Becoming an ATG

[cosimo]

Is it almost impossible for a present or future fighter to be considered to be as good as the greats like Robinson and Greb et al? I mean, due to the fact fighters fight so little compared to the old greats, and the general level of competition isn't as good as say, the 70s... being undefeated and having lots of titles doesn't mean that much nowadays, as is the case of Mayweather...

I just wonder what a fighter would have to do to be considered. I guess beat everyone ridiculously easily, or if the quality of fighters improved?

Thoughts?

[Goodnight, Irene]

Of course you can become an all-time great. There will always be room for the likes of Manny Pacquiao, for instance.

Eclipsing Robinson, Greb, & Pep is more difficult. While I believe in the philosophy that there'll always be someone better in the end, I also think it's impossible for a contemporary fighter to truly prove their better.

Even a unique case like Pacquiao's, for one, look at it. Most of the greats of modern days have not or could not achieve what he has. Anyone gonna rank his sxity or so career fights above Armstrong's numbers? Robinson's?

I think we can always have new greats. I think someone will come along who was a better fighter than anyone in history to date. I think it's impossible, however, for a fighter to truly prove they are such.

[Shazam!]

This is an interesting point of discussion, cosimo....There's definitely an argument to suggest that old fighters are looked more favourably upon because of the tougher conditions that they faced....ie the amount of fights, the 'looser' rules, less regard for physical safety...

Who can say how many fights Mayweather or Pacquiao would have lost if they'd fought 100 fights?

How about trying to pick 20 fighters of the past 20 years who deserve 'All-Time Great Status' in their weight class?

Barrera, Pacquiao, Roy Jones Jr, Floyd Mayweather, Oscar De La Hoya, Pernell Whitaker, B-Hop, Lennox Lewis...I think all these guys would have a chance of competing with the best of all time.

[cosimo]

Yeah I guess I should've been more specific, rather than just ATG I should've said in the league of the Robinsons and Grebs of the past, and I should've put in terms of achievement rather than just skill.

[Goodnight, Irene]

This is an interesting point of discussion, cosimo....There's definitely an argument to suggest that old fighters are looked more favourably upon because of the tougher conditions that they faced....ie the amount of fights, the 'looser' rules, less regard for physical safety...

Who can say how many fights Mayweather or Pacquiao would have lost if they'd fought 100 fights?

How about trying to pick 20 fighters of the past 20 years who deserve 'All-Time Great Status' in their weight class?

Barrera, Pacquiao, Roy Jones Jr, Floyd Mayweather, Oscar De La Hoya, Pernell Whitaker, B-Hop, Lennox Lewis...I think all these guys would have a chance of competing with the best of all time.

I think the only fair way to compare is to look at both men at their peaks, & decide who you think would win head-to-head.

Achievements are always going to favour the older fighters. That's not romanticism, that's looking at the conditions in which they fought. They can't be topped in this regard by contemporary fighters.

[cosimo]

This is an interesting point of discussion, cosimo....There's definitely an argument to suggest that old fighters are looked more favourably upon because of the tougher conditions that they faced....ie the amount of fights, the 'looser' rules, less regard for physical safety...

Who can say how many fights Mayweather or Pacquiao would have lost if they'd fought 100 fights?

How about trying to pick 20 fighters of the past 20 years who deserve 'All-Time Great Status' in their weight class?

Barrera, Pacquiao, Roy Jones Jr, Floyd Mayweather, Oscar De La Hoya, Pernell Whitaker, B-Hop, Lennox Lewis...I think all these guys would have a chance of competing with the best of all time.

I think the only fair way to compare is to look at both men at their peaks, & decide who you think would win head-to-head.

Achievements are always going to favour the older fighters. That's not romanticism, that's looking at the conditions in which they fought. They can't be topped in this regard by contemporary fighters.

This is what I was really getting at.

[Shazam!]

Yeah I kind of agree that achievement will always favour old fighters in most instances, although we still have fighters moving up several weight classes which is something we can compare with the old days...

e.g. Pacquiao 7 weight world champ, Roy Jones going from MW champ to HW champ (ruiz or no ruiz!)...those are huge achievements, comparable with the greatest of all time.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Yeah I kind of agree that achievement will always favour old fighters in most instances, although we still have fighters moving up several weight classes which is something we can compare with the old days...

e.g. Pacquiao 7 weight world champ, Roy Jones going from MW champ to HW champ (ruiz or no ruiz!)...those are huge achievements, comparable with the greatest of all time.

Until you realise how many superfluous titles exist, & how few of those are genuine championships.

[p4p1]

Yeah I kind of agree that achievement will always favour old fighters in most instances, although we still have fighters moving up several weight classes which is something we can compare with the old days...

e.g. Pacquiao 7 weight world champ, Roy Jones going from MW champ to HW champ (ruiz or no ruiz!)...those are huge achievements, comparable with the greatest of all time.

Until you realise how many superfluous titles exist, & how few of those are genuine championships.

pacs won 4 lineal titles in different weights if he beats the winner of mayweather moseley that makes it 5 thats never been done before

[Ambling Alp]

I think a current fighter could become an ATG. However, once a guy makes it to the top, its just too tempting for most talneted fighters to take easy paydays. As mentioned it's just too easy for a great fighter to win a WBS title in several weight classes over the course of their career.
If someone really wants to go down in history as a legend, then he must fight the best as often as possible; even if it means fighting on the other guys turf. (ie so many Americans won't fight somewhere else.)

2 challenging fights a year really isn't asking that much. However, that will add up to 15-20 major fights during a fighters career. He wins those,(or almost all of those) then he will considered a great fighter not just a great talent.

It's not "titles" that makes Pacquaio a great; it's the laundrey list of outstanding fighters that he has beat. He has dared to be great, which is pretty rare anymore.

[p4p1]

I think a current fighter could become an ATG. However, once a guy makes it to the top, its just too tempting for most talneted fighters to take easy paydays. As mentioned it's just too easy for a great fighter to win a WBS title in several weight classes over the course of their career.
If someone really wants to go down in history as a legend, then he must fight the best as often as possible; even if it means fighting on the other guys turf. (ie so many Americans won't fight somewhere else.)

2 challenging fights a year really isn't asking that much. However, that will add up to 15-20 major fights during a fighters career. He wins those,(or almost all of those) then he will considered a great fighter not just a great talent.

It's not "titles" that makes Pacquaio a great; it's the laundrey list of outstanding fighters that he has beat. He has dared to be great, which is pretty rare anymore.

the point i was trying to make with the lineal titles normally it means you have beaten the best in the division

[Goodnight, Irene]

Yeah I kind of agree that achievement will always favour old fighters in most instances, although we still have fighters moving up several weight classes which is something we can compare with the old days...

e.g. Pacquiao 7 weight world champ, Roy Jones going from MW champ to HW champ (ruiz or no ruiz!)...those are huge achievements, comparable with the greatest of all time.

Until you realise how many superfluous titles exist, & how few of those are genuine championships.

pacs won 4 lineal titles in different weights if he beats the winner of mayweather moseley that makes it 5 thats never been done before

No one said otherwise. How many fragmented titles have he & Jones won?

[p4p1]

Until you realise how many superfluous titles exist, & how few of those are genuine championships.

pacs won 4 lineal titles in different weights if he beats the winner of mayweather moseley that makes it 5 thats never been done before

No one said otherwise. How many fragmented titles have he & Jones won?

dont they say jones is an 8x or something ridiculas like that but i think pacs accomplishments speak for them self being the man who beat the man is a big deal IMO

[Goodnight, Irene]

Again, I agree. Again, though --- how many fragmented & partial titles & trinkets have they won between them? There are certainly more on offer than in days of yesteryear --- & what they all amount to, for the most part, are red herrings...not greatness.

[p4p1]

Again, I agree. Again, though --- how many fragmented & partial titles & trinkets have they won between them? There are certainly more on offer than in days of yesteryear --- & what they all amount to, for the most part, are red herrings...not greatness.

oh defiantly i think that between them they must be over 15 titles or so danny green calls himself a 3 weight champ and he has one 1 world title fight mundine has never won a proper world title fight but u can call him 2 time

[p4p1]

would u consider pac a former featherweight champion even though he never won a belt?

[Diamond WEAPON]

would u consider pac a former featherweight champion even though he never won a belt?

He beat Barrera, who was obviously THE CHAMP, it's just he had been stripped of his official belt that he had beaten up Hamed for.

[Goodnight, Irene]

would u consider pac a former featherweight champion even though he never won a belt?

Yes. He beat the champ.

[Shazam!]

Well, Pac has beaten flyweights and he's beaten naturally bigger guys like De La Hoya who has fought and Cotto, who is going to fight....at closer to middleweight. He's also beaten many of the top fighters in between. Barrera, Marquez, Morales, Hatton, Clottey, Diaz. It's no secret that Pacquiao has ripped his way through the lower weight divisions in a way that is comparable with the greats.

[Panzerfaust]

e.g. Pacquiao 7 weight world champ, Roy Jones going from MW champ to HW champ (ruiz or no ruiz!)...those are huge achievements, comparable with the greatest of all time.

Considering the 17 weight classes, with 4 belts in each weight class for a whoping total of 68 ''World titles'' and the eight weight classes there were before with only one World title in each . Id have to disagree.

Also H2H i feel the current crop is far weaker than those of days gone by.Not their faults though ,but the truly great trainers arent around anymore. They are very good even great athletes but the boxing skills are not there.

[elmersalsa]

Yeah I kind of agree that achievement will always favour old fighters in most instances, although we still have fighters moving up several weight classes which is something we can compare with the old days...

e.g. Pacquiao 7 weight world champ, Roy Jones going from MW champ to HW champ (ruiz or no ruiz!)...those are huge achievements, comparable with the greatest of all time.

Until you realise how many superfluous titles exist, & how few of those are genuine championships.

[elmersalsa]

The sport of boxing is dying and the MMA is taking over. Why? because of bullshit fights like Mayweather vs Mosley. Both fighters fought like if they were in a sparring session after the fourth round. What piece of crap. And now we see why these today's fighters want to be compared with the great ones of the past.

[dempseyfire]

It can be done but is VERY HARD to do in this watered down era. The highest active fight I'd rank historically is Pacquao and the guy has beaten top fighters from flyweight to welterweight and won 4 linear titles . . and I STILL wouldn't rank him in the top 20 P4P. Fighters today just don't have the high level of comp nor the activity.

Only fighters fighting today you could make solid arguments for being ranked as ATG (ie top 20 all time in their best weight class or top 50 p4p) are Hopkins, Pacquao, Mayweather and Jones Jr (even though I regard him as basically retired). Two are in their 40s and the other two will probably fight another 2-3 years tops.

[Diamond WEAPON]

The activity/achievement argument is a big part of the reason why I had become a big fan of Edgar Sosa at Light Flyweight. After battering and further exposing the still highly-regarded Viloria, he was fighting every couple of months a knocking off a mix of mid-level challengers and contenders before Rodel Mayol headbutted him into his current inactivity. I'm hoping as soon as he's healthy he has just one warm-up, if that, then jumps right back in the mix against the obvious top champ and future HOFer Wongjongkam, as he has stated he would.

[hitman09]

Of course you can become an all-time great. There will always be room for the likes of Manny Pacquiao, for instance.

Eclipsing Robinson, Greb, & Pep is more difficult. While I believe in the philosophy that there'll always be someone better in the end, I also think it's impossible for a contemporary fighter to truly prove their better.

Even a unique case like Pacquiao's, for one, look at it. Most of the greats of modern days have not or could not achieve what he has. Anyone gonna rank his sxity or so career fights above Armstrong's numbers? Robinson's?

I think we can always have new greats. I think someone will come along who was a better fighter than anyone in history to date. I think it's impossible, however, for a fighter to truly prove they are such.

You're slipping, G,I.

I agree with the post though.