I voted below TOP 20.

I think it is a matter of looking at a record he broke (winning in 8 divisions) as the reason he is rated so high. My 1st question would be; how did that become the standard record for achieving ATG status? Records are broken in every major sport, but that isn't the (or at least my) criteria for greatness.

It is a disservice for me to rank him above fighters who never saw more than 8 weight classes. Previous to the 1970s, none had that option. None.


How am I to rank any fighter who won (1) title in 8 weight classes -say over one who only won in (4) weight classes but unified in all (4) weight classes? Before Pac's era those guys not only had to fight against corrupt sanctioning, & the mob, but with less than what? 3 Boxing organizations or less.
But Pac got to fight in an era of the WBC, WBA, IBF...& his era made WBO a worthy title, let alone to add on IBO, Ring, Linear, to the generic USBA, NABF. DIAMOND Belts.
And of all those available titles he fought for multiple belts in 2001, 2004, 2005, 2009 & 2015 (3) titles.
The only time he came close to cleaning out a division was his win over Cotto in 2009, where one of those titles was a Diamond belt. I still can't get over how he moved up to LW, took on David Diaz and not Juan Diaz the other champ. Or Casamayor who was the Lineal champ. ALL TIME GREATS don't leave stones unturned, belts unclaimed, reputations unchecked, myths unexposed.

Boxing fans I loved watching Pac. I bought his PPV's more than Mayweather's, but aint no way I can rate ANY boxer as an all time great that didn't unify -at least the one division they fought in either their youth or prime.
If I compile a Top 20 ATG's- their positions may change from time to time, but what is a constant is they all unified the belts in their best weight class, not set records.