Thread: Mosley Highlight Vid..Where does everyone rank him All time?

Where does everyone rank Mosley as an all time fighter?....How high does he rank in this era?.....One of the top 5? top 10? of this era?.......In the top 20 P4P of all time?....Top 30?...Just curious

[youtube=425,350]bJGzq5g63MQ[/youtube]

One of the top 5 athletes to ever box. I think he had one problem and thats he wasn't a true boxer, but a boxer-puncher which got him in trouble against bigger guys who could box.

I am trying not to do p4p ALl time anymore, but I seperate it by before 80's and from 1980 on. In this time frame I would say he is in the top 30 maybe even top 20.

Its too bad they don't show him as like a 17 year old kicking the crap out of JCC.

im going to say top 5 of the 90's on top 10 all time IMO

I rank Mosley as #1 or #2 all-time lightweight.

As far as overall boxers, he's top 20 all-time.

I think he may be a top 5 all time lightweight. Top 15 all time Welter, and may just fit into a top 50 all time p4p list. Maybe one of the top 5 fighters between the start of his career to now.

I think it's too difficult to rank him. I'm not particularly good at making ATG lists aside from maybe a top 5 or 10 but I don't see him being a top 20 if I managed to make one.

Why you may ask? Simply put,talent wise,he was SENSATIONAL at the lower weights but at 147 and 154,he has wins over Oscar(1 debateable),Collazo,a shot to heck Vargas and 2 losses to Vernon and 2 losses to Winky. That is not an ATG record. Also at 147/154,I don't think he displays the same power,technique nor speed he did at the lower weights. He slaps alot more with his punches.

Obviously he still has time to increase his legacy and wins over Cotto and Mayweather would make him an ATG but until then,imo, I don't think he's top 20. I can think of RJJ,Pernell,Mayweather,Ricardo Lopez,Tito and maybe a few others from this generation who have more claim to being ATG's than Shane. Again,just my opinion and it can change if someone puts a valid argument forward.

Originally Posted by El Gamo

I think it's too difficult to rank him. I'm not particularly good at making ATG lists aside from maybe a top 5 or 10 but I don't see him being a top 20 if I managed to make one.

Why you may ask? Simply put,talent wise,he was SENSATIONAL at the lower weights but at 147 and 154,he has wins over Oscar(1 debateable),Collazo,a shot to heck Vargas and 2 losses to Vernon and 2 losses to Winky. That is not an ATG record. Also at 147/154,I don't think he displays the same power,technique nor speed he did at the lower weights. He slaps alot more with his punches.

Obviously he still has time to increase his legacy and wins over Cotto and Mayweather would make him an ATG but until then,imo, I don't think he's top 20. I can think of RJJ,Pernell,Mayweather,Ricardo Lopez,Tito and maybe a few others from this generation who have more claim to being ATG's than Shane. Again,just my opinion and it can change if someone puts a valid argument forward.

I get what u are saying about how Shane was not as effective at 147+ but what if he had of just fought at 135 and 140 all his career. I cant think of many who could have beat him. Maybe Kostya or FLoyd, but that is debatable.
I mean he could easily have been 50(42)-0 or something? Would he be all time great then?

Way too many if's and buts there Eagle bro. That's like saying if Tito had not lost to B Hop and Winky or Pernell had not lost to TIto and beaten Oscar. Too much hypothetical talk BUT if you ,of course,he maintained a record like that,I'd be stupid to not call him an ATG!!

For the record,I think Shane would have massacred Tszyu and I think Mayweather Shane at 135 would have been one of the greatest fights ever. Mayweather is an ATG at 130/135 in my opinion. I'm not too hot on him at 147 and 154 though.

CC's all around for the opinions...IMO Mosley made a mistake going to 154...as far as 147 well the body as well all know can only carry or should i say get down in weight for so long and be as effective...

Personally I do not know where I would rank him all time but definatly one of the top 10 of our generation maybe top 5...

Plus he has always been a great face of the sport as far as being respectable and never doing anything to give his or boxings image a blake eye

Originally Posted by eagle

I think he may be a top 5 all time lightweight. Top 15 all time Welter, and may just fit into a top 50 all time p4p list. Maybe one of the top 5 fighters between the start of his career to now.

I think he may be a top 5 all time lightweight. Top 15 all time Welter, and may just fit into a top 50 all time p4p list.

That about covers it

Originally Posted by eagle

I think he may be a top 5 all time lightweight. Top 15 all time Welter, and may just fit into a top 50 all time p4p list. Maybe one of the top 5 fighters between the start of his career to now.

CC. Took the words right out of my mouth. I don't see how people can argue with that assessment.

Originally Posted by El Gamo

I think it's too difficult to rank him. I'm not particularly good at making ATG lists aside from maybe a top 5 or 10 but I don't see him being a top 20 if I managed to make one.

Why you may ask? Simply put,talent wise,he was SENSATIONAL at the lower weights but at 147 and 154,he has wins over Oscar(1 debateable),Collazo,a shot to heck Vargas and 2 losses to Vernon and 2 losses to Winky. That is not an ATG record. Also at 147/154,I don't think he displays the same power,technique nor speed he did at the lower weights. He slaps alot more with his punches.

Obviously he still has time to increase his legacy and wins over Cotto and Mayweather would make him an ATG but until then,imo, I don't think he's top 20. I can think of RJJ,Pernell,Mayweather,Ricardo Lopez,Tito and maybe a few others from this generation who have more claim to being ATG's than Shane. Again,just my opinion and it can change if someone puts a valid argument forward.

I think he has a better claim than Tito. Tito was a great welter and good at 154, but he didn't really have it as a middleweight, and even in victory, Tito showed his limitations against Oscar. Tito got dismantled by Winky and Hopkins. Let's not take anything away from Forrest. When healthy and in his prime, he was a tremendous fighter. If you want to knock Shane's record, look at Tito's...Sweetpea was shot when Tito beat him, Camacho was past his best, though I think he would have beaten Camacho at any point. You can say Vargas was shot when he fought Shane, but they guy is 6 years and 20 fights younger. Shane is still doing it at a near-peak level at 35 years old. That's gotta count for something. Oh, and with 37 KO's out of 147, I think he's doing a little more than slapping.


In terms of record, they are pretty similar. You can argue that Shane's record isn't better, but I think it's impossible to argue that it's worse. The thing that puts Shane ahead is his success in so many different weight classes. I agree, Shane wasn't dominant at weights other than 135, but he was damn good and near the top. At 135, he was at least as dominant (if not more so) than Tito was at 147, and on top of that, he beat very good fighters all the way up to 154. The only guy Tito beat at 154 was Vargas and he didn't beat anybody that mattered at 160.

Top 20 all-time P4P? Not sure about that, I'll give him top 50, but he's higher on my list than Tito, and for that matter, Lopez.

Basically every big name figher who reigned for a good bit is top 50, that goes without saying. IMO though, the main criteria for being ranked highly is wins against great fighters, and Shane's only significant win thusfar came against Oscar. I can't put him in the top 20.

Originally Posted by SeanE

Originally Posted by El Gamo

I think it's too difficult to rank him. I'm not particularly good at making ATG lists aside from maybe a top 5 or 10 but I don't see him being a top 20 if I managed to make one.

Why you may ask? Simply put,talent wise,he was SENSATIONAL at the lower weights but at 147 and 154,he has wins over Oscar(1 debateable),Collazo,a shot to heck Vargas and 2 losses to Vernon and 2 losses to Winky. That is not an ATG record. Also at 147/154,I don't think he displays the same power,technique nor speed he did at the lower weights. He slaps alot more with his punches.

Obviously he still has time to increase his legacy and wins over Cotto and Mayweather would make him an ATG but until then,imo, I don't think he's top 20. I can think of RJJ,Pernell,Mayweather,Ricardo Lopez,Tito and maybe a few others from this generation who have more claim to being ATG's than Shane. Again,just my opinion and it can change if someone puts a valid argument forward.

I think he has a better claim than Tito. Tito was a great welter and good at 154, but he didn't really have it as a middleweight, and even in victory, Tito showed his limitations against Oscar. Tito got dismantled by Winky and Hopkins. Let's not take anything away from Forrest. When healthy and in his prime, he was a tremendous fighter. If you want to knock Shane's record, look at Tito's...Sweetpea was shot when Tito beat him, Camacho was past his best, though I think he would have beaten Camacho at any point. You can say Vargas was shot when he fought Shane, but they guy is 6 years and 20 fights younger. Shane is still doing it at a near-peak level at 35 years old. That's gotta count for something. Oh, and with 37 KO's out of 147, I think he's doing a little more than slapping.


In terms of record, they are pretty similar. You can argue that Shane's record isn't better, but I think it's impossible to argue that it's worse. The thing that puts Shane ahead is his success in so many different weight classes. I agree, Shane wasn't dominant at weights other than 135, but he was damn good and near the top. At 135, he was at least as dominant (if not more so) than Tito was at 147, and on top of that, he beat very good fighters all the way up to 154. The only guy Tito beat at 154 was Vargas and he didn't beat anybody that mattered at 160.

Top 20 all-time P4P? Not sure about that, I'll give him top 50, but he's higher on my list than Tito, and for that matter, Lopez.

Most of your points are weak.. Beating an old Pernell is easier said than done,ask Oscar And Trinidad dominated his division(147) against better fighters than Shane at 135.

Your argument is flawed as soon as you bring up Shane beating Vargas. Tito ruined a prime(or as close as he got to it) Vargas. He destroyed Mayorga. He annihilated and at times ended the career of good fighters like David Reid,Hugo Pineda,William Joppy,Oba Carr,was the first to beat the at the time feared Yory Boy Campas,beat the well rated Blocker and beat Pernell which was hard for anyone whether he was old or not and Camacho.Oh and lost to 2 All time Greats in B Hop and Winky.

And your point about his KO'S is also poor. Like I said,he was a monstor at lightweight but at the higher weights,he does not have the same power,slapping at times(NOT all the time). He has 2 kos in 5,6 years and they were against a shot,shot Vargas.

Oh and finally,you say lets not take anything away from Forrest but Forrest is not as good as Winky or B Hop? And Forrest is a good fighter but for one reason or another,has not lived up to his potential(most likely injuries). His only real big wins have been over Shane twice.

And again,Tito's win over Mayorga,nay his destruction....on a guy that beat Vernon twice.....so I think it mattered. Case closed.