Does Mayweather get enough credit?

by mark_england Mon 29 Jun - 21:48

Personally I'd say no.

Of course everything is about opinions, but I've seen people on here saying he wouldn't even make their all time top 20!! Really?!

For someone who has mastered defence so impressively, never been beaten in a tough era, makes top fighters look ordinary, and who has a resume of De La Hoya, Pacquiao, Cotto, Marquez, Alvarez, Hatton, plus other notable wins, I think he deserves more credit than he's given.

Best I've ever seen personally.

by Gentleman01 Mon 29 Jun - 22:07

Many people have him in their top 10 ATG lists. Even people who aren't quite as enamoured with his achievements still rate him and rank him highly. If someone ranks him outside the top 20 then, although I disagree, I wouldn't conclude that that person wasn't giving Floyd enough credit, just that they'd given other great fighters slightly more credit. Being rated as the 21st greatest boxer of all-time is still incredibly high praise, for example.

He's the consensus p4p King and widely considered the greatest fighter of his generation. I think he gets plenty of credit.

by catchweight Mon 29 Jun - 22:08

Im not one for making lists but I think hes generally an overrated boxer with an overrated record as a result of extremelly opportunistic matchmaking. Certainly extremelly talented but I wouldnt have him in the same calibre as a Leonard, Hearns or Whitaker. I think its debateable how he would fare even against an on form de la Hoya, Benitez, Pacquiao or Mosely.

by mark_england Mon 29 Jun - 22:17

There was nothing wrong with Pacquiao in their fight, he just couldn't land a shot because Mayweather was too good defensively.

De la Hoya was hardly past it when they fought either, and FMJ clearly won that fight as well.

by catchweight Mon 29 Jun - 22:19

Pacquiao was past his best and injured. de la Hoya was old and was level pegging until he ran out of steam in the last 3 rounds.

by mark_england Mon 29 Jun - 22:26

Injured or just had to make an excuse for a quite frankly embarassing performance where he was completely outclassed?

by catchweight Mon 29 Jun - 22:27

Injured

by Lance Mon 29 Jun - 23:22

I know who this is. The order in which the names are listed rings very familiar with a certain WUM around here. Bit sad really

by Strongback Tue 30 Jun - 0:01

Mayweather doesn't make my Top 20. Might scrape into my Top 30.

He doesn't have any great wins against other prime greats. A lot of people around here are in love with the ledger but when it comes to Floyd, well he gets a pass.

by TopHat24/7 Tue 30 Jun - 9:26

mark_england wrote:
Of course everything is about opinions, but I've seen people on here saying he wouldn't even make their all time top 20!! Really?!

Who??

Typical Flomo line.

You'll get Truss's knickers fizzing at least......

by TopHat24/7 Tue 30 Jun - 9:39

Jesus, should have read the thread before posting.

Thankfully not many people pay attention to what Strongy spouts...

by **ShahenshahG** Tue 30 Jun - 10:27

I don't think he should be outside top 20. Scraping top 10 maybe but no lower than 12. As gentleman said when you get to the elite it's a question of separating how high you rate them rather than whether you rate them.

by AdamT Tue 30 Jun - 10:44

I place him around 10, wouldn't argue if someone had him 15-20. Any lower than that is a bit low for me in my opinion.

by TopHat24/7 Tue 30 Jun - 12:17

Sounds sensible, I'd agree.

by **88Chris05** Tue 30 Jun - 12:24

He’ll probably be more highly rated and appreciated in general once he’s been retired for a while than he is now, which is a trend for a lot of great fighters.

Right now though, if I had to pick one or the other I’d say that he probably gets enough praise and the credit due to him from boxing fans, at least in the majority of cases, but doesn’t get enough credit from the hoary old ‘expert’ type boxing historians in the media whose word is taken as gospel by a lot of people for whatever reason.

Ranking fighters is subjective but there’s a limit to how much the subjectivity can be stretched. If someone said they don’t have Mayweather challenging for a top ten spot all-time, I’d say fair enough. There are criticisms which can be levelled at him which could easily rule him out depending on what you like. If they said he wasn’t making their top twenty, again I wouldn’t have a problem with that. But not in a top thirty? Starting to take the mick a little bit I’d say, but that’s just my opinion.

by AdamT Tue 30 Jun - 12:26

Yeah he should definitley at least be top 30. Although I rate him higher, 20 is probably fair enough.

Boxing has been around forever, being top 20 is amazing.

by bhb001 Tue 30 Jun - 12:35

No. Being the money he pays for everything with cash.

by Hands Of Stone Tue 30 Jun - 12:50

Has to be between 10 and 20, probably around 14-16 imo but these things are so easy to change

Problem I have with Floyd is that of ALL the fighters listed in the OP, not a single one was not either a.) Past his prime (DLH, Pacquiao, Mosley, Cotto) b.) Not fighting in their prefered/natural weight class (JMM, Hatton and Canelo with the catchweight)

Maidana, Guerrero, Ortiz, Gatti, Baldomir, Judah, Corley all had moments in their careers but generally all of them have failed at the highest level with a lot of loses. None of them really had anything to travel anybody who is claiming to be top 10 p4p

The wins i'm most impressed by is the Castillo rematch and dispatching of Corrales. But even then, castillo was a good fighter, but not a fellow atg and gave Floyd all he could handle. Likewise Corrales is easily his best win but Corrales' problems were well documented.

May not be mayweathers fault but would have loved to see how he'd do with a young Cotto and a younger Mosley but definitely, Floyd could have fought a 2009 version of pacquiao which would have him in the top 10, not the pacquiao that had been KO and had lsot the intensity of old.

by 3fingers Tue 30 Jun - 13:13

If he'd had three memorable fights/wars then he'd be in everyone's top 5....that says just as much about us as it does his talent.

by TopHat24/7 Tue 30 Jun - 13:20

Only if those 3 fights were significant.

He had a fairly memorbale fight/war in MM 1 and it hasn't helped him. If he'd had a (victorious) war with Pac in 2009 then yes, he may well have leaped into a lot of people's top 5s.

by AdamT Tue 30 Jun - 13:26

TopHat24/7 wrote:Only if those 3 fights were significant.

He had a fairly memorbale fight/war in MM 1 and it hasn't helped him. If he'd had a (victorious) war with Pac in 2009 then yes, he may well have leaped into a lot of people's top 5s.

Fair point. He will never fight GGG but if he was willing to step up to Middle and beat him, then he would definitely be pushing for 5.

by TopHat24/7 Tue 30 Jun - 13:41

Yeh, that'd be massive. Though I don't hold it against him for not taking it (as I do '09 Pac, for example).

by AdamT Tue 30 Jun - 13:48

I wish Castillo had of taken that zero when he won their first fight. Floyd would never had the zero to protect and I think he would of definitely thought anybody, anytime.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 30 Jun - 13:53

I tend to look for the more knowledgeable posters and their opinions on this subject....

Think you really should have a decent knowledge of the fighters you are talking about when rating........Their opposition etc...longevity...

Too easy to chuck numbers out like 20-25..........10-15 without knowing who the heck you're talking about...

I know the Captain has Floyd Top 10........Chris 10-15............Hammer 10-15..........Rowley around there too i believe.....

I have him Top 10 ...Best fighter I've ever seen during my lifetime with Junior.........Not to say that there haven't been better fighters before that.....

As for holding certain fights against Floyd it goes with the territory........I could critique everyone of Ali's best wins..........

by AdamT Tue 30 Jun - 13:57

I blame both him and Pac for 09-10. That fight should of happened.

by TopHat24/7 Tue 30 Jun - 14:04

Both to blame, madness to suggest otherwise, but only one of them 'retired'.

by AdamT Tue 30 Jun - 14:07

I think the fight was at it's biggest after Pac destroyed Cotto and Mayweather clowned JMM.

It was close to a 50/50 as it could be. I always picked Floyd but if I'm being honest, I think Pacquiao looked sensational then.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 30 Jun - 14:19

He looked as sensational back then as Mo Farah looks now...

by DuransHorse Tue 30 Jun - 14:44

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I tend to look for the more knowledgeable posters and their opinions on this subject....

Think you really should have a decent knowledge of the fighters you are talking about when rating........Their opposition etc...longevity...

Too easy to chuck numbers out like 20-25..........10-15 without knowing who the heck you're talking about...

I know the Captain has Floyd Top 10........Chris 10-15............Hammer 10-15..........Rowley around there too i believe.....

I have him Top 10 ...Best fighter I've ever seen during my lifetime with Junior.........Not to say that there haven't been better fighters before that.....

As for holding certain fights against Floyd it goes with the territory........I could critique everyone of Ali's best wins..........

Thanks for highlighting that for us, Truss. Just to confirm, 'knowledgeable posters' are still those that concur with your own opinions aren't they? Very Happy

by AdamT Tue 30 Jun - 14:57

I don't claim to be knowledgeable (I know I am not) but I do have Floyd top 10. He could of been top 5 if he beat Manny sooner.

by TopHat24/7 Tue 30 Jun - 14:58

AdamT wrote:I think the fight was at it's biggest after Pac destroyed Cotto and Mayweather clowned JMM.

It was close to a 50/50 as it could be. I always picked Floyd but if I'm being honest, I think Pacquiao looked sensational then.

Agreed.

by TopHat24/7 Tue 30 Jun - 14:59

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He looked as sensational back then as Mo Farah looks now...

Oh dear. Pathetic comment.

How's your man, Lance Armstong,'s record looking......??

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 30 Jun - 15:00

DuransHorse wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I tend to look for the more knowledgeable posters and their opinions on this subject....

Think you really should have a decent knowledge of the fighters you are talking about when rating........Their opposition etc...longevity...

Too easy to chuck numbers out like 20-25..........10-15 without knowing who the heck you're talking about...

I know the Captain has Floyd Top 10........Chris 10-15............Hammer 10-15..........Rowley around there too i believe.....

I have him Top 10 ...Best fighter I've ever seen during my lifetime with Junior.........Not to say that there haven't been better fighters before that.....

As for holding certain fights against Floyd it goes with the territory........I could critique everyone of Ali's best wins..........

Thanks for highlighting that for us, Truss. Just to confirm, 'knowledgeable posters' are still those that concur with your own opinions aren't they?

i just said I have him top 10 Duran........Only one of them concur...

Not interested Toppy.........

by TopHat24/7 Tue 30 Jun - 15:00

Not interested?

Then don't make pathetic bell-end WUM comments.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 30 Jun - 15:02

AdamT wrote:I think the fight was at it's biggest after Pac destroyed Cotto and Mayweather clowned JMM.

It was close to a 50/50 as it could be. I always picked Floyd but if I'm being honest, I think Pacquiao looked sensational then.

Toppy wouldn't be able to name 20 fighters to put in a Top 20 list................Let alone analyze records and other criteria..

You shouldn't waste your time...

by captain carrantuohil Tue 30 Jun - 15:16

In general, people accord Mayweather the respect that he deserves as a fighter. There will always be one or two who won't but no fighter, all-time top 10 or not, has ever managed to escape completely from sticklers who would insist that his record is padded/missing at least one great contemporary (more in Robinson's case)/ inconsistent or that Fighter A or B had his number. Doesn't much matter - Floyd is equalled only by Jones, Whitaker and maybe Nunn in terms of pure talent over the past thirty years or so. As far as achievements/CV are concerned, we can't totally ignore Roy's catastrophic downfall at an age when Floyd was still befuddling some of the best of his generation and Nunn falls clearly short of this sort of class. Only Pea, then, to touch him overall since the end of the 80s, in my view.

I havered for months and years before deciding where exactly to put Mayweather in my all-time list. I honestly don't see too many people he should have fought and didn't, with the shining exception of Pacquiao 4 or 5 years before he actually did. Any names such as Paul Williams are red herrings of the Jones Jr/Michalczewski ilk and are not to be taken too seriously. Nevertheless, I was once for putting him a step below Whitaker, Tunney, Ray Leonard and Duran at around the 14-15 mark - until he fought Alvarez. It was then that I felt that I was under-selling Floyd somewhat. Past his best in age and speed; fighting above his best weight; up against a young gun in the prime of life with some excellent recent wins behind him, the consensus number one at this higher weight - and Floyd took him to school. It was a rare display of virtuosity against someone who continues to take extremely high rank among his pound for pound contemporaries. For that reason, I have lifted him to number 10 in my list, which is where he will now remain until an even greater fighter hoves into view.

Not everyone will buy my reasoning, which is fine and dandy. No monopoly on wisdom here. However, not many could construct a reasonable case that Mayweather is not one of the greatest practitioners of his sport of any era.

by AdamT Tue 30 Jun - 15:22

captain carrantuohil wrote:In general, people accord Mayweather the respect that he deserves as a fighter. There will always be one or two who won't but no fighter, all-time top 10 or not, has ever managed to eacape completely from sticklers who would insist that his record is padded/missing at least one great contemporary (more in Robinson's case)/ inconsistent or that Fighter A or B had his number. Doesn't much matter - Floyd is equalled only by Jones, Whitaker and maybe Nunn in terms of pure talent over the past thirty years or so. As far as achievements/CV is concerned, we can't totally ignore Roy's catastrophic downfall at an age when Floyd was still befuddling some of the best of his generation and Nunn falls clearly short of this sort of class. Only Pea, then, to touch him overall since the end of the 80s, in my view.

I havered for months and years before deciding where exactly to put Mayweather in my all-time list. I honestly don't see too many people he should have fought and didn't, with the shining exception of Pacquiao 4 or 5 years before he actually did. Any names such as Paul Williams are red herrings of the Jones Jr/Michalczewski ilk and are not to be taken too seriously. Nevertheless, I was once for putting him a step below Whitaker, Tunney, Ray Leonard and Duran at around the 14-15 mark - until he fought Alvarez. It was then that I felt that I was under-selling Floyd somewhat. Past his best in age and speed; fighting above his best weight; up against a young gun in the prime of life with some excellent recent wins behind him, the consensus number one at this higher weight - and Floyd took him to school. It was a rare display of virtuosity against someone who continues to take extremely high rank among his pound for pound contemporaries. For that reason, I have lifted him to number 10 in my list, which is where he will now remain until an even greater fighter hoves into view.

Not everyone will buy my reasoning, which is fine and dandy. No monopoly on wisdom here. However, not many could construct a reasonable case that Mayweather is not one of the greatest practitioners of his sport of any era.

Probably the best post I have read regarding Mayweather's legacy.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 30 Jun - 15:29

It's bang on the money..........

Top 10...........................10-15 it's all good............

A guy can't be around the top of the sport for 17 years and beaten the quality he has without having a place in the elite..

by JabMachineMK2 Tue 30 Jun - 15:29

This is a really poor topic to be honest. The Captain just summed up everything that needs to be said.

by AdamT Tue 30 Jun - 15:37

To change the subject, were would Hopkins be rated?

Is he a top 40 fighter? Obviously in the modern era he is top 20 in my view.

Just be interested to hear from the more knowledgable posters on this.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 30 Jun - 15:46

Hoppo is banging on the Top 20.............

Can't have him above Jones though..

by captain carrantuohil Tue 30 Jun - 15:47

Top 50 certainly, Adam, in my view and in saying that, I must be leaving open the possibility that he is top 40 as well. There are so many fine judgement calls to be made between numbers 41 and 47 or 39 and 45 that it would be difficult to take exception to anyonewho wanted to put him as high as about 35.

I do have a group of about 30 fighters in mind who must be ranked ahead of Hoppo; for me, he would be mid-40s, I suppose, but it's so difficult to be precise without writing all the names down and drinking a bottle of red wine to aid the old judging process.

Modern era Number 20? Do you mean last twenty or thirty years? In that case, yes, certainly. Will always be overlooked, I suspect, by those who prefer their boxing a bit redder in tooth and claw but Hopkins' CV stands comparison with all but the absolute pound for pound elite.

by hogey Tue 30 Jun - 15:52

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He looked as sensational back then as Mo Farah looks now...

Still even Mo has not got a couple of alleged failed drugs tests hidden away, unlike Wife beater.
I think Floyd is worth a spot in the top 25, most likely just inside top 20. Great fighter, but could have been so much more even if it meant him losing a couple along the way. I would still rate Jones Jnr higher on my all time list for me he was the best fighter since Leonard.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 30 Jun - 15:53

All this top 25 crap.......

You don't even know what your Top 25 is..

In fairness Farah isn't as "forgetful" as your 400m chick.......

Banned for a year and woman of the year in 2014....

Say no more..

by **88Chris05** Tue 30 Jun - 15:56

I think Bernard doesn't look out of place anywhere between 20 (a more generous view but not completely unsustainable as we've all got our own methods of rating fighters) and 35, for me. Since the end of the Four Kings era the only guys I'd have above him would be, in roughly chronological order, Chavez, Whitaker, Jones, Mayweather and Pacquiao.

Personally couldn't have him quite in the same class as Pernell, Roy or Floyd, but if someone was to argue for him to be just as high or even a shade higher than Julio or Manny then I'd certainly listen to see if they could change my mind.

by AdamT Tue 30 Jun - 15:57

I have Jones ahead of Hopkins. Jones Jr was a better fighter at his peak and held a version of the heavyweight championship. However his fall from grace can't be ignored.

Just as well I like to rate fighters at their very best. However Hopkins longevity and age can't be ignored, so he runs Jones Jr close.

Captain, last 30-35 years.

I could name at least 10 guys but find it hard to name 20 higher than Hopkins in recent years.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 30 Jun - 15:59

88Chris05 wrote:I think Bernard doesn't look out of place anywhere between 20 (a more generous view but not completely unsustainable as we've all got our own methods of rating fighters) and 35, for me. Since the end of the Four Kings era the only guys I'd have above him would be, in roughly chronological order, Chavez, Whitaker, Jones, Mayweather and Pacquiao.

Personally couldn't have him quite in the same class as Pernell, Roy or Floyd, but if someone was to argue for him to be just as high or even a shade higher than Julio or Manny then I'd certainly listen to see if they could change my mind.

Whittaker......................Didn't beat as many p4pers................Didn't have Floyd's longevity..................Beaten three times....

and higher than Floyd............

ok...

by TopHat24/7 Tue 30 Jun - 16:00

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:All this top 25 crap.......

You don't even know what your Top 25 is..

In fairness Farah isn't as "forgetful" as your 400m chick.......

Banned for a year and woman of the year in 2014....

Say no more..

Lance Armstrong.

by **88Chris05** Tue 30 Jun - 16:04

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:
88Chris05 wrote:I think Bernard doesn't look out of place anywhere between 20 (a more generous view but not completely unsustainable as we've all got our own methods of rating fighters) and 35, for me. Since the end of the Four Kings era the only guys I'd have above him would be, in roughly chronological order, Chavez, Whitaker, Jones, Mayweather and Pacquiao.

Personally couldn't have him quite in the same class as Pernell, Roy or Floyd, but if someone was to argue for him to be just as high or even a shade higher than Julio or Manny then I'd certainly listen to see if they could change my mind.

Whittaker......................Didn't beat as many p4pers................Didn't have Floyd's longevity..................Beaten three times....

and higher than Floyd............

ok...

by TopHat24/7 Tue 30 Jun - 16:06

88Chris05 wrote:
Personally couldn't have him quite in the same class as Pernell, Roy or Floyd, but if someone was to argue for him to be just as high or even a shade higher than Julio or Manny then I'd certainly listen to see if they could change my mind.

What does Berny have on his record to equal MAB twice and Morales twice at best weight? (and arguably JMM twice). Tito is the only standout win in his major MW reign.

Above that weight his record is as mixed as Manny's in terms of quality but peppered with more losses.

by Sponsored content