Thread: is it possible for Mayweather to retire the greatest ever?

ok then, lets just say he goes on to beat Mosely, Pac, Berto, Kahn ( if he keeps progressing) Williams, would that make him the greatest ever?

If not what would he have to do??

What he SHOULD have done was fight Mosley, Cotto and Margo when the division was on fire. Khan and Berto ain't great wins, Shane would be good and so would Williams. He will fight Shane I think, he is pushing 40 now.

Mosley wouldn't fight him, Cotto hadn't proven himself as a WW, and Margarito before Cotto would have given Mayweather the same amount of respect as beating Baldomir did, and now that he has cheated it would have been even less. I think now that Pacquiao has risen to such heights, Mosley who has risen to his heights, and Cotto who is now forgiven for his one loss(because Antonio cheated no doubt) is still deadly and could have MOsley and Pacquiao under his belt imo there is more for Floyd to build his legacy on. If Berto continues to improve, and if Clottey beats name fighters that could only increase Floyd's legacy, but I doubt he would fight Clottey who just isn't a big enough draw.

The thing about he "should" have fought this guy or the other guy is that nobody will ever be satisfied with nobody. Even if Mayweather faced all the guys who are now on top and beat them, there will always be the typical "Oh, but wait, if he fought legendary X, he would have lost". Mayweather keeps showing how great he is so far, how many clear flaws can we name? Sure, some will argue he fought a small guy recently but he has also fought big guys. But still, big or small guys, he still shows how his defense is close to perfect. The last time I saw someone with a defense comparable to his is Pernell Whitaker but Floyd now only has the defense, he can punch.

Love him or hate him, he's a talented boxer in all areas.

Originally Posted by Chino

The thing about he "should" have fought this guy or the other guy is that nobody will ever be satisfied with nobody. Even if Mayweather faced all the guys who are now on top and beat them, there will always be the typical "Oh, but wait, if he fought legendary X, he would have lost". Mayweather keeps showing how great he is so far, how many clear flaws can we name? Sure, some will argue he fought a small guy recently but he has also fought big guys. But still, big or small guys, he still shows how his defense is close to perfect. The last time I saw someone with a defense comparable to his is Pernell Whitaker but Floyd now only has the defense, he can punch.

Love him or hate him, he's a talented boxer in all areas.

I would never slag him off if he fought the to Welters, he fought some great guys south of 140 and I have nothing but respect for that. He just ain't fought prime hungry guys for a long time. I want him to get beat for one reason........that's all he goes on about "I'm undefeated, he has losses why should I fight him blah blah" I just want to see what he would replace the "undefeated" thing with.

The greatest fighter ever is such a subjective issue. However, if he beat those fighters you mentioned he would absolutely deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as the fighters we perceive as the best ever.

Yeah, its such a subjective topic.

Personally I dont like appointing a G.O.A.T. I class fighters in different catagories, with All Time Great being the top class.

Putting everything aside, who ducked who, ect ect, and looking at Floyd purely on ability alone, his name deserves to be mentioned with any fighter who ever lived. How many times do you see virtuoso talented, combined with outstanding physical gifts, an incredible mind for fighting and discipline like you see with Floyd?


You gotta enjoy guys like Floyd, Pacquaio, Hopkins, Roy Jones, ect ect, real modern day greats, because with the decline in boxing's popularity you're going to see fewer and fewer of them.

Originally Posted by Kel

Originally Posted by Chino

The thing about he "should" have fought this guy or the other guy is that nobody will ever be satisfied with nobody. Even if Mayweather faced all the guys who are now on top and beat them, there will always be the typical "Oh, but wait, if he fought legendary X, he would have lost". Mayweather keeps showing how great he is so far, how many clear flaws can we name? Sure, some will argue he fought a small guy recently but he has also fought big guys. But still, big or small guys, he still shows how his defense is close to perfect. The last time I saw someone with a defense comparable to his is Pernell Whitaker but Floyd now only has the defense, he can punch.

Love him or hate him, he's a talented boxer in all areas.

I would never slag him off if he fought the to Welters, he fought some great guys south of 140 and I have nothing but respect for that. He just ain't fought prime hungry guys for a long time. I want him to get beat for one reason........that's all he goes on about "I'm undefeated, he has losses why should I fight him blah blah" I just want to see what he would replace the "undefeated" thing with.

Hold on, correct me if I'm wrong (and I may be) but you're a Joe Calzaghe fan right?

That tool STILL goes on about how he is undefeated on Strictly Come F'in Dancin and he fought NOBODY (Kessler is the exception - Hopkins beat him)

If there is anybody who cares about their undefeated streak and won't stop going on about it, it's JC. Yet, Mayweather suddenly becomes public enemy number 1 for being undefeated.

Also, I don't remember him ever saying "he has losses, why should I fight him" because he probably would have had a couple fights his whole career if that was the case.

He usually just says "there is no blueprint to beat me because I ain't been beaten"

In answer to the topic question - I highly doubt anybody would allow Mayweather to retire the greatest. People look back too fondly on the old guys like they were on a different planet to Floyd..

Shame really because I think he's just as good as SRL, Hearns, Duran in his own way. SRL was known for his slick combination, Hearns for his flicker jab and those ball n chain fists. Duran for his sheer animal instincts. Floyd should be known as a defensive master.

Styles make fights - I think he's pretty evenly matched against the ATG's

Oh and I'd pay good money to see him beat the hell out of Khan with Roach in his corner

Maybe he can do that when he's 40 odd and it'd be even funnier

Originally Posted by Althugz

Originally Posted by Kel

Originally Posted by Chino

The thing about he "should" have fought this guy or the other guy is that nobody will ever be satisfied with nobody. Even if Mayweather faced all the guys who are now on top and beat them, there will always be the typical "Oh, but wait, if he fought legendary X, he would have lost". Mayweather keeps showing how great he is so far, how many clear flaws can we name? Sure, some will argue he fought a small guy recently but he has also fought big guys. But still, big or small guys, he still shows how his defense is close to perfect. The last time I saw someone with a defense comparable to his is Pernell Whitaker but Floyd now only has the defense, he can punch.

Love him or hate him, he's a talented boxer in all areas.

I would never slag him off if he fought the to Welters, he fought some great guys south of 140 and I have nothing but respect for that. He just ain't fought prime hungry guys for a long time. I want him to get beat for one reason........that's all he goes on about "I'm undefeated, he has losses why should I fight him blah blah" I just want to see what he would replace the "undefeated" thing with.

Hold on, correct me if I'm wrong (and I may be) but you're a Joe Calzaghe fan right?

That tool STILL goes on about how he is undefeated on Strictly Come F'in Dancin and he fought NOBODY (Kessler is the exception - Hopkins beat him)

If there is anybody who cares about their undefeated streak and won't stop going on about it, it's JC. Yet, Mayweather suddenly becomes public enemy number 1 for being undefeated.

Also, I don't remember him ever saying "he has losses, why should I fight him" because he probably would have had a couple fights his whole career if that was the case.

He usually just says "there is no blueprint to beat me because I ain't been beaten"

In answer to the topic question - I highly doubt anybody would allow Mayweather to retire the greatest. People look back too fondly on the old guys like they were on a different planet to Floyd..

Shame really because I think he's just as good as SRL, Hearns, Duran in his own way. SRL was known for his slick combination, Hearns for his flicker jab and those ball n chain fists. Duran for his sheer animal instincts. Floyd should be known as a defensive master.

Styles make fights - I think he's pretty evenly matched against the ATG's

In terms of skillset he has his own thing going on that defines him as a great in his era, but based on resume it's nothing compared to Leonard, Hearns, Duran.

Hell let's just take Leonard's resume and matched him with Floyd since he was considered the best p4p of his era and Floyd is considered to be the best p4p of his era. Leonard beat guys like Benitez, Duran, Hearns, and Hagler in their absolute prime or close to it. Now name me a fighter on Floyd's resume that has the credentials of Hearns, Duran, Benitez, Hagler that was at their absolute prime or close to it that Floyd beat? There isn't any fighter on Floyd's resume that comes close to those 4 I mentioned that Leonard beat. Some of Floyd's fans may say De La Hoya, but Oscar was 34 and would be a shot fighter a year later.

And get this, Leonard had only 1 fight in 5 years, came back and jumped up 2 weight classes and went the distance with Hagler (whether he beat Hagler or not is another debate). Floyd comes back after almost 2 years and makes the LW champ jumps two weight classes and beats him.

In terms of skill set Floyd may even beat a guy like Leonard in some sort of fantasy matchup, but in terms of resume he doesn't even come close to matching Leonard's or Duran or Hearns. To be the greatest of all time, you better have an outstanding resume. That's the number 1 criteria.

Originally Posted by Chino

The thing about he "should" have fought this guy or the other guy is that nobody will ever be satisfied with nobody. Even if Mayweather faced all the guys who are now on top and beat them, there will always be the typical "Oh, but wait, if he fought legendary X, he would have lost". Mayweather keeps showing how great he is so far, how many clear flaws can we name? Sure, some will argue he fought a small guy recently but he has also fought big guys. But still, big or small guys, he still shows how his defense is close to perfect. The last time I saw someone with a defense comparable to his is Pernell Whitaker but Floyd now only has the defense, he can punch.

Love him or hate him, he's a talented boxer in all areas.

Where there will always be the neighsayers who criticize every boxer's career. Think about the criticism on Calzaghe. He "should" have fought Chad Dawson etc. Mayweather deserves some criticism for his past choices in opponents. He chose Baldomir to fight at welterweight and he hasn't fought another welterweight since Baldomir. The criticism isn't new. Fortunately for Mayweather, he can prove the neighsayers wrong by fighting everyone. He has the chance. The Pacquiao fight is just for money. Let's be honest. We all know the outcome already. How about other fights where the outcome is less certain? Those are the fights he needs to take and win to merit high, high praise. Beat Paul Williams, beat shane mosley, and beat Cotto (after he beats Pacquiao), and then let's talk about where he places.

Originally Posted by gudnite vienna

ok then, lets just say he goes on to beat Mosely, Pac, Berto, Kahn ( if he keeps progressing) Williams, would that make him the greatest ever?

If not what would he have to do??

This thread should be called "Is it possible for Mayweather to retire"

He's a good boxer but not the gratest.

As strange as it sounds for me, to be the greatest ever you have to get beaten and then come back stronger and better, like Leonard did after Duran and Ali after Frazier and Norton, but to be honest if Floyd gets beat I think it will end him in the same way it did Hamed. So no I don't see Floyd retiring the G.O.A.T but great none the less!

I think he could join the ranks of Zsolt Erdei, Joe Mesi, and Sven Ottke. He is truly a great. He has nothing left to prove after beating Marquez. I wish him well in retirement.

All in all I think Floyd just wants to pay the IRS back and get some more cash from so he can "shoot up cars." I don't think he cares about legacy.

When SRL came out of retirement he Terry Norris, Marvin Hagler. Now that's a guy that is thinking about his legacy.