50-0: The Best Ever

I appreciate Floyd but just wanted to point out these threads are so typical and predictable after a Mayweather fight. You have a bunch hating on him, a bunch claiming boxing is dying, and then you have the obligatory "Mayweather is so great" thread. At least Pacquiao's name doesn't automatically come up and the ensuing flame war between Pac fans and Floyd fans isn't a thing anymore.
 
eh, he accomplished more than most of the guys on that list.

See Leonard is an example of name notoriety outweighing actual accomplishment. Yeah, yeah. Hearns. Duran. Hagler. Oh my. Great wins. But how about the fact he lost to Duran? how about the fact that Floyd was the best P4P in the world at a point in his career when Leonard was a stepping stone in his?

Ezzard Charles? Charles did more than Floyd? Come on now.

I don't like fighters like Gans and Langford being part of modern all time lists. The sport was pretty much pro wrestling back then. Ever notice how often those guys fought opponents 3 times, splitting the first two? If you see that on a fighter's record from that era, its a red flag.

Floyd has topped the P4P ranks for over a decade in the sport. Conor was like 1 of 3 or 4 guys he's fought in like 20 years that wasn't a former world champion and the first guy who wasn't ranked in the top 10 since he fought Hernandez.

Everyone you mentioned lost to someone he shouldn't have too. Why doesn't that matter when you're looking at the all time picture?

Leonard took the Duran fight when Duran was at an absolute beast. No jokes there. He was hungry and in peak form. Credit to Leonard for taking such a fight that could make people look down in him today in Sherdog forums. Mayweather didn't fight certain guys in their primes. Pacquiao, for instance, was 5-6 years too late, and when he did, well, we saw what happened - a one sided but a clutch and hold snore-fest. Still a win, sure, no argument, but people can criticize those circumstances as/more easily than Leonard who fought at guy at his best, and then won in dominant fashion in the rematch.

Ezzard Charles is being seriously underappreciated here. I will say that his LHW run gets underappreciated. Different afflictions, sure, but Charles was really remarkably skilled. If you watch him, you'll see that a lot of what he does, bigger guys don't normally do. I'm not necessarily arguing with you here, but I'm more coming to his defense. He fought in one of the best eras of boxing where the gyms were packed, the trainers knew so much, and even average fighters then were actually really good and would probably be upper crust today. No, that's not because I'm smitten by black and white footage, that's just the facts. More minds, people, infrastructure invested in something, the more talent you'll see.

The sport was not pro wrestling, and ignoring guys like Gans and Langford is just a disservice born out of ignorance. Having close fights is not a red flag, it's indicative of the times. Nobody boxes today, thus, the talent pool is not as deep.

No one is saying that Floyd isn't a really good fighter, because I agree that he is, but you are riding on him hard here. Somewhere in the low end of the top 15-20 there could be a case made.

When you are fighting guys that are at their best, and you lose to them, you shouldn't be penalized for that. You should be appreciated for reaching for greatness. Ray Robinson had more than a few losses, but he's better than Floyd. He did more. He went from WW to LHW and fought anybody and there are very few fighters that have made a successful move from WW to MW (and that's due to the quality of the opposition - SRR was just special. A guy fighting a surging, dangerous fighter, at his absolute best shouldn't be penalized for losing. If that fighters waits 6 years and then fights him and beats him, it's an admission of his own fear and insecurities about fighting that fighter.

Sometimes you make some good observations, but you are coming on too strong here in your Mayweather love and not being as objective as you ought to be (which can be hard, I'm sure).
 
Serious question here. If Mayweather fought Pac in 2010, would the fight plan for both be different? Coz honestly I think the way the fight went in 2015 would be no different if it took place in 2010. Maybe Pac would be more aggressive, but Floyd would still counter his ass, and would still make Pac punch less.
 
The best ever? Probably not, but even old Bert would have had to suck it up and at least put him in his top ten.
Nah. I mean maybe he would have but to me? Strictly resume wise give me

In no order

Robinson
Ali
Armstrong
Gans
Langford
Wilde
Greb
Leonard
Charles


If you wanted to put him 10 i guess i would be cool with that. But even than...

Can we really say that floyd has a better resume than say a Mickey Walker? Personally i say no
 
Serious question here. If Mayweather fought Pac in 2010, would the fight plan for both be different? Coz honestly I think the way the fight went in 2015 would be no different if it took place in 2010. Maybe Pac would be more aggressive, but Floyd would still counter his ass, and would still make Pac punch less.
It would have probably been a bit more competitive but likely the same result
 
Leonard took the Duran fight when Duran was at an absolute beast. No jokes there. He was hungry and in peak form. Credit to Leonard for taking such a fight that could make people look down in him today in Sherdog forums. Mayweather didn't fight certain guys in their primes. Pacquiao, for instance, was 5-6 years too late, and when he did, well, we saw what happened - a one sided but a clutch and hold snore-fest. Still a win, sure, no argument, but people can criticize those circumstances as/more easily than Leonard who fought at guy at his best, and then won in dominant fashion in the rematch.

Ezzard Charles is being seriously underappreciated here. I will say that his LHW run gets underappreciated. Different afflictions, sure, but Charles was really remarkably skilled. If you watch him, you'll see that a lot of what he does, bigger guys don't normally do. I'm not necessarily arguing with you here, but I'm more coming to his defense. He fought in one of the best eras of boxing where the gyms were packed, the trainers knew so much, and even average fighters then were actually really good and would probably be upper crust today. No, that's not because I'm smitten by black and white footage, that's just the facts. More minds, people, infrastructure invested in something, the more talent you'll see.

The sport was not pro wrestling, and ignoring guys like Gans and Langford is just a disservice born out of ignorance. Having close fights is not a red flag, it's indicative of the times. Nobody boxes today, thus, the talent pool is not as deep.

No one is saying that Floyd isn't a really good fighter, because I agree that he is, but you are riding on him hard here. Somewhere in the low end of the top 15-20 there could be a case made.

When you are fighting guys that are at their best, and you lose to them, you shouldn't be penalized for that. You should be appreciated for reaching for greatness. Ray Robinson had more than a few losses, but he's better than Floyd. He did more. He went from WW to LHW and fought anybody and there are very few fighters that have made a successful move from WW to MW (and that's due to the quality of the opposition - SRR was just special. A guy fighting a surging, dangerous fighter, at his absolute best shouldn't be penalized for losing. If that fighters waits 6 years and then fights him and beats him, it's an admission of his own fear and insecurities about fighting that fighter.

Sometimes you make some good observations, but you are coming on too strong here in your Mayweather love and not being as objective as you ought to be (which can be hard, I'm sure).

Sorry, just sounds like the same old nostalgic bias to me. Your description of Duran sort of clinches it. You're making him out to be something more than a standout boxer from his era. Thats what he was. He wasn't some mythical creature. You're comparing guys that you view as legendary to guys who are still fighting. Look at the stats. Thats the only way to realistically compare guys from different eras. Floyds list of accomplishments is just greater than a lot of the guys you are talking about.

And yeah, the sport was basically pro wrestling. Guys from the Greb era talked about fixed fights like they were talking about what they had for breakfast. It was commonplace and its pretty common knowledge.
 
Floyd Mayweather
50-0 (27 KO)

Top PPV draw
11 time champion
5 divisions

Notable wins: Manny Pacquiao, Canelo Alvarez, Miguel Cotto, Shane Mosley, Juan Manuel Marquez, Ricky Hatton, Oscar Dela Hoya, Zab Judah, Arturo Gatti, Jose Luis Castillo, Diego Corrales, Genaro Hernandez, among others.

Impressive resume, if you ask me. Plus, almost flawless performances on a flawless record. What should be the arguments on why Floyd shouldn't be the GOAT?

No no no Lol , Floyd is all time great not the goat at all by any stretch. Plus that 50th win was as bs as a win could be.
 
Serious question here. If Mayweather fought Pac in 2010, would the fight plan for both be different? Coz honestly I think the way the fight went in 2015 would be no different if it took place in 2010. Maybe Pac would be more aggressive, but Floyd would still counter his ass, and would still make Pac punch less.

I'm not saying the outcome would necessarily change, because Mayweather makes those great adjustments. But in 2010 both men fight differently. Pacquiao fights at a higher volume, speed, and athleticism. Mayweather is younger too so he is sharper, busier. I don't think he scraps more, but it might be more like the Hatton fight, than it was the 2015 Pacquiao fight (and there is a difference). Much closer. I wouldn't want to bet on it.
 
Sorry, just sounds like the same old nostalgic bias to me. Your description of Duran sort of clinches it. You're making him out to be something more than a standout boxer from his era. Thats what he was. He wasn't some mythical creature. You're comparing guys that you view as legendary to guys who are still fighting. Look at the stats. Thats the only way to realistically compare guys from different eras. Floyds list of accomplishments is just greater than a lot of the guys you are talking about.

And yeah, the sport was basically pro wrestling. Guys from the Greb era talked about fixed fights like they were talking about what they had for breakfast. It was commonplace and its pretty common knowledge.

Fair. If you hear enough nostalgic bias, it may cloud you're judgment. That doesn't mean you can't change. The difference here is that I am not most. Not that that should convince you, but I see what you won't.

Stats are relative to their own eras, so no, it's not safe to say that because Duran lost to ATG's he is worse than Floyd who avoided the risk of some fighters in their prime. Duran was exactly what you said: a stand out boxer from his era. Same as Floyd, nothing more. What doesn't diminish Duran is his his willingness to fight ATG's in their prime. Same with SRR. These guys stand out. So do a whole bunch of others and that is why Floyd being in a top 5 spot is a tough sell. He won some incredible fights, sure, and other guys he fought at a safe time.

And no, it wasn't pro wrestling 100 years ago. Hate that era and cast such aspersions and you may as well diminish every fighter today for being all hopped up on steroids. Those performance enhancers are a fight fixer. Better hate everybody today and their record. We all know how thorough - or not - the testing is. If you are going to talk about fixed fights, find a better decade (30's and 40's) and name (Greb) to throw under the bus. The fact you did that actually speaks to your misinformation and makes me see why you wash the past with a jaded colour.

Am I saying Duran is a god or is better than Mayweather? Not necessarily. But I am saying that names like his and others (Robinson, Leonard, Pep, Louis, Ali, Marciano, Lewis, etc.) make putting Mayweather in such a lofty spot as top 5 is suspect when so many names throughout history have proven themselves and not because some Italian mobster chewing on a cigar is backing them.
 
eh, he accomplished more than most of the guys on that list.

See Leonard is an example of name notoriety outweighing actual accomplishment. Yeah, yeah. Hearns. Duran. Hagler. Oh my. Great wins. But how about the fact he lost to Duran? how about the fact that Floyd was the best P4P in the world at a point in his career when Leonard was a stepping stone in his?

Ezzard Charles? Charles did more than Floyd? Come on now.

I don't like fighters like Gans and Langford being part of modern all time lists. The sport was pretty much pro wrestling back then. Ever notice how often those guys fought opponents 3 times, splitting the first two? If you see that on a fighter's record from that era, its a red flag.

Floyd has topped the P4P ranks for over a decade in the sport. Conor was like 1 of 3 or 4 guys he's fought in like 20 years that wasn't a former world champion and the first guy who wasn't ranked in the top 10 since he fought Hernandez.

Everyone you mentioned lost to someone he shouldn't have too. Why doesn't that matter when you're looking at the all time picture?
People hate because he doesn't have a lot of flashy KOs , and he and since he hardly ever got hit he didn't have a lot of "heroic" come from behind moments
 
On the other side though, he beat Sugar Shane when he was in his late 30's. Cotto who Pacquiao and Mayweather both avoided until after he got plastered by Margarito, btw, yes they both avoided Cotto, it was not a weight class issue.

Waited until Cotto aged? Floyd wanted Cotto since their days at 140, Bobfather floated the idea until Mayweather did a demo job on Bruseles at which point he scrapped the fight because Cotto was the cash cow and he didn't want to lose out on that sweet, sweet, Puerto Rican $$. Mayweather beats that drum no matter when they fight, probably even stops young Cotto who didn't have the boxing mind or educated jab he developed in the autumn of his career.

Shane wanted no part of Floyd until he became the sport's biggest draw, Mayweather was calling him out when he was at 130 and Mosley 135 but the latter told the world he had a toothache and then decided to chase the big bucks with the DLH fights. All that aside people like to forget that Shane was fresh off of his savage destruction of Margarcheeto and looked fantastic doing it. Floyd always had the style to give Mosley fits no way he would've avoided this fight at any point in his career.
 
He is great, has greatness, is incredible and unique.

But not the the best ever.

When someone is the best ever, everyone should accept it. Think Roger Federer, Michael Jordan, Pele (that's a hard one, each country has their hero) Schumacher, etc.

When lists come up all over the world from the different sports by different venues about who is the best ever at their respective sport, you will see those guys at #1 more often than not.

When actual best ever lists for boxing come up, Floyd is never #1. I am not going to give my view on to why he is not the best ever, in fact he is far from it but I don't want to get into that argument right now. I will just leave it at that, when best ever lists are made by respectable sources, Floyd sometimes isn't even in the list at all.
 
Fair. If you hear enough nostalgic bias, it may cloud you're judgment. That doesn't mean you can't change. The difference here is that I am not most. Not that that should convince you, but I see what you won't.

Stats are relative to their own eras, so no, it's not safe to say that because Duran lost to ATG's he is worse than Floyd who avoided the risk of some fighters in their prime. Duran was exactly what you said: a stand out boxer from his era. Same as Floyd, nothing more. What doesn't diminish Duran is his his willingness to fight ATG's in their prime. Same with SRR. These guys stand out. So do a whole bunch of others and that is why Floyd being in a top 5 spot is a tough sell. He won some incredible fights, sure, and other guys he fought at a safe time.

And no, it wasn't pro wrestling 100 years ago. Hate that era and cast such aspersions and you may as well diminish every fighter today for being all hopped up on steroids. Those performance enhancers are a fight fixer. Better hate everybody today and their record. We all know how thorough - or not - the testing is. If you are going to talk about fixed fights, find a better decade (30's and 40's) and name (Greb) to throw under the bus. The fact you did that actually speaks to your misinformation and makes me see why you wash the past with a jaded colour.

Am I saying Duran is a god or is better than Mayweather? Not necessarily. But I am saying that names like his and others (Robinson, Leonard, Pep, Louis, Ali, Marciano, Lewis, etc.) make putting Mayweather in such a lofty spot as top 5 is suspect when so many names throughout history have proven themselves and not because some Italian mobster chewing on a cigar is backing them.
You're crazy if you think fights in the Greb/Gans eras weren't fixed all the time.



Duran is a great example if a fighter who's resume doesn't really match his legend. I can't see how a win over Leonard and his lightweight run is better than Floyds career. there's just more to Floyd's resume. People act like its some amazing feat that Duran beat Barkley when he was 38. No one would call Barkley great. Floyd was still atop the P4P list at the same age, regularly beating ranked titlists.
 
At that age Duran had almost double the fights Floyd has had in his whole career.
At 29 years old, when he fought Leonard, Duran was in his 70 something pro fight.
It's not only the quality of the opposition he faced, it's also the sheer number.

I personally don't know where to rank Floyd.
I only know he is damn great!
As far as technique goes he reached the climax and he was great in every facet of the game.
In every spot and occasion in the ring and even outside the ring.
He also had pretty high IQ and was a great strategist.

His record isn't as impressive as that of some others boxing greats though.
And in ranking record is the most important thing.
 
Last edited:
Nah. I mean maybe he would have but to me? Strictly resume wise give me

In no order

Robinson
Ali
Armstrong
Gans
Langford
Wilde
Greb
Leonard
Charles

Robinson was too good for his time and there is an argument for him being better than Floyd but not sure if he would be as dominant against the fighters in this era. From the footage ive seen it looks like he's facing a bunch a Gatti's. I know boxing fans have a love for the past and its blasphemy to say and present boxer is better than a great from the past but I feel like boxing has evolved way more since then. We know so much more. Same goes for the other old timers on your list.

I've always said Ali was greater than Floyd outside of the ring but inside I dont think he is. Boxers like Ali and Roy Jones get old, lose their reflexes and take some L's whilst Floyd got old, adjusted his style and became boring.

There is an argument for Leonard being better. Leonard would of PROBABLY beaten Floyd at 147 because he was a bigger WW. P4P tho I'm not sure who I can pick over the other.
 
Robinson was too good for his time and there is an argument for him being better than Floyd but not sure if he would be as dominant against the fighters in this era. From the footage ive seen it looks like he's facing a bunch a Gatti's. I know boxing fans have a love for the past and its blasphemy to say and present boxer is better than a great from the past but I feel like boxing has evolved way more since then. We know so much more. Same goes for the other old timers on your list.

I've always said Ali was greater than Floyd outside of the ring but inside I dont think he is. Boxers like Ali and Roy Jones get old, lose their reflexes and take some L's whilst Floyd got old, adjusted his style and became boring.

There is an argument for Leonard being better. Leonard would of PROBABLY beaten Floyd at 147 because he was a bigger WW. P4P tho I'm not sure who I can pick over the other.
You dont think ali had a better resume? I think alis is pretty far ahead actualy

Srr too

Plus than your throw guys like charles gans armstrong etc

Just cant see the guy in the top 5 or 10 even
 
Back
Top