his negative style


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

dyna said:


> What makes Gatti better than John Ruiz?
> Holyfield came of a good effort against Lewis, Ruiz beat him.
> Kirk Johnson, Rahman, Oquendo, first Valuev fight, McCline who almost stopped Sam Peter.
> 
> ...


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> Well he fought Ruiz 3 times, will have to rewatch 1, but 2 was clearly for Ruiz and 3 for Holy as far as i can remember.
> i have to admite though a lot of Ruiz fights i scored against him for his negative style


It's fair to score the third to Holy, very close fight.
He also lost to Golota, though Powerpuncher disagrees with me there.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


>


And Ruiz improved after that fight.
He has his big wins all 4+ years after Tua.


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


>


Also remember this is the heavyweight division, overall the talent pool is smaller, you can't jump up and down and every punch can end it, these are generally now-a-days 220+ pound guys punching each other


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> L*ol, its not that he just looked old, he was old*. He lost whatever momentum he had with the margacheato win ( a guy built for mosley to look good against) with that lay off.


Mosley was 38 or 39 when he loss to Mayweather

Larry Holmes was 43 when he loss to Holyfield

George Foreman was 42 when he loss to Holyfield

Your logic is just horrible.

Please just stop


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

dyna said:


> And Ruiz improved after that fight.
> He has his big wins all 4+ years after Tua.


Bruh Ruiz is just horrible... I don't have time to explain something that's common knowledge


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Mosley was 38 or 39 when he loss to Mayweather
> 
> Larry Holmes was 43 when he loss to Holyfield
> 
> ...


Mosley didn't do a thing afterwards, Foreman won the biggest prize in sports, Holmes just schooled up-and-coming Olypmpian Mercer and fought a close fight with McCall afterwards


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> Mosley didn't do a thing afterwards, Foreman won the biggest prize in sports, Holmes just schooled up-and-coming Olypmpian Mercer and fought a close fight with McCall afterwards


It's not about what he did "after", it's about what he did leading into the fight which matters the most

Prior to losing to Floyd, Mosley was coming off of the 2nd biggest victory of his life. This is a fact.

People accused Floyd of ducking Mosley and the public begged for the fight to happen. Floyd gives the people what they want and it's "oh, he was old". Why was no one saying this before the fight when they were asking for it to happen?


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> Mosley didn't do a thing afterwards, Foreman won the biggest prize in sports, Holmes just schooled up-and-coming Olypmpian Mercer and fought a close fight with McCall afterwards


You talk about how people wrote Holyfield off against Tyson, but what about the people that wrote Mosley off against Margarito?

Why the double standard?


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Mosley was 38 or 39 when he loss to Mayweather
> 
> Larry Holmes was 43 when he loss to Holyfield
> 
> ...


Lol did i say any of those guys werent old tho? Stop making assumptions

And big george clearly had more in the tank than mosley did, you know given that he was able to beat moorer, briggs, cooney and stewart

Mosley comparably didnt do shit after unlike george.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Lol did i say any of those guys werent old tho? Stop making assumptions
> 
> And big george clearly had more in the tank than mosley did, you know given that he was able to beat moorer, briggs, cooney and stewart
> 
> Mosley comparably didnt do shit after unlike george.


Those were some of the biggest wins in Holy's career against fighters that were old...

Ok so now we're back to talking about accomplishments and not "physical age or someone looking physically old"?

Bruh, you're all over the place


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Bruh Ruiz is just horrible... I don't have time to explain something that's common knowledge


Only by those who are uneducated in the art of abstract fisticuffs.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Ok so now we're back to talking about accomplishments and not "physical age or someone looking old"?
> 
> Bruh, you're all over the place


You missed my point again lol.

Big george was "younger" in "ring years" than mosley was, this can be attributed to foreman's layoff after his loss to jimmy young in '77, which helped his longevity. and based on what george was able to do after his fight with holyfield, compared to what mosley did after mayweather. Its safe to say that foreman had more to offer while mosley was pretty much done as an elite fighter after mayweather.

I also disagree that mosleys second best win was margacheato. Vargas x2 were better wins and arguably mayorga was. Possiblt leija and collazo too... depending on how you scored the razor close cotto fight that could be consideed a better win than margacheato. The lay off is a factor to consider too because mosley was likely rusty and old against floyd.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> You missed my point again lol.
> 
> Big george was "younger" in "ring years" than mosley was, this can be attributed to foreman's layoff after his loss to jimmy young in '77, which helped his longevity. and based on what george was able to do after his fight with holyfield, compared to what mosley did after mayweather. Its safe to say that foreman had more to offer while mosley was pretty much done as an elite fighter after mayweather.
> 
> I also disagree that mosleys second best win was margacheato. Vargas x2 were better wins and arguably mayorga was. Possiblt leija and collazo too... depending on how you scored the razor close cotto fight that could be consideed a better win than margacheato. The lay off is a factor to consider too because mosley was likely rusty and old against floyd.


I'm talking about what fighter Floyd was fighting in Mosley.

What does Floyd have to do with Mosley vs Pacquiao/Canelo/Pablo Cano, etc?

What does the fight that happened May 2010 have to do with anything that happen thereafter?

That's like me saying Winky Wright's win over Mosley shouldn't mean anything because Mosley loss to Vernon Forrest. Luckily for Wright that Mosley won after that or else his fights against Shane wouldn't have meant shit.

Poor logic on your part


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Il
> What does the fight that happened May 2010 have to do with anything that happen thereafter?


You can gauge what mosley had left by looking at mosleys fights after mayweather. He looked like shit against floyd and he looked like shit in his fights after. Never a significant win after floyd. While beating up marg was a good win and one of mosley's best, it was against a 1 dimensional fighter who was made to order for mosley. Plus the lay off wasnt good for mosley either.


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> You can gauge what mosley had left by looking at mosleys fights after mayweather. He looked like shit against floyd and he looked like shit in his fights after. Never a significant win after floyd. While beating up marg was a good win and one of mosley's best, it was against a 1 dimensional fighter who was made to order for mosley. Plus the lay off wasnt good for mosley either.


Who's to say Floyd didn't damage Mosley's confidence?

Who's to say Mosley wasn't in the best shape of his life against Floyd?

Has anyone hurt Mayweather worse than Mosley did in the 2nd round?

Were people fearing for Mosley's life in any other fight like they were against Margarito? Of course not. Marg was his 2nd best win.

Lol @ Vargas or Mayorga being better wins than Margarito.

You judging someone's performance years later has nothing to do with the fighter that was in the ring May 2010.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Mosley was coming off the 2nd biggest career win of his career outside of DLH when he fought Floyd.
> 
> Why would Mosley be off?


He took 18 months off at a point in his career when he was on the slide and 38 year old. He looked like crap ever since, he drew with Sergio Mora in his next fight, Sergio Mora.

Margarito was a great win but it made Mosley look better than he was at that point, Margo was feeling the weight and had been caught with dodgy wraps moments before. Watch Mosley-Mayorga and tell me that was anywhere near a prime Mosley, he had to pull out a last round KO. Mayorga aint a bad fighter but a prime Mosley wouldnt have struggled near that much.

Holmes beat Ray Mercer the fight before and looked good and gave McCall fits after.

Its a very fair comparison.


BoxingGenius27 said:


> Mosley was coming off the 2nd biggest career win of his career outside of DLH when he fought Floyd.
> 
> Why would Mosley be off?


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

BoxingGenius27 said:


> Who's to say Floyd didn't damage Mosley's confidence?
> 
> Who's to say Mosley wasn't in the best shape of his life against Floyd?
> 
> ...


Margarito was the second best fighter Mosley beat. This is so obvious it hurts.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> Margarito was the second best fighter Mosley beat. This is so obvious it hurts.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It's remarkable the length some people go to try and support their case


----------



## BoxingGenius27 (Jun 8, 2013)

tommygun711 said:


> Vargas x2 were better wins and arguably mayorga was. Possiblt leija and collazo too... .


Who did Vargas, Mayorga, Leija or Collazo beat after they loss to Mosley?

1. After Vargas loss to Mosley, he NEVER won another fight

2. After losing to Mosley, Mayorga loss to Cotto and never had another significant fight thereafter

3. Leija???

4. After Mosley, Collazo's best win was Victor Ortiz coming off 2 consecutive KO losses

Like I said, please just stop with this logic

I'm convinced you will say anything no matter how crazy it sounds to prove your logic right.... Very shameful at this point


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

Fucking interesting debate guys. :clap: Glad I played a role in this.

BTW Anyone who says Ali is not a Tier 1 ATG please come at me, for me it is simply undebateable.


----------



## TSOL (Dec 15, 2013)

top 25


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

Even though Mayweather's victory over Pacquiao is somewhat tainted by timing and shoulder, I don't think you can really underestimate its significance. It means you can drive a triumph through the space between them where previously it was a struggle to pass a piece of paper. I believe it's an enormous enhancement of Mayweather's ranking. And by enormous, I mean enormous.


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

Ivan Drago said:


> Fucking interesting debate guys. :clap: Glad I played a role in this.
> 
> BTW Anyone who says Ali is not a Tier 1 ATG please come at me, for me it is simply undebateable.


Tier II broski :cheers

The guys above him beat more champions, more ATG's, more "ranked" guys and crucially, they did it in more weight divisions.

Greb's resume at LHW is better than Ali's at HW. And Greb also has one of the best MW resumes of all time, and a very fine one at HW. See the difference?

Still, both are great, great fighters.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Ivan Drago said:


> Fucking interesting debate guys. :clap: Glad I played a role in this.
> 
> BTW Anyone who says Ali is not a Tier 1 ATG please come at me, for me it is simply undebateable.


He definitely is a tier 1 ATG. Such a deep resume. Wins over multiple ATGs. I dont see how he isnt


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

McGrain said:


> Tier II broski :cheers
> 
> The guys above him beat more champions, more ATG's, more "ranked" guys and crucially, they did it in more weight divisions.
> 
> ...


The weight division thing can't be held against him though. Surely?

And even with all that, look at Ali in the ring and prime. Is there a single boxer in history you favour against him? Maybe a handful you can debate, but he is a H2H monster who done things in the ring no HW had ever or will ever do again to that level.

For me he is the no.1 H2H HW all time.
No.1 HW resume all time.
No.1 on ability, Louis is technically better but the style and ring IQ of Ali has to be factored in when judging ability IMO.

On the flipside we have never seen Greb so I guess you can say you can't hold that against him but am I going to get into a debate with you about Harry Greb? Absolutely not, I'm going to shamelessly duck you. There is room for both at the pinnacle of the sport.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

I think one weight dominance is as good as weight hopping tbh. In fact I think its harder to dominate one division over a long period of time than it is to weight hop.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> I think one weight dominance is as good as weight hopping tbh. In fact I think its harder to dominate one division over a long period of time than it is to weight hop.


Espescially considering Ali's division was very deep. It cant be considered a negative against Ali that he was just a HW


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

tommygun711 said:


> Espescially considering Ali's division was very deep. It cant be considered a negative against Ali that he was just a HW


I agree - I guess it all comes down to each run as some runs of dominance in a division aren't that impressive (say Navaez) but some weight hopping achievements aren't either (see Broner).

You can't say because he achieved in so many weights its better than one, all depends ont he fighters you fought. Wieght hopping looks good on paper but it doesn't hold into account that (more so in this day and age) it allows fighters for draining down and rehydrating to higher divisions for unfair advantage, with multiple belts into the equation it also allows boxers to pick their paths more and take easier fights as opposed to fighting the best guys on a more consistent basis.


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

tommygun711 said:


> He definitely is a tier 1 ATG. Such a deep resume. Wins over multiple ATGs. I dont see how he isnt


For starters, look at the fights with ATGs: (1) Liston was hurt and aging the first time and Walcott butchered the rematch, should've been an NC or DQ. This must be the only fight in history where the guy beats the count and is up and fighting and then has the ref change their mind. (2) Frazier beat Ali down in the fight that mattered and (3) Foreman was a raw product who many fighters, namely Jimmy Young, werecapable of exposing.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

Ivan Drago said:


> The weight division thing can't be held against him though. Surely?


That's the wrong way to look at things IMO, specifically too much from the point of view of Ali. It's not that it's being held against him, it's that Greb is being properly creditted. A MW, he is one of the greatest LHW's ever to have lived, and was one of the most significant HW's of his day. These are astonishing p4p achievements and should be treated as such.



> And even with all that, look at Ali in the ring and prime. Is there a single boxer in history you favour against him? Maybe a handful you can debate, but he is a H2H monster who done things in the ring no HW had ever or will ever do again to that level.
> 
> For me he is the no.1 H2H HW all time.


I think I'd agree with you that he's Tier I purely on h2h ability, yeah. I even thing that p4p judging more purely on skilset and ability he is very, very near the top if not quite Tier I which is absurd for a heavyweight. On a list that heavily and consistently weighed h2h I could see him Tier I, aye.



> On the flipside we have never seen Greb so I guess you can say you can't hold that against him but am I going to get into a debate with you about Harry Greb? Absolutely not, I'm going to shamelessly duck you. There is room for both at the pinnacle of the sport.


Langford is another good example. Beats Gans while a teenager at 140lbs, beats Harry Wills at 210lbs when a mature male. But it's more than that - I think that if you line up the very top guys best wins and Ali's best wins, the top tier guys come off better under any circumstances. Take Ezzard Charles - he beat Moore three times. That's like Ali beating Louis three times. Think about what that would do for his standing!


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

tommygun711 said:


> Espescially considering Ali's division was very deep. It cant be considered a negative against Ali that he was just a HW


I think heavyweight is deeper than it generally gets credit for on ESB, and it might even be deeper than light-heavy. I'm about 90% sure that welter, light and middle will all prove to be deeper though. Middle is the one that stands the best direct comparison historically and it is way deeper I reckon.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

McGrain said:


> I think heavyweight is deeper than it generally gets credit for on ESB, and it might even be deeper than light-heavy. I'm about 90% sure that welter, light and middle will all prove to be deeper though. Middle is the one that stands the best direct comparison historically and it is way deeper I reckon.


It depends on era as well. Ali probably fought in the greatest heavyweight era of all time. Just because Middleweight is deeper over all doesn't mean anything if you say compared it to Hopkins era which was decent but still way poorer than ALi's heavyweight era.


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

Chatty said:


> It depends on era as well. Ali probably fought in the greatest heavyweight era of all time. Just because Middleweight is deeper over all doesn't mean anything if you say compared it to Hopkins era which was decent but still way poorer than ALi's heavyweight era.


That's true, but one thing generally does follow the other. Here are the top 100 guys I had Ali beating when I did that list:

Joe Frazier (Top Ten), George Foreman (Top Ten), Sonny Liston (Top Ten), Floyd Patterson (#18), Ken Norton (#22), Jimmy Young (#33), Jimmy Ellis (#36), Ernie Terrell (#37), Archie Moore (#38), Zora Folley (#43), Jerry Quarry (#44), Ron Lyle (#46), Earnie Shavers (#54), Oscar Bonavena (#70), George Chuvalo (#82)

This is pretty astonishing. If anything, I reckon the heavys 66-76 get lowballed these days. Can you imagine, though, what Henry Armstrong's list would look like? Featherweight, lightweight, welterweight all?


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

McGrain said:


> That's the wrong way to look at things IMO, specifically too much from the point of view of Ali. It's not that it's being held against him, it's that Greb is being properly creditted. A MW, he is one of the greatest LHW's ever to have lived, and was one of the most significant HW's of his day. These are astonishing p4p achievements and should be treated as such.


Of course guys who achieved ridiculous feats when going up in weight should have that factored in, but to use it as a justification for them being tier 1 and Ali not is unfair because he was a HW who can't go up. The criteria should be a little different to compensate for the disadvantage HW's have in that they can't really prove definitive P4P greatness by beating bigger guys.



> I think I'd agree with you that he's Tier I purely on h2h ability, yeah. I even thing that p4p judging more purely on skilset and ability he is very, very near the top if not quite Tier I which is absurd for a heavyweight. On a list that heavily and consistently weighed h2h I could see him Tier I, aye.


Excellent.



> Langford is another good example. Beats Gans while a teenager at 140lbs, beats Harry Wills at 210lbs when a mature male. But it's more than that - I think that if you line up the very top guys best wins and Ali's best wins, the top tier guys come off better under any circumstances. Take Ezzard Charles - he beat Moore three times. That's like Ali beating Louis three times. Think about what that would do for his standing!


Yeah Charles is a phenom, a tier 1 lock. Ali has 3 of the top 10 HW's of all time on his resume and, I don't know if this makes a difference, he was a huge underdog vs two of them.


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

Ivan Drago said:


> Of course guys who achieved ridiculous feats when going up in weight should have that factored in, but to use it as a justification for them being tier 1 and Ali not is unfair because he was a HW who can't go up. The criteria should be a little different to compensate for the disadvantage HW's have in that they can't really prove definitive P4P greatness by beating bigger guys.


Fair enough but there are two things I think it's worth your thinking about before you put this to bed. 1) if Ali was the GOAT at heavy and top 10 at light-heavy, wouldn't you be pushing that at me in this discussion as a major factor in ranking him tier I? And 2) is it more impressive to defeat many of the greatest light-heavies AND middles in a stacked era or just the top heavies?



> Yeah Charles is a phenom, a tier 1 lock. Ali has 3 of the top 10 HW's of all time on his resume and, I don't know if this makes a difference, he was a huge underdog vs two of them.


It certainly does, but how about this: the highest ranked true heavyweight that Ali defeated that made my top 100 p4p (which i'm not suggesting is the be all and end all) is Joe Frazier. He was #92 . This may be low, but I absolutely can't see him higher than 81, say. Now look at Armstrong. He utterly thrashed Barney Ross ranked #14 , can't be lower than 20.


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

McGrain said:


> Fair enough but there are two things I think it's worth your thinking about before you put this to bed. 1) if Ali was the GOAT at heavy and top 10 at light-heavy, wouldn't you be pushing that at me in this discussion as a major factor in ranking him tier I? And 2) is it more impressive to defeat many of the greatest light-heavies AND middles in a stacked era or just the top heavies?


1) Of course. 2? It depends on the era, and Ali fought and beat the greatest HW era of all, and done it in a completely unique style for a heavyweight.



> It certainly does, but how about this: the highest ranked true heavyweight that Ali defeated that made my top 100 p4p (which i'm not suggesting is the be all and end all) is Joe Frazier. He was #92 . This may be low, but I absolutely can't see him higher than 81, say. Now look at Armstrong. He utterly thrashed Barney Ross ranked #14 , can't be lower than 20.


Yeah his absolute greatest win isn't there with Armstrong or Charles perhaps.

But are Frazier and Foreman far behind Basillo and Lamotta as best wins? Or Philidelphia Jack O'brien and Nonpareil Jack Dempsey?

Far enough behind, if they are even behind, that a legitimate case can't be made for Ali having similar level best wins to other tier 1 guys?


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

Ivan Drago said:


> 1) Of course. 2? It depends on the era, and Ali fought and beat the greatest HW era of all, and done it in a completely unique style for a heavyweight.


Yes, but all the guys under consideration for top tier fought in these astonishing neighbourhoods.



> Yeah his absolute greatest win isn't there with Armstrong or Charles perhaps.
> 
> But are Frazier and Foreman far behind Basillo and Lamotta as best wins? Or Philidelphia Jack O'brien and Nonpareil Jack Dempsey?
> 
> Far enough behind, if they are even behind, that a legitimate case can't be made for Ali having similar level best wins to other tier 1 guys?


No, I don't think so, but the list of guys Robinson picked off the top 100 list is enormous, and he did it in three different weight divisions, all of which were thriving.


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

McGrain said:


> Yes, but all the guys under consideration for top tier fought in these astonishing neighbourhoods.
> 
> No, I don't think so, but the list of guys Robinson picked off the top 100 list is enormous, and he did it in three different weight divisions, all of which were thriving.


Yeah Robinson was bad choice perhaps. He's on the cusp, maybe the cold hard facts just keep him out but whenever I watch him I can't not have him in there.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

The discussion shouldn't be where he ranks among the greatest boxers as he's clearly the #1 .
It's where he ranks among the greatest athletes ever.
His dominance is only matched by the likes of Phil Taylor but how often has Taylor beaten a 6 time world champion like Robert Guerrero.
Truly a top 5 athlete of all time.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> For starters, look at the fights with ATGs: (1) Liston was hurt and aging the first time and Walcott butchered the rematch, should've been an NC or DQ. This must be the only fight in history where the guy beats the count and is up and fighting and then has the ref change their mind. (2) Frazier beat Ali down in the fight that mattered and (3) Foreman was a raw product who many fighters, namely Jimmy Young, werecapable of exposing.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


lol this is such horse shit.

1) Liston may or may not have been at his best, but what I do know is that Liston was coming off of wins against Floyd Patterson, probably the best wins of Liston's entire career next to Cleveland Williams. Liston was "the man" at the time and Ali took him apart. Ali deserves credit for those fights, period. Liston was an ATG and a destroyer, nobody saw Ali winning that fight (barring Galento) and nobody expected Ali to dominate Liston like he did.

2) Frazier won the first fight, but I remember when I scored it I had it 8-7 for Ali, IMO it was a razor close fight and a lot of this had to do with Ali's early lead. That isn't a damaging fight to Ali's legacy at all. Ali went on to win both rematches and believe me, Manila mattered just as much as FOTC.

3) It's funny how people call Foreman a raw product or a limited slugger, the reality is he was a destroyer just like Sonny Liston and nobody in the division at the time was capable of beating Foreman except for Ali. Again everyone expected Foreman to take Ali out. Foreman is an ATG win and better than any win on most people's resumes.

Jimmy Young was a very talented pure boxer, and he deserves credit for his win against Foreman, but I don't think he neccesarily beat a prime Foreman. At least mentally, Foreman wasn't 100% against Young.


----------



## Knox Harrington (Apr 7, 2014)

tommygun711 said:


> lol this is such horse shit.
> 
> 1) Liston may or may not have been at his best, but what I do know is that Liston was coming off of wins against Floyd Patterson, probably the best wins of Liston's entire career next to Cleveland Williams. Liston was "the man" at the time and Ali took him apart. Ali deserves credit for those fights, period. Liston was an ATG and a destroyer, nobody saw Ali winning that fight (barring Galento) and nobody expected Ali to dominate Liston like he did.
> 
> ...


1. Ali didn't dominate s hit. They were splitting rounds in the first fight before Liston quit citing a shoulder injury. The rematch was a farce. Liston legitimately was dropped, but beat the count and was up fighting again. Maybe he was on his way to getting stopped, but Walcott ruined that fight.
2. Your scorecard sucks and nobody agrees with that.
3. I don't rate Foreman as high as others. He had nowhere near Liston's fundamentals and benefitted from two perfect match ups in Norton and Frazier. Many boxers could've exposed him. Lyle also showed his limitations too.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Slick Ric (Apr 7, 2015)

dyna said:


> The discussion shouldn't be where he ranks among the greatest boxers as he's clearly the #1 .
> It's where he ranks among the greatest athletes ever.
> His dominance is only matched by the likes of Phil Taylor but how often has Taylor beaten a 6 time world champion like Robert Guerrero.
> Truly a top 5 athlete of all time.


Except he's clearly not the greatest... Not by a long shot.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Knox Harrington said:


> 1. Ali didn't dominate s hit. They were splitting rounds in the first fight before Liston quit citing a shoulder injury. The rematch was a farce. Liston legitimately was dropped, but beat the count and was up fighting again. Maybe he was on his way to getting stopped, but Walcott ruined that fight.
> 2. Your scorecard sucks and nobody agrees with that.
> 3. I don't rate Foreman as high as others. He had nowhere near Liston's fundamentals and benefitted from two perfect match ups in Norton and Frazier. Many boxers could've exposed him. Lyle also showed his limitations too.


1. Ali controlled the fight. Outboxed Liston. Psychologically mind fucked him. and I don't care what you say, basically. Everyone knows Ali owned Liston in the first fight. 
2. Still, claiming that the other 2 fights "don't matter" is bullshit. Ali won the series, and that's that... The first one was a close fight that Joe probably won based on the 15th round KD.
3. It's easy to say in hindsight that he benefited from perfect match ups but the reality is that Norton and Frazier were two top level HWs, Foreman was a fuckin killer and an ATG. This isn't up for debate really, it's an ATG win.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Chatty said:


> I think one weight dominance is as good as weight hopping tbh. In fact I think its harder to dominate one division over a long period of time than it is to weight hop.


idk, Duran, Leonard, Hearns > Hagler imo


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> idk, Duran, Leonard, Hearns > Hagler imo


I dont think thats what he meant or was trying to say. Its a case-to-case type thing. Even if some people think those 3 are greater than Marvin, in defense of Marvin, hes the only guy in history that has a claim to beating all 3 of them.. depending on how you saw the leonard fight :deal


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> idk, Duran, Leonard, Hearns > Hagler imo


Sometimes obviously, it gives you an option to fight more names but I think it may actually be harder to stay put and dominate a division for a decade - theres not a whole lot of people been able to do it.

You can make an argument for hagler being above Hearns as well imo. Haglers resume is pretty damn solid and even before he became champion he had beat a lot of very good fighters.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Sometimes obviously, it gives you an option to fight more names but I think it may actually be harder to stay put and dominate a division for a decade - theres not a whole lot of people been able to do it.
> 
> You can make an argument for hagler being above Hearns as well imo. Haglers resume is pretty damn solid and even before he became champion he had beat a lot of very good fighters.


yeah i got ya and i actually miss seeing a fighter dominate a division for years and years. Weight jumping is getting worn out nowadays.


----------



## Takamura (Sep 6, 2013)

Floyd must be the only fighter in history to beat a fellow ATG fighter by UD and not get a boost in ranking lol. Fuck it tho I can't say personally I'm to young (21) to have seen really anybody pre Pernell (who I don't think should be rated higher than Floyd personally)


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> Floyd's in the top 20 now :rasta He and Pernell aren't as far apart as some people would like to think





MichiganWarrior said:


> 20-25. Around Pernell, Chavez and Roy


He crossed up and broke Chavez's ankles AI3-style now as far as ATG rankings. Still think Taylor was the best fighter at the times fought on either of their W ledgers. Achievements and shit between their opponents won't change much in how I feel about that but it was on some 'by the skin of his teeth' type shit, not necessarily a great performance per se. It showed some great qualities though.

Maybe I'm just overly pessimistic due to shit not related to boxing, but Pacquiao's effort looked straight ass. That's after taking into consideration and crediting Floyd's ability to drop practically everyone's output that he faces. He fought exactly like imagined and he would to secure the W, but he was there to win and could've turned it up several notches, it's Pacquiao's fault we didn't see it.

"800 punches! 1000 punches!" :rofl Opportunity of a Lifetime in front of him and he doesn't take the initiative. Hardly even once. Yeah, that shoulder looked so debilitated, flailing his arms in the air at the weigh-in celebrating his pay day. Enjoy your cash out.... while it lasts, you fat head little cunt.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> He crossed up and broke Chavez's ankles AI3-style now as far as ATG rankings. Still think Taylor was the best fighter at the times fought on either of their W ledgers. Achievements and shit between their opponents won't change much in how I feel about that but it was on some 'by the skin of his teeth' type shit, not necessarily a great performance per se. It showed some great qualities though.
> 
> Maybe I'm just overly pessimistic due to shit not related to boxing, but Pacquiao's effort looked straight ass. That's after taking into consideration and crediting Floyd's ability to drop practically everyone's output that he faces. He fought exactly like imagined and he would to secure the W, but he was there to win and could've turned it up several notches, it's Pacquiao's fault we didn't see it.
> 
> "800 punches! 1000 punches!" :rofl Opportunity of a Lifetime in front of him and he doesn't take the initiative. Hardly even once. Yeah, that shoulder looked so debilitated, flailing his arms in the air at the weigh-in celebrating his pay day. Enjoy your cash out.... while it lasts, you fat head little cunt.


Lmao exactly how i feel. Pacquiao rolled over for Mayweather.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> He crossed up and broke Chavez's ankles AI3-style now as far as ATG rankings. Still think Taylor was the best fighter at the times fought on either of their W ledgers. Achievements and shit between their opponents won't change much in how I feel about that but it was on some 'by the skin of his teeth' type shit, not necessarily a great performance per se. It showed some great qualities though.
> 
> Maybe I'm just overly pessimistic due to shit not related to boxing, but Pacquiao's effort looked straight ass. That's after taking into consideration and crediting Floyd's ability to drop practically everyone's output that he faces. He fought exactly like imagined and he would to secure the W, but he was there to win and could've turned it up several notches, it's Pacquiao's fault we didn't see it.
> 
> "800 punches! 1000 punches!" :rofl Opportunity of a Lifetime in front of him and he doesn't take the initiative. Hardly even once. Yeah, that shoulder looked so debilitated, flailing his arms in the air at the weigh-in celebrating his pay day. Enjoy your cash out.... while it lasts, you fat head little cunt.


yeah I've been here for the past week saying how crappy that gameplan was and how pitiful Pacquiao's effort was vs Floyd. He looked like he was giving up after round 1. To go off of what you say, Mayweather did what he had to win, but could have done more if needed. Ariza and others from Mayweather's team said they were expecting a different, more aggressive Pacquiao.

How can those clowns watch Maidana I and Canelo and come to the conclusion that they need to fight more like Canelo. Yeah I guess tasting a few of these had him shook, but damn. He doesn't deserve a damn rematch. Every other fighter wouldn't get one with 10-2 and 8-4 scorecards. I personally had it 9-3 









My condolences to you man btw


----------



## Powerpuncher (May 20, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Group 1:Sugar Ray Robinson, Harry Greb, Ezzard Charles, Henry Armstrong, Sam Langford, Roberto Duran, Benny Leonard, Sugar Ray Leonard, Willie Pep, Archie Moore.
> 
> Group 2: Muhammad Ali, Barney Ross, Joe Gans, Tony Canzoneri, Mickey Walker, Julio Cesar Chavez, Joe Louis, Bob Fitzsimmons, Pernell Whitaker, Packey MacFarland
> 
> ...


It's all opinion and criteria but I don't see what Ross, Armstrong, Saddler, Benny Leonard, Pep, Gans have done that Floyd hasn't if we're comparing fighters from similar weight classes.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

Powerpuncher said:


> It's all opinion and criteria but I don't see what Ross, Armstrong, Benny Leonard, Pep, Gans have done that Floyd hasn't if we're comparing fighters from similar weight classes.


Ross made 44 defenses of his title without throwing a single punch.

While being dead from tuberculosis.


----------



## Powerpuncher (May 20, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> Duran is argubally the greatest lightweight of all time and thats saying something. Beat guys like Marcel, DeJesus etc and avenged all his defeats before moving on to the ww division were he defeated the no2 ww of all time in Leonard. After that his career slipped a little but still holds quite a few very good victories, even holding the 168 belt by defeating Barkley who just defeated Hearns. And hold is own with Hagler despite being the natural smaller man.
> 
> Do I really have to explain why Ali is a top 10 atg? Really?


If Duran is the best LW, it isn't because of his LW work. Marcel was at FW and his overall LW resume isn't the greatest DeJesus and Buchanan aside he isn't ripped up trees.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Powerpuncher said:


> It's all opinion and criteria but I don't see what Ross, Armstrong, Saddler, Benny Leonard, Pep, Gans have done that Floyd hasn't if we're comparing fighters from similar weight classes.


They dominated but in stronger eras where they fought more greats imo.


----------



## Powerpuncher (May 20, 2013)

Lester1583 said:


> Ross made 44 defenses of his title without throwing a single punch.
> 
> While being dead from tuberculosis.


It doesn't count unless he played a game of basketball before the fight


----------



## Powerpuncher (May 20, 2013)

Chatty said:


> They dominated but in stronger eras where they fought more greats imo.


I don't think they were stronger eras, again it's opinion I suppose, so if you think that ok. But some of their contemparies look pretty average on film to me and Saddler while a physical beast with a heck of a dig and Bivins looks far from great.

Pep didn't dominate once he ran into Saddler and ofcourse before that came up short against Angott. The only man I mentioned who'd given up similar weight to FMJ is Armstrong. Who was steered clear of the best WWs. Both Pep and Leonard came up short moving up a couple of division although controversially in Lenord's case

Ross outright came out as the victor of his era but it saw losses to his rivals and was dominated by Armstrong past his prime but still in his 20s

Also you have guys like Walker who wasn't dominant in any weight class he fought at. He shouldn't have been MW Champion either winning it from Tiger Flowers via a robbery.


----------



## ChampionsForever (Jun 5, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> yeah I've been here for the past week saying how crappy that gameplan was and how pitiful Pacquiao's effort was vs Floyd. He looked like he was giving up after round 1. To go off of what you say, Mayweather did what he had to win, but could have done more if needed. Ariza and others from Mayweather's team said they were expecting a different, more aggressive Pacquiao.
> 
> How can those clowns watch Maidana I and Canelo and come to the conclusion that they need to fight more like Canelo. Yeah I guess tasting a few of these had him shook, but damn. He doesn't deserve a damn rematch. Every other fighter wouldn't get one with 10-2 and 8-4 scorecards. I personally had it 9-3
> 
> ...


Does a punch even land in that GIF?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Powerpuncher said:


> I don't think they were stronger eras, again it's opinion I suppose, so if you think that ok. But some of their contemparies look pretty average on film to me and Saddler while a physical beast with a heck of a dig and Bivins looks far from great.
> 
> Pep didn't dominate once he ran into Saddler and ofcourse before that came up short against Angott. The only man I mentioned who'd given up similar weight to FMJ is Armstrong. Who was steered clear of the best WWs. Both Pep and Leonard came up short moving up a couple of division although controversially in Lenord's case
> 
> ...


I dont do era to era comparisons in terms of film. Boxing is constantly evolving so I don't think its fair to do so. I prefer to compare the boxers to their contemporaries of the day and how good they were in said era and judge them on that. I just think era to era comparisons of film doesn't really work because whilst they are the same sport everything in them has changed (well on comparisons of this amount of time frame anyway - FLoyd/Pernell for example is fine because they can be directly compared) - styles were different, more rounds, different gloves, different rules, we always take fighters forward but dont send them back and say how a guy from our era would do in theres living like them and with less info on nutrition/S&C/Supplements etc (not that I think all are better now mind).

Anyway you get the point on that. So I can't compare Leonard to Floyd - pointless to do so, I instead look at how good they were in their own era and compared to fighters of their time, who they fought, when they fought them, longevity (not just in years but in fights/rounds), risk factor etc.

It would take me ages to go through it all in depth and I aint got time at the minute but I might make a thread sometime in the next few weeks going through it and we can discuss it then.

TBF to pep by the time he fought Saddler he'd had over 130 fights over 8 years and was involved in a plane crash, obviously Saddler had had a lot as well but it wasnt the best version of Pep by that point plus Pep had dealt with a lot of good fighters. The Angott fight is disputable, its not a clear cut victory for Angott and could well be argued for Pep (obviously not by us cause theirs no footage).

Armstrongs is clear, he might have been steered from some at WW but he still fought everyone who was great from his weight class and still ebat some very good welters. You can make the same argument for Floyd because he aint fought a top welter int heir prime imo (might not be all his fault but it happened none the less).

I dont care about losses, I don't give them points for them but I wouldn't take away from boxers for challenging themselves to the max. This sin't a knock on Floyd but his career (more so from LWW onwards) has been carefully matched, its an indictment on boxing in the 21st century but he's never fully (or even had the chance to fully) test himself against an elite boxer in their prime - its unfortunate for both him and us as fans but again I can' reward him for what never happened.

The only footage of Bivins is from after he was put in a coma whilst serving in the armed forces and came back mentally shot to bits, again unfortunate we don't have the prime footage but he possibly has the greatest winning run in history and we do have footage of opponents, fight reports etc to go on.

Walkers era was ultra stacked, you dont need to dominate an era like that to come out as a true great - his main rival in the consensus 1/2 GOAT and he fought a number of guys who would be ranked in the top 50 ATG's and prospered.


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

ChampionsForever said:


> Does a punch even land in that GIF?


Pacquaio didn't see it either :franklin

I guess, him and his fans share similar deficiencies.


----------



## ChampionsForever (Jun 5, 2013)

browsing said:


> Pacquaio didn't see it either :franklin
> 
> I guess, him and his fans share similar deficiencies.


:lol: Pac blocks it with his left glove, his head doesn't even fling back.


----------



## Lester1583 (Jun 30, 2012)

If only Pac had the skills of his fellow country man, the unbreakable Penalosa.


----------



## browsing (Jun 9, 2013)

ChampionsForever said:


> :lol: Pac blocks it with his left glove, his head doesn't even fling back.


 *Since when has Pac's left glove blocked anything when he was lunging in* :deadmanny :rlydoe: *:gbrones If that was the case, this dude wouldn't be as susceptible to them right hand leads as his ass is :fuckoff ,* Pac's head clearly and sharply jerks the south-west - because he's hit with that sweet punch. He struggles with being timed and clearly your eyes do too. :baz The judges didn't miss it tho bama


----------



## 2manyusernames (Jun 14, 2012)

If Pacquiao isn't on Floyd's level, and Pacquiao got given a complete schooling by Floyd, how does beating him cement his legacy as an all time great?

If Pacquiao is really that bad, it doesn't make sense that Floyd's now a lock in for #20 based on beating him. You Floyd fanatics sure are a weird and contradictory bunch.

The more you bash on Pacquiao, the less Floyd's win counts for anything meaningful. Yet the more you big up Pacquiao, the more Floyd's win IS meaningful. I believe that's called cognitive dissonance. You want to big up Floyd, but you don't want to big up Manny, yet the two need to go hand in hand of you're making claims about #10 ATG based on beating him.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Lmao exactly how i feel. Pacquiao rolled over for Mayweather.





bballchump11 said:


> yeah I've been here for the past week saying how crappy that gameplan was and how pitiful Pacquiao's effort was vs Floyd. He looked like he was giving up after round 1. To go off of what you say, Mayweather did what he had to win, but could have done more if needed. Ariza and others from Mayweather's team said they were expecting a different, more aggressive Pacquiao.
> 
> How can those clowns watch Maidana I and Canelo and come to the conclusion that they need to fight more like Canelo. Yeah I guess tasting a few of these had him shook, but damn. He doesn't deserve a damn rematch. Every other fighter wouldn't get one with 10-2 and 8-4 scorecards. I personally had it 9-3
> 
> ...


I enjoyed the Canelo performance so much more. He was styling hard on that motherfucker, knocking his dome in every direction and backing him up at several different points of the fight. Tons of highlight reel shit in that one. It was one of the greatest memories I'll take from Floyd's career. This thing on May 2nd was pretty blase, I dunno. Maybe my memory is just hazy from it and I wasn't all there, I just don't remember too many

:sxane

Type Moments like he ordinarily serves up.

(And thanks Zach, this is the most fucked up thing I've yet to experience in life)


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> I enjoyed the Canelo performance so much more. He was styling hard on that motherfucker, knocking his dome in every direction and backing him up at several different points of the fight. Tons of highlight reel shit in that one. It was one of the greatest memories I'll take from Floyd's career. This thing on May 2nd was pretty blase, I dunno. Maybe my memory is just hazy from it and I wasn't all there, I just don't remember too many
> 
> :sxane
> 
> ...


yeah I know what you mean. The Canelo fight showed his full toolbox there. I'll give Manny credit in this fight. His handspeed is very fast and he can counter pretty well. Whenever Floyd wanted to get come forward or get too aggressive, Manny did a good job at making Floyd pay for it. That's why I don't mind how Mayweather fight. I was actually yelling at the screen for him not to get too aggressive :yep
Mayweather noted himself that the only times Manny got off was when he stayed still.

I wish Manny did more though in order to bring more out of Floyd though.


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

2manyusernames said:


> If Pacquiao isn't on Floyd's level, and Pacquiao got given a complete schooling by Floyd, how does beating him cement his legacy as an all time great?
> 
> If Pacquiao is really that bad, it doesn't make sense that Floyd's now a lock in for #20 based on beating him. You Floyd fanatics sure are a weird and contradictory bunch.
> 
> The more you bash on Pacquiao, the less Floyd's win counts for anything meaningful. Yet the more you big up Pacquiao, the more Floyd's win IS meaningful. I believe that's called cognitive dissonance. You want to big up Floyd, but you don't want to big up Manny, yet the two need to go hand in hand of you're making claims about #10 ATG based on beating him.


youre an idiot, shut up


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> I enjoyed the Canelo performance so much more. He was styling hard on that motherfucker, knocking his dome in every direction and backing him up at several different points of the fight. Tons of highlight reel shit in that one. It was one of the greatest memories I'll take from Floyd's career. This thing on May 2nd was pretty blase, I dunno. Maybe my memory is just hazy from it and I wasn't all there, I just don't remember too many
> 
> :sxane
> 
> ...


The Canelo schooling was much better, much better

canelo atleast tried, pacquiao and roach came into the fight trying to steal a decision


----------



## 2manyusernames (Jun 14, 2012)

MichiganWarrior said:


> youre an idiot, shut up


I think it's well known that you're the biggest idiot on these forums.


----------

