BoxRec

Pureist wrote:Everyone has bought up floyds unbeaten record, what would be the difference in ATG rating if Castillo was awarded the win as he should have been in their first fight, also, if Chavez had of retired at 80-0 how would that have impacted these arguments,

the "0" means nothing in ATG ratings, literally
nothing, since these are usually done by true
afficionados. no one has rocky marciano on
top of a HW ATG list.

man wrote:

Pureist wrote:Everyone has bought up floyds unbeaten record, what would be the difference in ATG rating if Castillo was awarded the win as he should have been in their first fight, also, if Chavez had of retired at 80-0 how would that have impacted these arguments,

the "0" means nothing in ATG ratings, literally
nothing, since these are usually done by true
afficionados. no one has rocky marciano on
top of a HW ATG list.

How would you personally qualify an ATG

With the likes of any sports suoerstars like Mayweather they will always have massive set of fans who will either love or hate.. MW may not do any favours with his mannerisms... but the guy is an absolute genius and is quality which ever side of ever the fence you may sit..

ajwesty13 wrote:With the likes of any sports suoerstars like Mayweather they will always have massive set of fans who will either love or hate.. MW may not do any favours with his mannerisms... but the guy is an absolute genius and is quality which ever side of ever the fence you may sit..

Agree totally, silky skills and brilliant defence, definitely an ATG, floyds "0" has been mentioned numerous times in this thread, if he had lost 5-6 fights would people still class him as an ATG, Marciano wasn't really skilful but still got the job done on all occasions, calzahe got the job done each time aswell but was dropped while doing so, everyone has different expectations of an ATG

He's up there with the greatest of defensive fighters... Pep, Benitez, Whittaker, Johnson...

I think his record is good but getting overblown on here. I mean it's all well and good to say he beat x number of champs but almost none of those guys would have been champs 50 years ago... They were belt holders. At the same time he hasn’t set up camp as king of the hill and said come and get me…instead he’s picked who he wants to fight. It’s not really the same as having to defend against all-comers who have fought their way to the top.

He’s great in any era but not top 20 all-time.

man wrote:

Pureist wrote:Everyone has bought up floyds unbeaten record, what would be the difference in ATG rating if Castillo was awarded the win as he should have been in their first fight, also, if Chavez had of retired at 80-0 how would that have impacted these arguments,

the "0" means nothing in ATG ratings, literally
nothing, since these are usually done by true
afficionados. no one has rocky marciano on
top of a HW ATG list.

I do.

punchoutsb wrote:

man wrote:

Pureist wrote:Everyone has bought up floyds unbeaten record, what would be the difference in ATG rating if Castillo was awarded the win as he should have been in their first fight, also, if Chavez had of retired at 80-0 how would that have impacted these arguments,

the "0" means nothing in ATG ratings, literally
nothing, since these are usually done by true
afficionados. no one has rocky marciano on
top of a HW ATG list.

I do.

So it doesnt matter who the opponents are then right?

Pureist wrote:

man wrote:

Pureist wrote:Everyone has bought up floyds unbeaten record, what would be the difference in ATG rating if Castillo was awarded the win as he should have been in their first fight, also, if Chavez had of retired at 80-0 how would that have impacted these arguments,

the "0" means nothing in ATG ratings, literally
nothing, since these are usually done by true
afficionados. no one has rocky marciano on
top of a HW ATG list.

How would you personally qualify an ATG

i have no explicit set of criteria, definitely not
the numbers of his record. but i try. an ATG seems
to be next to invincible at some point in his career.
one needs to have the feeling that he can compete
with everybody there ever was.

the quality of beaten opponents is essentially the
key. it means nil to walk through avalanches of
club fighters, but to beat the man significantly,
that is something.

Ezzard wrote:He's up there with the greatest of defensive fighters... Pep, Benitez, Whittaker, Johnson...

I think his record is good but getting overblown on here. I mean it's all well and good to say he beat x number of champs but almost none of those guys would have been champs 50 years ago... They were belt holders. At the same time he hasn’t set up camp as king of the hill and said come and get me…instead he’s picked who he wants to fight. It’s not really the same as having to defend against all-comers who have fought their way to the top.

He’s great in any era but not top 20 all-time.

Exactly, took the words out of my mouth, 1 sanctioning body meant you really were the world champion

Pureist wrote:

ajwesty13 wrote:With the likes of any sports suoerstars like Mayweather they will always have massive set of fans who will either love or hate.. MW may not do any favours with his mannerisms... but the guy is an absolute genius and is quality which ever side of ever the fence you may sit..

Agree totally, silky skills and brilliant defence, definitely an ATG, floyds "0" has been mentioned numerous times in this thread, if he had lost 5-6 fights would people still class him as an ATG, Marciano wasn't really skilful but still got the job done on all occasions, calzahe got the job done each time aswell but was dropped while doing so, everyone has different expectations of an ATG

I think sometimes we can get ATG confused with like ability, mentioning Jo and Marciano who came across well and a very good fan base... still for me mw is above them skill wise but under for like ability..

Skill wise Marciano way below, joe had brilliant skills, he took a lot more risks than floyd, doesn't matter who you are you can't get out the way of everything, the more risks you take the more you will be hit, joe was dropped on occasions due to taking risks

No doubt one the greatest of all time. Beat the best of his era and was rarely challenged (not never challenged, just rarely).

Pureist wrote:Skill wise Marciano way below, joe had brilliant skills, he took a lot more risks than floyd, doesn't matter who you are you can't get out the way of everything, the more risks you take the more you will be hit, joe was dropped on occasions due to taking risks

Agree .. Jo was a front foot fighter which is a riskier style of being caught, while mw would fight mostly off the back... I cam only think of a few time Floyd was buzzed in his career which speaks volumes..

Ezzard wrote:He's up there with the greatest of defensive fighters... Pep, Benitez, Whittaker, Johnson...

I think his record is good but getting overblown on here. I mean it's all well and good to say he beat x number of champs but almost none of those guys would have been champs 50 years ago... They were belt holders. At the same time he hasn’t set up camp as king of the hill and said come and get me…instead he’s picked who he wants to fight. It’s not really the same as having to defend against all-comers who have fought their way to the top.

He’s great in any era but not top 20 all-time.

X2

Butterbean wrote:

Ezzard wrote:He's up there with the greatest of defensive fighters... Pep, Benitez, Whittaker, Johnson...

I think his record is good but getting overblown on here. I mean it's all well and good to say he beat x number of champs but almost none of those guys would have been champs 50 years ago... They were belt holders. At the same time he hasn’t set up camp as king of the hill and said come and get me…instead he’s picked who he wants to fight. It’s not really the same as having to defend against all-comers who have fought their way to the top.

He’s great in any era but not top 20 all-time.

X2

X3, although I think you can argue a spot somewhere between 15 and 20, but personally I'd have him somewhere around #25. I think anyone who has Mayweather in their top 10 either is seriously overrating him, or lacks knowledge of other ATGs.

Ezzard wrote:He's up there with the greatest of defensive fighters... Pep, Benitez, Whittaker, Johnson...

I think his record is good but getting overblown on here. I mean it's all well and good to say he beat x number of champs but almost none of those guys would have been champs 50 years ago... They were belt holders. At the same time he hasn’t set up camp as king of the hill and said come and get me…instead he’s picked who he wants to fight. It’s not really the same as having to defend against all-comers who have fought their way to the top.

He’s great in any era but not top 20 all-time.

It is difficult to compare todays fighters with that of half a century ago .... like most sports it evolves, just like boxing... there are so many variants to consider that are not the same like differences in equipment, diet, fluid intake training, media changes to study opponents, stircter rules, and even the science ... Even Belts are more in abundance today plus mw has the choicetoday of who and when because every wants to fight him ... I'd put him in the top 10 at the very least..

Ezzard wrote:He's up there with the greatest of defensive fighters... Pep, Benitez, Whittaker, Johnson...

I think his record is good but getting overblown on here. I mean it's all well and good to say he beat x number of champs but almost none of those guys would have been champs 50 years ago... They were belt holders. At the same time he hasn’t set up camp as king of the hill and said come and get me…instead he’s picked who he wants to fight. It’s not really the same as having to defend against all-comers who have fought their way to the top.

He’s great in any era but not top 20 all-time.

It is difficult to compare todays fighters with that of half a century ago .... like most sports it evolves, just like boxing... there are so many variants to consider that are not the same like differences in equipment, diet, fluid intake training, media changes to study opponents, stircter rules, and even the science ... Even Belts are more in abundance today .

mw has the choice today of who and when because everyone who is any ne wants to fight him for the prospect of beating him or a nice earner ... I'd put him in the top 10 at the very least..

jezzamundo wrote:

Butterbean wrote:

Ezzard wrote:He's up there with the greatest of defensive fighters... Pep, Benitez, Whittaker, Johnson...

I think his record is good but getting overblown on here. I mean it's all well and good to say he beat x number of champs but almost none of those guys would have been champs 50 years ago... They were belt holders. At the same time he hasn’t set up camp as king of the hill and said come and get me…instead he’s picked who he wants to fight. It’s not really the same as having to defend against all-comers who have fought their way to the top.

He’s great in any era but not top 20 all-time.

X2

X3, although I think you can argue a spot somewhere between 15 and 20, but personally I'd have him somewhere around #25. I think anyone who has Mayweather in their top 10 either is seriously overrating him, or lacks knowledge of other ATGs.

Without doing a Google or Boxrec search name24 fighters that you would rank ahead of him??

Why don't you want us to do a Google or BoxRec search? Just because I don't remember an old-time fighter doesn't mean he doesn't deserve to be ranked ahead of Floyd. I don't pretend to be a boxing historian.

Butterbean wrote:

Ezzard wrote:He's up there with the greatest of defensive fighters... Pep, Benitez, Whittaker, Johnson...

I think his record is good but getting overblown on here. I mean it's all well and good to say he beat x number of champs but almost none of those guys would have been champs 50 years ago... They were belt holders. At the same time he hasn’t set up camp as king of the hill and said come and get me…instead he’s picked who he wants to fight. It’s not really the same as having to defend against all-comers who have fought their way to the top.

He’s great in any era but not top 20 all-time.

Easy top 20 for me the only fighter that I've seen live ( tv)that could be rated as a better boxer was Roy jones and that's just personal choice .for me Floyd is a top ten fighter ,many get way to romantic about old fighters .

stevedoc wrote:

Butterbean wrote:

Ezzard wrote:He's up there with the greatest of defensive fighters... Pep, Benitez, Whittaker, Johnson...

I think his record is good but getting overblown on here. I mean it's all well and good to say he beat x number of champs but almost none of those guys would have been champs 50 years ago... They were belt holders. At the same time he hasn’t set up camp as king of the hill and said come and get me…instead he’s picked who he wants to fight. It’s not really the same as having to defend against all-comers who have fought their way to the top.

He’s great in any era but not top 20 all-time.

Easy top 20 for me the only fighter that I've seen live ( tv)that could be rated as a better boxer was Roy jones and that's just personal choice .for me Floyd is a top ten fighter ,many get way to romantic about old fighters .

Floyd was never as physically gifted as Roy Jones, but a far better technical boxer and a better resume. I think it's questionable whether RJJ cracks the all-time top 50 p4p list, whereas I think Floyd belongs nearer #25. For me it's not about getting romantic about old fighters, it's that the top guys these days fight less often and (more importantly) rarely fight each other, especially not when they are in their primes. It's just too hard to build an ATG resume these days.

world ranked wrote:

punchoutsb wrote: I do.

So it doesnt matter who the opponents are then right?

Did I say that?

punchoutsb wrote:

world ranked wrote:

punchoutsb wrote: I do.

So it doesnt matter who the opponents are then right?

Did I say that?

So what other reason you Marciano the best hw of all time other than the zero in the loss column?

world ranked wrote:
So what other reason you Marciano the best hw of all time other than the zero in the loss column?

Heart, chin, conditioning, punching power, and more desire than any of fighter that has ever lived. He knew how to win, and more importantly knew how not to lose. He was the best conditioned heavy of the modern era, one of the hardest punchers, and could take a shot with the best of them.

punchoutsb wrote:

world ranked wrote:
So what other reason you Marciano the best hw of all time other than the zero in the loss column?

importantly knew how not to lose.

Again the most important for you is zero in the loss column.