p4p all time where do you rate Mayweather

First topic message reminder :

I was a major fan. Always backed him when he was accused of cherry picking and always stuck up for his genuis when classed as boring. There was a time when I would of had him in the top ten but not now. He is still a wonderful fighter and has had a fantastic career up until the last couple years.

Top 20 for me but should be top 10 giving his immense talent. He is the greatest boxer of his generation but "TBE", not a chance in hell.

I understand he is 38 and people that support him will use that as an excuse for him picking who he wants. I'm not buying it. If he doesn't want to fight the best he should just retire. Never in history has such a superfight been avoided by top boxers (Floyd and Manny both). Mayweather not fighting Manny will hurt his standing when he is long retired, more so than Manny. It will remain a black mark on his record. Even if he retires undefeated there will be those that believe he only remained so because he avoided Manny. I believe he would of defeated Manny but does it matter what we believe. The only way anyone would ever know is if they had of squared off, shame we were robbed of a real superfight, or who knows a possible trilogy.

Mayweather has the talent to be remembered along side the very best. He has the skills and abilities to compete with anyone. As Truss has said, name other fighters at his age that is as dominating. It's just a pity his later career is motivated completely of money and protecting that zero at all costs.

ATG but could of been a real legend.

Is Trussywussy upsetting Jabbywabby..

Is that your wifes nickname for you as she spoon feeds you your lunch on the sofa or as she moves you to your mobility scooter to stop you lashing out?

Effin hell lads/lasses, calm down a bit. It's like the off topic section all over again.

I'll quite happily go down in flames if I pull this bald little bigot with me.

Calling someone a bigot without proof is actionable..

Go for it. Its not exactly a secret is it. You know what a bigot is?

bigot
noun
a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions

A.K.A - you.

Derbymanc wrote:Effin hell lads/lasses, calm down a bit. It's like the off topic section all over again.

I'm calm...Squirty gives it but can't take it...

Can you Squirty?"

Squirty?

I take my fair share on here, but not from you. I've said it before and I'll repeat myself, you're a cancer to the forum.

Don't be so sensitive Jabby..

Deep breaths and calm down....

That a boy !!

Come on fellas, don't make me beg. Back on topic....

To be brutally honest, I struggle to give Calzaghe too much kudos for the Jones win, Jabby. I'd probably take Calzaghe's win over Reid as being more impressive really, given the context and timing of the fights. Jones' form either side of facing Calzaghe had been poor, he was nigh-on forty and it had been five years since he'd scored a significant victory. He caught Calzaghe napping early on, but it was clear that he was nothing like his old self by 2008.

There's a lot of revisionism that goes on with Calzaghe's career these days, I feel. What he achieved was impressive by anyone's standards, but given how long he held world titles in whatever form and how much ability he had, his career overall could be viewed as largely disappointing in relative terms. There's also a myth growing that he was frozen out by the likes of Jones, Toney, Michalczewski, Hopkins etc. The reality is that there was no real appetite from fans to see Calzaghe in against those guys because he'd done nothing to suggest he was anywhere near their class until they'd all started to fade badly.

Calzaghe was no Golovkin case at the time - between 1997 and 2005 he was largely an afterthought. Jones was criticised more or less all the time he spent as a world champion (1993 - 2004, and remember Calzaghe was 1997 - 2008, so plenty time where they both held belts of whatever nature) for the level of his opposition and lack of defining fights. But in the 2000 / 2001 documentary about him, where they discussed who he should be looking to fight at the time in order to silence his critics, Calzaghe's name wasn't even mentioned. Not once.

Mayweather has the odd hole here and there in his record, but I don't think you can lump him in with Calzaghe in that respect. He was still only twenty-three when he demolished Corrales to underline his status as the best Super-Feather in the world, and that was only a couple of years after winning his first world title from Hernandez. After that, he made pretty swift progress through the weight classes. A world of difference between that and Calzaghe defending his WBO belt year after year against a steady supply of gatekeepers, with the odd former belt holder thrown in now and then before finally getting a unification fight in 2006.

Mayweather's basically spent well over a decade (even allowing for his mini retirements here and there) as one of the acclaimed, tip-top pound for pounders in the sport. Calzaghe only really had that distinction for the last two, three years of his career.

Mayweather's a couple of leagues above Calzaghe both in terms of ability and his career record / accomplishments in my opinion, but that's just me.

I agree Jones and Hoppo both had baggage by then...

Jermaine Taylor had undone Hoppo....Jones was on the slide..

Only an idiot has Calzaghe near Floyd

Find Clazaghe's standing on this forum quite strange. I remember in the old days of 606 he was an utter pariah, vilified for his CV considering his obvious gifts. It was a thankless task being a JC fan.

I was a fan them and still am now. Think he's more than a match for any modern super middleweight. Although I'd agree his achievements perhaps aren't equal to his attributes.

How do you put Floyd into context? Again his attributes and longevity are incredible but he's never faced his natural rival. I've never been a fan of his and can't say I particularly enjoy his style, exceptions being his fights with JMM & Mosley when I thought he performed brilliantly. I still don't think he's put in a performance in any fight like Pacquiao did against Cotto but to be fair there's no way he could mirror that come forward style and maybe it's a personal preference of mine.

Saddens me (well, it doesn't really make me sad) to say that Pacquaio will always be an albatross around the neck of Mayweather and vice/versa. I find it difficult to appreciate the career of one without the other.

Yes Dipps.....It shows you want we already know......Time is a great healer as regards ATG standings..

Twenty years time Manny and May will be much better thought of..

I have Mayweather about 30th as an ATG.

Time will prove me to be correct as it has a habit of doing.

Anyone notice the revolt against Eddie Hearn and his PPV, it's the talk of boxing on the web.

Calzaghe above Floyd seems a very strange one. He had a pretty poor resume apart from Hopkins and Kessler really.

Manfredo Jr? RJJ? Come on.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I agree Jones and Hoppo both had baggage by then...

Jermaine Taylor had undone Hoppo....Jones was on the slide..

Only an idiot has Calzaghe near Floyd

Wow, a point regarding PBF that you and I agree on! Keep your head down for flying pigs........!!

There's a habit with Mayweather to forget the early part of his career which was brilliant by any definition of the term. Down at 130lbs he didn't just beat some very good fighters he thrashed them, whether it was out-boxing Hernandez round after round, blitzing Manfredy or treating Corrales like a yo-yo.

He did then get the benefit of a contentious decision over Castillo which he promptly put right but by then he had in my opinion cemented himself as one of the greatest super featherweights of all time.

His career at Welterweight does have a few holes but I would consider them to be Pacquiao and Cotto shaped, two fights that should have happened. The names of Williams and Margarito get brought up a lot but neither of them would have propelled him any higher than he already is while Mosley was nursing a poorly tooth when Floyd wanted that fight.

A lot remains to be seen about Alvarez but I think we can all agree he's proven himself to be the best 154lber in the world behind Mayweather so that is a very good win, the catchweight is less than desirable but they've been around since the dawn of time.

De La Hoya, Mosley, Cotto, Hatton, Marquez, Gatti, Judah, Maidana and Guerrero are all good wins certainly too good to be considered filler something i'd possibly reserve for Ortiz or the Pudwill types Calzaghe was fighting.

We're not talking about a record that compares to the legendary fighters of the past like Charles, Ali, Robinson, Armstrong, Greb, Ross, Moore or Fitzsimmons. However boxing has changed a lot since then, gone backwards if you ask me and if you take Charles the boxers of the 20 years between 160-175lbs wouldn't make a dent on his record collectively. There is no modern day equivalent of the black murderers row nor is the talent between featherweight and light welterweight comparable to the 1930's.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I agree Jones and Hoppo both had baggage by then...

Jermaine Taylor had undone Hoppo....Jones was on the slide..

Only an idiot has Calzaghe near Floyd

Wow, a point regarding PBF that you and I agree on! Keep your head down for flying pigs........!!

That idiot would most probably be Oscar De La Hoya who got Hopkins and Calzaghe on the stage during the Hatton weigh in.

The main gripe I have with Mayweather fans claiming he should be ranked top ten (which seems preposterous to me) is the fact that, since Castillo, he has refused to test himself in the manner the sport's true legends did.

How could anyone rank him alongside someone like Leonard, who faced all the great fighters of his era?

Ducking out of a red hot welterweight division in 2008 and then passing on the chance to face his greatest rival (in a fight that would have elevated the sport) goes against him. All-time, if you're measuring quality of wins/opposition, I fail to see how he can even rank above Pacquiao?

Talent-wise, he as good as it gets. He's perhaps the most successful fighter of all time (in terms of earnings and health) but he has consistently refused to test himself. Look at Hopkins - close to 50 and choosing to face a killer like Kovalev. That's how great fighters operate.

Harrison wrote:Look at Hopkins - close to 50 and choosing to face a killer like Kovalev. That's how great fighters operate.

Nicely made point.

Mayweather - p4p best for a decade.

Many decades before him.

Is modern boxing so much worse than the previous eras?

If we picked one p4p best from the the last 10 decades (100years) how many are better than mayweather?

I'd choose the p4p top 5 from each decade, starting from 1990 going back backwards. Then I would pit mayweather against them in some kind of knockout tournament.

I'd compare him against each of the top 5 from 1990 to 1980 then see where he places. Then I'd pit him against the top 5 from '80 to '70 and see where he places, then I'd do the same for every decade since the invention of boxing.

Only then would i be satisfied I'd given the OP'S question ample consideration. Then I would have my answer.

..or at least I would if my knowledge allowed me to do the above..

You must be having a laugh. De la Hoya would have beaten Mayweather back in the day.