Quote Originally Posted by Beanflicker View Post
Quote Originally Posted by mikeeod View Post
Guy just doesn't have the accomplishments. This is where Floyd fans lose credibility in their arguments. No way in Hell wins over Chico, Castillo, Hatton and Mosely put him that high.
Well here's where the discussion gets a bit more interesting and I find that the double standards start to pop up, and I'm more than happy to go down this road.

Let's take 5 greats from the past (long past, distant past) and we'll throw in Floyd. I'll go with 5 guys who usually end up in most top 10 ATG lists.

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Hank Armstrong
3. Willie Pep
4. Roberto Duran
5. Sugar Ray Leonard
6. Floyd Mayweather

Six guys, six ATG's, all A+ quality.

I'd like for someone - anyone - to explain to me what these guys did that puts them above Mayweather in the two categories that matter: 1) In-ring ability and 2) Accomplishment (quality of opposition beat, title's won/defended, ect).

All of those guys, with the exception of Willie Pep obviously, probably hit harder than Floyd. SRR carried his power up to higher weights like nobody else in the history of boxing. Armstrong didn't have big one-punch power from what I've seen but he was a fantastic volume puncher. Duran was Hands of Stone, Leonard could punch respectfully with both hands, ect. All guys were obviously not as effective in terms of power punching at the higher weights. Floyd was a good puncher at 130-135 (31-0 with 21 KOs, 13-0 in title fights with 7 KOs), but not on the level of those guys for certain.

So besides power, which we will give the advantage to all of those guys except Pep, what did they do that puts them out of reach of Floyd? Let's break it down and try to quantify it.
That's two different discussions you are having. Accomplishments and historical standing is separate from head to head match ups and who people "think" was the better overall fighter. Those discussions of "who is better r completely subjective, and they rarely account for style match ups...etc. I will explain how I think those guys you named break out from Floyd in each way though.
1) Accomplishments: This is where it isn't even debatable for me. Floyd never ducked anyone, I know, bathe hasn't beaten the ATGs, HOFers...etc., that those top 5 did. Maybe Pep is debatable, but I don't have Willie in my top 5, I have Ali instead. Floyd has NEVER "slain the dragon". Think Duran jumping to WW n beating the prime Leonard. Think Leonard beating Duran, Hearns n then the complete monster in Hagler. Floyd never beat the sheer number of ATG/HOFers that SRR, and rarely in such spectacular fashion. As impressive as retiring undefeated is (Ricardo Lopez, Joe C n Marciano), Henry Armstrong simultaneously holding 3 of 8 (should've been 4 of 8 but he was robbed vs Garcia) world titles available, defending the WW title over 20 times in a year with most of those being stoppages and beating a good number of ATG/HOF fighters along the way is more impressive. While Floyd is popular and transcends boxing, he is nowhere near the icon Ali was and has NEVER produced historical fights or comebacks like Ali and Leonard did. So, for accomplishments and historical ranking, I can't see a valid case to even have Floyd in the conversation.
2) Overall abilities: Tough to beat Floyd but for me he never showed the ability to hammer out a tough, brutal fight. He's never had to, so he very well may be able to, but I've never seen him beat an elite fighter by gutting it out. Maidana and Castillo were solid, but not JCC, Duran, Armstrong...etc., elite and they gave him fits. Jesus Chavez roughed Floyd up as did Hatton. So, in summary: I feel those guys have power, toughness and killer instinct that Floyd does not. Those guys all closed the show against elite opposition.