Floyd's resume.

[Master]

If you can't look at Robinsons record and pick out the number of PRIME HOFers he beat, you don't want to see it. If you are going to sit there and pretend that Floyd vs Oscar and Manny, his two biggest events, were even close to the excitement or historical relevance of Ali vs Frazier (1&3) and Foreman, there is no point discussing the subject with you. Ali made boxing a global sport, and win or lose, people came away from those fights LOVING the sport of boxing and life long fans. You can't say the same for Floyd as both the Oscar and Manny fights turned people off. Not what ATGs do.

Let's take Ray Leonard now. He beat a prime Hearns, Duran, Benitez, and the monster that was Hagler (I thought Marvin won but Ray got the decision n that was a bold move to even fight the guy). Name Floyd's equivalents to those fights/accomplishments.

You are correct when you say that not all of the missed fights falling through were Floyd's fault. Doesn't change the fact that he didn't beat that level of competition. I personally think Ricardo Lopez would've been top 10 ATG if he had the requisite comp at his weight class. He didn't, so he isn't.

I would argue that Manny fought tougher competition in his career, although not by that much. Oscar definitely fought better and tougher comp, but lost numerous times. Floyd is a top 15 or lower ATG fighter, which is phenomenal. I have home top ten, personally. But to say that he has a claim for GOAT, I just don't see a realistic case at all.

Why don't you enlighten me then? Tell me SRR's best wins, and tell me exactly why those guys are so above and beyond Floyd's best wins.

I don't give a fuck about "excitement" and "historical significance". We're talking about a guy's worth in the ring. Were Floyd's fights as big as Ali's vs Frazier and Foreman? I have no idea, I wasn't alive back then and it was before the era of PPV. All I know is Mayweather/Pac sold 4.4 MILLION PPV's at $100 a piece, so it was a pretty big fight. Big as Ali's? Who knows, who gives a fuck. Why does it matter?

Ray Leonard had a great career, but when I bring up the NO MAS thing I was always told that Duran was passed his prime by then, as his prime was at LW.

You can take Hearns and say "prime Hearns", but you can also say "green Hearns", a 22 year old kid who didn't yet know how to pace himself and didn't know how to protect himself and survive when he was hurt.

Bringing up Hagler (which I still feel is one of the greatest victories in boxing history), Ray admitted himself that he decided to fight Hagler because, when having dinner with Hagler, Marvin (then mid 30s) confided in him that he was worn down and thinking about retiring. And of course, Ray demanded the special stipulation of 12 rounds instead of 15.

Now I consider all of those great wins, I'm just saying if you can poke holes in anything in you choose to scrutinize it that way. People choose to scrutinize Floyd's wins harshly, then give passes to whichever other greats he's compared to.

When you claim to be the best ever then you have to stand to some scrutiny.

[Beanflicker]

When you claim to be the best ever then you have to stand to some scrutiny.

Of course, everyone does.

But if you're trying to analyze it and you're judging one guy's career on a different criteria because of something he said outside the ring.

When Floyd says "I'm the best ever" and people get pissed and rack their brains to come up with reasons why he isn't and judging him more harshly than other fighters... that opinion has no real credibility.

If people can't stay objective about it, they should stay out of the discussion.